Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

DEFENSE ATTORNEY and TRIAL ASSISTANTS

VIEWS: 4 PAGES: 17

									      Section 12

The Role of Defense and
  Defense Advocates
GLOSSARY
Annie E. Casey Foundation – A private charitable organization dedicated to
helping build better futures for disadvantaged children in the United States.
The primary mission of the Foundation is to foster public policies, human-
service reforms, and community supports that more effectively meet the
needs of today’s vulnerable children and families. In pursuit of this goal, the
Foundation makes grants that help states, cities, and neighborhoods fashion
more innovative, cost-effective responses to these needs.

Community Detention (CD) – Previously called “Close Street Supervision”
or “Close Supervision,” this is a court-ordered 7-day a week program in lieu
of detention, designed to be culturally competent, while preserving public
safety.

“Coverage” – The re-appointment of an indigent defense firm to the
representation of a youth, when it is not that firm’s “pick-up” time.

Detention Reform Legal Team (DRLT) – This group includes
representatives of the District Attorney’s Office, the eight law firms that
provide indigent representation for the County and members of the Juvenile
Community Justice Department. DRLT discusses technical and legal issues
related to Detention Reform and how they affect the representation of
juvenile clients.

Disposition – Juvenile equivalent of sentencing in the adult court system.

Juvenile Court Counselors (JCC) – Multnomah County Department of
Community Justice employees responsible for conducting pre-adjudication
assessments of delinquent youth, completing Court Summaries and
Reformation Plans, proposing dispositions to the Court, and providing case
management for youth pending adjudication. They supervise youth in the
community at both pre- and post-adjudication stages and are the equivalent
of an adult probation officer.

Oregon Youth Authority (OYA) – The State agency established to provide
temporary custody of delinquent youth adjudicated on a law violation and
released to OYA’s care.

“Pick-ups” – When a defense firm is newly appointed to the representation
of a youth by the Court at the Preliminary Hearing. Since Multnomah County
public defense firms are on individual contracts with the State Court
Administrator, a system of rotation for indigent appointments has been
developed to allow for adequate “pick-up” time so that each firm meets its
contract level.



                 Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                        Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                               Section 12 – Page 3
                                   August, 2006
Preliminary Hearings – Shelter hearings held within 36 hours of when a
youth is detained, excluding weekends and holidays. Probable cause findings
are made at this time, as well as the decision whether or not to detain the
youth pending adjudication.

Pre-trial Placement Coordinator (PC) – A new position designated to
approve the Preliminary Hearing docket and present recommendations to the
Court. The Coordinator collects information and recommendations from the
Juvenile Court Counselors, reviews the information for compliance with the
RAI and Department policy, and screens and refers appropriate cases for
detention alternatives.

Pre-trial Placement Planning Meeting (“11:30 Meeting”) – The
meeting that occurs daily at 11:30 a.m., prior to Preliminary Hearings, to
discuss each case and a potential recommendation for the Court. In regular
attendance are: a representative from the District Attorney’s office, a
representative from Community Detention, the various defense firms that
either have clients with Preliminary Hearings or are picking up new clients,
the Oregon Youth Authority, and the Placement Coordinator. Other parties
who attend (as needed) include: a representative from State Office of
Services to Children and Families, Staff Secure Shelter programs, and
Juvenile Court Counselors. The parties discuss recommendations and
attempt to concur on a plan to present at the Preliminary Hearing.

Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI) – The objective instrument used to
determine the level of risk of pre-adjudicated youth. This instrument
assesses youths’ risk of re-offending and/or failing to appear for hearing.
The RAI is used in determining detention decisions at both intake and
Preliminary Hearings.

Senate Bill 1 – State legislation implemented in 1995 that made many
significant changes in the juvenile justice process, including forming the
Oregon Youth Authority and implementing Measure 11.

Staff Secure Shelter – Temporary (up to 28 days) shelter placement with
24 hour staff supervision for pre-adjudicated youth requiring the most secure
shelter placement.

State Office of Services to Children and Families (SCF or SOSCF) –
The Oregon state agency charged with the protection, welfare, and service
delivery to youth with significant mental health needs when they are
committed by the Court into SCF care. These youth are associated with the
Dependency Court or are in the temporary custody of probationary services
in the Delinquency Court.




