Overcrowding in the Santa Cruz County Main Jail

The Santa Cruz County main jail has been overcrowded since it opened in 1981.

Data on inmates transferred to the main jail for parole hearings (Morrissey) was evaluated for a 60-day period starting mid-August 2003. During this period, 20 inmates were transferred mostly from the Santa Rita State Prison to the Santa Cruz main jail to wait for their parole hearings. The holding period was distributed as follows: Number of Inmates Number of Days Held 2 1 4 4 1 5 11 6 1 12 1 16 Average Inmate Stay: 5.85 days Mid-August to Mid-October 2003 Table 1. Length of Stay for Inmates Awaiting Parole Hearings A holding period of five days or less requires scheduling transportation inbound and outbound within a two-day window around the day of a hearing. The Sheriffs department maintains that planning on anything shorter is not practical. If the total number of inmate days in our data could be reduced to an average of five days that would equal a total of 29 days in a 60-day period or less than one-half of an inmate on average.

Data was analyzed for all inmates held in the main jail over 30 days from arraignment, but not sentenced. A snapshot of the data on November 18, 2003, revealed 124 inmates held over 30 days from arraignment. Additional holding time until the next scheduled court appearance for each case is totaled as well as the totals of motion delays initiated by defense, prosecution and judicial. These delays are coded in the court minute orders as “1050” motions. Data shows that most motions for delays are initiated by the defense. Some defendants prefer the Santa Cruz jail to state facilities, and any delays of the court Issues Contributing to the Overcrowding P a g e 3 - 5 process will count toward their ultimate sentence therefore defense attorneys have little incentive to expedite the process. However the prosecution requests delays as well, often because certain prosecution witnesses including arresting officers may not be available so a continuance is requested. Prosecutors usually have many cases pending and these delays, though not necessarily initiated by the prosecution, are accepted without much opposition. It falls on the judges to decide on these motion delays. Judges must consider the “fairness” as well as any judicial decisions that may be viewed as reason for an appeal. Using a normal distribution throughout the year, total delays over one month from arraignment contribute approximately 40 inmates to the overcrowded condition. The distribution of “1050” motions is as follows: Number of Time Held as of Additional Time to Total Cumulative Inmates Nov. 18, 2003 Next Scheduled Months’ Delay Court Appearance Over Initial 30 Days 36 1 - 2 months 26.9 months 44.9 months 26 2 - 3 months 17 months 114.9 months 15 3 - 4 months 8.9 months 37.5 months 9 4 - 5 months 10 months 41.5 months 8 5 - 6 months 9 months 45 months 6 6 - 7 months 4.5 months 37.5 months 9 7 - 8 months 6.4 months 64.9 months 7 8 - 9 months 5.7 months 58.2 months 5 9 - 10 months 5.4 months 47.9 months 0 10 - 11 months --- --- 2 11 - 12 months 4.5 months 25.5 months 1 Over 1 year 2.1 months 14.1 months Total Cumulative Months' Delay Over 30 Days: 531.5 months Table 2. Inmates Held for 1050 Motions as of 11-18-2003 - 6 Issues Contributing to the Overcrowding

Data was analyzed on inmates waiting for transfer to special rehabilitation programs including Proposition 36. A snapshot of data on November 10, 2003, revealed three inmates were being held at the main jail as custodial housing waiting for beds in special rehabilitation programs such as those mandated by Proposition

A snapshot of data on October 29, 2003 showed eight inmates in the main jail with sequential sentencings that exceeded one year. Normally inmates sentenced over one year for one or more offenses are transferred to state prisons, alleviating the main jail population. However when a convicted inmate is sequentially sentenced with terms less than one year, the court can remand them to local hold. Six different judges sentenced the eight inmates in this data category.

