Ernest Sonnier, who has spent the last 23 years of his life in prison, was freed on bond today after DNA test results suggest that he was wrongfully convicted of kidnapping and sexual assault charges. Congratulations to the Innocence Project and the Texas Innocence Network!

The Houston Chronicle reports that he is the sixth man to be freed from prison after challenging results from the Houston Police Department Crime Lab. The infamous HPD Crime Lab was closed in 2002 by police officials, and then-Police Chief Harold Hurtt called for an independent inquiry of the lab. The Final Report of the Independent Investigator identified hundreds of cases that needed further investigation, including 274 cases in which biological material was identified but never tested and 180 cases that were said to have "major issues" regarding the reliability or accuracy of the results.

I am thrilled for Mr. Sonnier but wonder how many more innocent men and women are behind bars as a result of the HPD Crime Lab.

Labels: dna, exonerations, HPD Crime Lab, innocence project, wrongful convictions

posted by Kristi Couvillon   permalink   0 Comments

Not to toot our own horn or anything, but Attorney General (AG) Eric Holder might be a loyal Sumpter & Gonzalez blog reader. On July 13th, 2009, we posted a blog titled The S&G Social Work Wish List. Well, according to his address to the American Bar Association Convention on Monday, August 3rd, it appears that AG Holder was listening (let's just allow me to believe that).

If you don't have time to read the entire article, in a nutshell, he makes the following commitments (I've added my $.02):

• Across the board, for all policies, procedures, and programs - science, data, and evidence-based practices will be used to shape policy. Wait. What? You mean, this hasn't ALWAYS been the case?
• The DOJ will not focus exclusively on incarceration as the most effective means of protecting public safety. Awesome.
• Spending on prisons will not continue to rise. He does not say it will decrease. He just says it won't continue to rise as it has in the past. Hey, it's a start.
• Money will be allocated for better rehabilitation programs for people sent to prison in order to facilitate a more successful reentry into society.
• Generally, there will be a greater focus on reentry services for people leaving prison.
• Risk assessments will be improved and used more widely to identify people who can be safe in the community and those who cannot. He doesn't specify which risk assessments will be used or what they will entail. He just says "smart risk assessments." This one makes me a little nervous because what I consider "smart" might be a lot different than the DOJ. Even more, why do they have to be "risk" assessments? I'd prefer a strength assessment. We can really change the landscape of our communities and the criminal justice system by moving away from a problem/deficit focused system toward a strengths-based approach. I could write an entire blog on this (and maybe I will) but, in short, if you tell someone he's no good, he's a "criminal", he's got problems, and inform him about all the factors that make him a "risk", eventually he's going to believe you and he's going to act accordingly.
• Non-violent drug offenders will be diverted away from the prison system. Intensive drug courts and treatment options will be used more widely and effectively. This is a positive change. Drug courts can be very effective. These programs are often very intensive and difficult to complete. Those of you reading this and thinking that they're getting the easy way out are sorely mistaken. In fact, I've known several people to choose jail over drug courts because it was too hard. The Attorney General doesn't mention it, but I would really like to see the development and more expansive use of mental health courts (another topic for a full blog at a later date). Many, many people commit crimes and enter the criminal justice system because they have a mental health issue that they are not managing. Prisons and jails have replaced mental health asylums as places to lock away people who have a mental illness. Mental health courts have been successful at helping this population of people to access treatment, manage their illnesses, and live functional lives in the community. It's really not much different from addictions and should be addressed in the same way.
• Evidence-based models will be used to prevent crime. When he talks about this topic, there's a quote that really concerns me: "We have models, for example, in New York City’s CompStat program - It uses data to map where crime is most likely to occur, to deploy police to those areas to disrupt criminal activity, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the enforcement strategies." I just hope that this doesn't turn into another form of institutional racism where more and more people in poverty and people of color are targeted and driven into the criminal justice system at rates exponentially higher than people with money and influence.
• The Deputy Attorney General (DAG) is charged with conducting a comprehensive evaluation of "federal sentencing guidelines, the Department’s charging and sentencing advocacy practices, mandatory minimums, crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparities, and racial and ethnic disparities in sentencing." The DAG is also responsible for "studying alternatives to incarceration, and strategies that help reduce recidivism when former offenders reenter society." The findings will be used to recommend new legislation that will reform the structure of federal sentencing. While he's at it, why doesn't he just re-evaluate that whole War on Drugs thing and let us know how that's working out.
• The indigent defense crisis will be addressed. This is a huge issue. Currently, a large portion of people who cannot afford to hire their own private attorney are not receiving adequate defense. More importantly, this is not entirely the fault of the attorneys. The federal government and most state governments have not made it possible for attorneys who want to practice indigent defense to do their jobs well. It's really an issue of money and resources. Federal and state governments pay for what they value and currently they are not paying for indigent defense.
• There will be better use of forensic science to support investigations. The AG states, "Our goal is to ensure that forensic science is practiced at the highest level possible, and always in the pursuit of truth. Because we put a premium on truth-seeking and because this Administration is committed to using the best science possible whenever possible, including in criminal justice, I also believe that defendants should have access to DNA evidence in a range of circumstances. DNA testing has an unparalleled ability to exonerate the wrongfully convicted as well as to identify the guilty."
• The DOJ will also be focusing on efforts "to detect and prevent economic crimes and online crimes, as well as related civil enforcement efforts." As a part of this discussion, he mentioned getting tough on healthcare fraud.