                 Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                        Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                               Section 12 – Page 4
                                   August, 2006
INTRODUCTION
The following section discusses the role of and benefits to the defense in the
reform process. It also examines the creation of defense advocates and the
development of their roles within the process.

GOALS
   To identify the need of the defense attorney’s acceptance of objective
    detention criteria as part of their case preparation and presentation at
    preliminary hearings.
   To describe the benefit of defense participation in pre-trial planning.
   To recognize the need to accept the role of the defense attorney in the
    judicial process.
   To identify the need for assessment of current defense attorney practices
    regarding case processing in home jurisdictions.

KEY ELEMENTS
   History:
     Multiple defense firms independently contracted with the State.
     Defense appointed to case, receives discovery, and meets client for
      the first time at the Preliminary Hearing.
     Senate Bill 1 changes treatment of youth in juvenile justice system.

   Philosophy:
     Detention should only be utilized when no other options exist.
     Earlier discovery and access to clients improves representation.
     More consistent preparation and presentation at Preliminary Hearings
      reduces pre-adjudication detention, improving case processing.

   Goals:
     Develop a discovery retrieval system and contact clients prior to
      Preliminary Hearings.
     Create defense advocate position.
     Identify and improve alternative placement resources.
     Improve defendant’s participation in the case and increase success on
      probation through expedited case processing and appropriate
      placement plans.
     Preserve all clients’ rights as well as defense ethics.
     Develop a data collection model to measure the impact of defense
      advocates on defense representation.



                  Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                         Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                                Section 12 – Page 5
                                    August, 2006
   Implementation:
     Develop advocate job description and incorporate into office funding
      scheme.
     Collaborate with Juvenile Community Justice Department on system
      development and incorporating defense into detention reform.
     Identify existing Juvenile Community Justice Department alternative
      placement resources and how to gain access to them.
     Identify and locate existing community resources.
     Identify and locate new resources.
     Educate all resources on the Detention Reform objectives and
      determine their availability and how to gain access to them.
     Participate in multiple decision-making forums to maintain the defense
      perspective in the system.
     Educate and incorporate all of the defense firms into the reformed
      defense advocacy strategy.
     Develop modes of communicating and strategizing among defense
      advocates to improve resource utilization and advocacy.

   Outcomes:
     Reduced use of Detention at the pre-adjudication phase.
     Earlier advocacy for defendants and improved probable cause
      arguments.
     Appropriate matching of defendants to resources.
     Improved defendant participation and investment in the case process.
     Streamlined case processing time at Preliminary Hearings.
     Reduced failure-to-appear and recidivism rates.
     More accurate assessments of risk potential and social histories.
     Active defense presence in the Juvenile Community Justice
      Department policy and program development.
     Improved communication between the defense and all involved parties
      (the Juvenile Community Justice Department, the District Attorney,
      and the Judiciary).
     Early identification of the client’s needs improves arguments and
      planning for dispositional hearings.

HISTORY
Public defense for indigent youth in Multnomah County has a unique format –
several defense firms are independently contracted with the State to provide
public defender services. Each firm develops its own contract criteria and
representation standards within the guidelines of the State Court
Administrator and the Oregon State Bar. There is a rotation system that
designates specific firms to pick up new cases each week. Any other
available firm picks up the designated firm’s conflicts and co-defendants.
Attorney appointments technically expire at disposition unless the firm
requests to be continued as counsel.

                 Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                        Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                               Section 12 – Page 6
                                   August, 2006
Prior to the Detention Reform Initiative, the Judicial Officer appointed
defense attorneys to each case at the Preliminary Hearing. Defense did not
have access to clients prior to appearing before the court. At the hearing,
the attorney received all of the discovery and the petition and was expected
to achieve several tasks at once:
   Read the discovery for probable cause arguments.
   Meet the client and determine his/her position.
   Follow the discussion in the courtroom and make appropriate arguments.
   Present a plan on behalf of the client.

Furthermore, since attorneys were not regularly re-appointed to repeat
offenders, the new court-appointed attorney lacked knowledge of the client’s
past history to aid in the preliminary representation. Because the time to
prepare and consult with the youth prior to the hearing was limited and there
was little continuity of representation, the defense was forced to save most
of its arguments and case planning for the dispositional phase.