The daily OR (Own Recognizance) releases, by day of the week, for a 60-day period of May and June 2003 are shown in the table below: Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Sheriff OR 50 50 44 45 66 86 102 Court OR 55 84 72 71 73 5 2 349(B) OR 52 40 32 41 60 91 84 CIT OR 13 9 6 6 2 0 0 Table 3. Own Recognizance Releases, May - June 2003 The four categories of OR release include the following: a. A Sheriff OR Release is based on guidelines that allow the County Detention Bureau discretion to release inmates with the provision that they appear for court arraignment. Since this is under the discretion of the Sheriff’s Detention Bureau, it is assumed that the bureau exercises the releases without delay to alleviate any unnecessary increase in the jail population. b. Court OR release is presently limited to Monday through Friday, causing the population in the main jail to increase during the weekends while these inmates await court hearings. A program to have pretrial release specialists review all arrestees and arrange for a judge to be available on weekends is no longer used in Santa Cruz County. When it was in effect, this program helped smooth out the population increase on weekends. It is difficult to specifically translate the numerical impact on overall population averages but, based on the limited data available, it could be as many as a 10 to 15 inmate reduction on average. Issues Contributing to the Overcrowding P a g e 3 - 7 c. An OR release under Penal Code 849 (B) 2 is for arrests for public intoxication only. The arresting officer is authorized to release such an arrestee with the provision that he show for appointed arraignment after a several hour drying-out period. Since the arrestee stays incarcerated for less than one day, it is unlikely that any opportunity for population reduction exists in this category. d. The Health Services Agency’s Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) can recommend OR release for select individuals under its care while incarcerated. Since CIT does not operate over the weekend, no releases occurred during weekends. The total number of CIT releases is so small that very little benefit can be found by extending its release activity to weekends.

The average daily population of inmates accused of crimes and determined by CIT to be mentally disturbed ranges from 50 to 70 people throughout the year. They are segregated from the main jail population and are overseen by the Health Services Agency’s Crisis Intervention Team. A snapshot of data on December 18, 2003 reveals 53 inmates meeting these criteria. Approximately forty of these inmates require psychotropic medication prescribed to manage serious bi-polar or schizophrenic conditions. Defense attorneys may request competency hearings under Penal Code 1368. The main jail holds defendants while the psychiatrist makes a determination and reports to the judge. The judge then rules whether the defendant can stand for the crimes accused. Any delays in the psychiatric determination, the judge’s ruling, or delays in holding inmates waiting for a bed to open at the state mental facility can increase the main jail population. Approximately one to three inmates are held for this process per month.

Data to determine the impact on main jail population of decriminalizing drug offenses is difficult to analyze. Most offenders have complex histories and the booking reports reflect a large number of arrests for parole and probation violations and other crimes. The courts under state and federal statutes now determine whether these persons should be incarcerated. None of the 124 inmates in the Santa Cruz County court process that are 30 days past arraignment on November 18, 2003 are being held only for drug usage, possession or possession of paraphernalia.

The main jail is now reviewed under new standards. When the main jail was built in 1981, the ratio for toilets was 1:8, showers 1:16, wash basins 1:8. The newer code ratio is less stringent with toilets 1:10, showers 1:20, etc.

A VOTIS (Violent Offender Truth in Sentencing) federal grant enabled the Sheriff's Department to offset a cut in its operating budget that resulted in a staff reduction of 62 people. This reduction would have reduced the California Board of Corrections mandated capacity of the jail to 249 persons. Because of the VOTIS grant the mandated capacity can be maintained at 311 persons. - 8 Issues Contributing to the Overcrowding

The California Board of Corrections Biennial Inspection under Penal Code 6031 report of August 18, 2003 highlighted overcrowding as a significant non- compliance issue with the main jail as follows: “These crowded conditions and inadequate staffing levels expose the Sheriff’s Department and the County of Santa Cruz to potential litigation. As this situation persists with inmates literally pressed against one another, there is a greater likelihood for increased assaults (e.g. inmate versus inmate or inmate versus staff) resulting in serious injury. While we acknowledge the economic downturn to the State of California and the 58 counties of this State, we must inform you that the Santa Cruz County Main Jail is not in compliance with Title 15, CCR, Section 1027, Number of Personnel, and Title 24, CCR, Section 470A.2.9 Dayrooms.” Conclusions

None of these inmates had been held over a week.