He's talking about making some critical changes to our Criminal Justice system that would dramatically improve its effectiveness for our citizens and our government. My favorite of all his statements is this:

"...it is time to move past politics and ideology, and to move forward to a criminal justice system that is predicated on the fact that we need it to be fair and effective. In sum, we need to adopt what works. Getting smart on crime requires talking openly about which policies have worked and which have not. And we have to do so without worrying about being labeled as too soft or too hard on crime. Getting smart on crime means moving beyond useless labels and catch-phrases, and instead relying on science and data to shape policy. And getting smart on crime means thinking about crime in context – not just reacting to the criminal act, but developing the government’s ability to enhance public safety before the crime is committed and after the former offender is returned to society."

Mr. Attorney General, enough talking. Let's start walking.

posted by Athan   permalink   0 Comments

Every few days I make it a point to compile the news and commentary surrounding criminal defense issues, especially as they relate to Austin, and send it along to all of the attorneys in the firm as potential blog topics. Starting today, those links and discussions are also going to be posted here, as well.

Kristi Couvillon wrote recently on APD’s dash cam policy, which got me thinking about this story: Florida cops stop a young woman for DUI, and then proceed to rear-end her car. After she's arrested, with the dash cam still recording, they cook up a story that they all agree to in which they decide that it's her fault, and then charge her with DUI/property damage. "I don't make things up or lie ever, because it's wrong," says the cop on the tape, "but if I have to bend it a little to protect a cop, I'm gonna."

Austin defense attorney Jamie Spencer has a couple good posts up right now. On the APD prostitution stings, he asks how much money was spent dressing a whole bunch of female police officers like prostitutes and running a sting that netted 23 arrests. And he gets to one of the hearts of the taser issue (which I’ve written about briefly here) when he asks how potentially unconstitutional acts can be declared acceptable just by claiming that they’re not outside of department policy.

In case you haven’t heard yet about The Superglue Incident:  Four women superglued a guy's penis to his stomach after tricking him into a bondage scenario because he was screwing (and scamming) all of them. If only we were still running the “We Could Defend That” campaign. 

US Attorney General Eric Holder gave a speech at the ABA convention where he says most of the same things that regarding reform and non-violent drug offenders, etc, that I’ve been learning since I started working with this firm.

In Kaufman County, the chief public defender/founder of the public defender's office is planning to run for DA. The link from Robert Guest, a Dallas-area defense attorney, talks about the difference between the roles, and what good can come from a PD becoming a prosecutor.

We have a bunch of old ads in a binder that equate DWI arrests with prohibition. I never really got those, but this bit from Politico, where MADD criticizes Obama for having Gates and Crowley over to the White House for beer, rather than milk and cookies, helps me understand it a little.

Also, California dropped charges against a guy who'd been arrested for DUI while riding a horse.

Finally, not to be all ACLU here, but this is video of a cop assaulting a woman from behind at a convenience store in Philadelphia because, half an hour earlier, his son had rear-ended her car.

Labels: abuse of power, APD, cameras, dwi, in the news, linkdump

posted by Dan   permalink   0 Comments