Although the Detention Reform Initiative had been implementing changes in
Multnomah County since 1992, it was not until legislative changes in 1995
that detention reform began to involve the defense more directly. In 1995,
changes in the Oregon legislature resulted in several new laws affecting
juveniles, particularly Senate Bill 1. These changes were driven by a shift in
philosophy among Oregon lawmakers from “rehabilitation” of youth to
“reformation” of youth. Although this created a more punitive attitude
towards delinquent youth, it enhanced the working relationship between the
defense and the proponents of the Detention Reform Initiative.

The basic philosophy of the Detention Reform Initiative is to reduce the use
of detention. Some means to achieve this are to improve representation at
the Preliminary Hearing and to identify alternative placement resources. In
1996, the Judiciary issued a new policy allowing defense firms to gain access
to both discovery and clients prior to appointment at the Preliminary Hearing.
Furthermore, it has recently become an accepted policy that repeat offenders
will have the same firm re-appointed to represent them.

COLLABORATION
The art of collaboration, a key piece to detention reform, included the
development of forums to help get the defense involved in some of the
decision-making processes. A Detention Reform Legal Team was developed,
which included attorneys from the various defense firms, the defense
advocates, members of the Juvenile Community Justice Department, the
Detention Reform Project Coordinator, and representatives of the District
Attorney’s Office. Topics on the agenda range from policy issues within the

                  Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                         Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                                Section 12 – Page 7
                                    August, 2006
Juvenile Court, changes in the detention reform, presentations by various
detention alternative programs, and discussion of changes within the legal
processes at Juvenile Court. This has been an effective way to create system
change through collaboration and has improved relationships between the
District Attorney, the Juvenile Community Justice Department, and the
defense. The DRLT meetings continue to occur on a monthly basis and are
now facilitated by a defense advocate in order to continue a strong defense
presence in the juvenile justice system.

IMPLEMENTATION
Overall, the defense bar’s goals are to provide the best representation for its
clients, reduce the number of incarcerated youth, and streamline case
processing to allow more time for appropriate resource identification and
case development. The 1996 judicial policy offered an opportunity to meet
those goals.

As each defense firm has its own unique contract with the State Court
Administrator and varying levels of resources, the defense response to this
opportunity has been mixed. Due to funding constraints and attorney over-
commitments, most offices are able only to obtain discovery before the
Preliminary Hearing in order to review the materials for probable cause
arguments. The Juvenile Rights Project (JRP) had a unique response to the
new policy and developed a new staff position in order to maximize the
benefits afforded in the reformed system. In 1996, JRP was the only office to
have a defense advocate routinely preparing cases for Preliminary Hearings.
They began to develop a system of information retrieval and detention
alternatives advocacy that could later be used by other advocates.
Concurrently, the Juvenile Community Justice Department continued to
improve pre-Preliminary Hearing placement planning methods that
coordinated with the defense advocate’s efforts. These were primarily the
institution of the Placement Coordinator position and the “11:30 Meeting.”
There were many problems and conflicts during this initial period of change.

The role of defense has always been one of controversy, since they are often
viewed as “outsiders,” both because of the geographical location of defense
firms and the natural wariness defense has of the system in order to ensure
that the clients’ rights are protected. It was difficult for parties on both sides
to make the transition from the prior adversarial approach to a more
collaborative effort. By giving the defense access to clients and discovery
prior to the court officially appointing attorneys to the case, it was unclear
who controlled the information regarding the decision of where to place the
youth. In the beginning, information retrieval consisted of visiting the
individual Juvenile Court Counselor’s offices and requesting discovery and
release recommendations. As a whole, the system was cumbersome and
awkward to negotiate the first year or so, until some of the Juvenile
Community Justice Department policies were fully implemented.

                  Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                         Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                                Section 12 – Page 8
                                    August, 2006
In 1997, JRP aided in securing a one-year grant that funded similar advocacy
positions for several other firms. These positions were incorporated into the
existing Casey Detention Reform grant. During the one-year pilot project,
defense advocates held monthly meetings to share ideas and strategies,
develop resource lists, and discuss problems regarding the developing
system. Some of these meetings incorporated members of the Juvenile
Community Justice Department in order to implement systemic changes,
such as reforming the notification system to defense firms regarding youth
with Preliminary Hearings. Collaboration between the defense advocates and
the Juvenile Community Justice Department enabled the defense to better
identify and utilize available community resources. Furthermore, gaps in the
available resources were identified and new services, such as the Staff
Secure Shelter, were developed. This enhanced defense advocacy expanded
the use of existing resources by educating these resources as to the
Detention Reform ideals.

The defense increased its participation in the Detention Reform Initiative by
having the advocates attend the Detention Reform Legal Team meetings
every month. These meetings also include members of the Juvenile
Community Justice Department and the District Attorney’s office.

In developing the advocacy position, the intention was to expedite the case
process without compromising defense ethics and to get defense actively
involved at the front end. Early access to discovery enables defense to make
improved probable cause arguments and advocate at Preliminary Hearings
for appropriate placements. The defense believes that appropriate
placement reduces recidivism rates and increases success on probation, both
pre- and post- adjudication. Currently, preliminary statistics in Multnomah
County show that only 7.8% of all the youth released at Preliminary Hearings
in 1998 failed to appear at their adjudication hearing and only 13.1% of all
the youth released at Preliminary Hearings in 1998 re-offended between their
Preliminary Hearing and adjudication.

Roles and Responsibilities of a Defense Advocate
 Obtain the Preliminary Hearing list as soon as possible and run the
  names/court numbers through a thorough search on the conflict checking
  system for conflicts and currently represented clients. Attempt to resolve
  any questions regarding attorney appointments to a case that arise during
  the search through more thorough searching of office case files and calls
  to the Juvenile Court staff (Prelim. Processor or Docketing) to verify the
  office information. (A recently established agreement with the Juvenile
  Community Justice Department states that the Docketing Department will
  run the Preliminary Hearing list through the court computer system and
  fax a list indicating the last known defense firm to represent the youth.
  This helps the pick-up firm determine the number of potential clients with
  whom they will be working.)

                 Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                        Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                               Section 12 – Page 9
                                   August, 2006
   Gather information. Once previously represented clients are established,
    information on these clients is gathered by locating case files and/or
    discussing the case with the individual attorney/legal assistant.
   Go to the Juvenile Court after gathering all of the information and
    immediately go to the Placement Coordinator’s office to obtain all
    available discovery (police reports, Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI)
    sheets, Community Detention reports, and JCC worksheets).
   Upon obtaining all of the available discovery, continue on to Detention to
    interview any detained clients/potential clients.
   Interview clients. The interview begins with an explanation of the
    advocate’s role. This is followed by a confirmation of the client’s desire to
    have an attorney appointed to his/her case. The rest of the interview
    covers the basic nature of the Preliminary Hearing and general
    information on the case and court procedure to expect in the near future,
    including the types of resources available in the community. The RAI
    score is reviewed with the client to verify its accuracy and discuss the
    general recommendation expected for the case. Ideally, clients should
    help the advocate plan release recommendations, telling the advocate
    what they would like to see happen at the Preliminary Hearing and the
    types of plans, which would be unacceptable.
   Attend the 11:30 Meeting. Also in attendance at this meeting are
    representatives from the District Attorney’s office, the Community
    Detention program, the Staff Secure Shelter program, and the Placement
    Coordinator. This is a time to gather more information on the case and
    participate in the development of a policy recommendation by advocating
    for the client’s wishes/plan with the least amount of disclosure.
   If the meeting produces any ideas/resources that require further
    investigation, the advocate shall endeavor to make those
    calls/investigations prior to the Preliminary Hearings at 1:30 p.m.
   Take notes. During this entire process copious notes are taken on a pre-
    drafted form for the attorney’s use. The ideal practice is to have the
    attorney attend the 11:30 Meeting and to obtain both oral and written
    information on the case. In the alternative, the prepared file is passed to
    the attorney, with either a meeting or phone communication to cover any
    finer points not detailed in the notes (such as gestures or intuitions). The
    attorney gains access to the file in ample time to allow for appropriate
    review of the discovery and case preparation before the Preliminary
    Hearing. If there are further questions, the advocate can either attend
    the Preliminary Hearing or be available by phone for more information.
    The form found in Additional Information is an example of what a defense
    advocate might use during an interview and case preparation.




                  Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                         Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                               Section 12 – Page 10
                                    August, 2006
OBSTACLES
During the Detention Reform Initiative, change was difficult for everyone, but
the reform has ultimately improved defense advocacy. For defense, the
difficulties existed even before a defense advocate position was created. Due
to traditional adversarial roles, which were fortified by multiple defense firms
with office bases outside of the Detention facility, defense firms were
consistently the last to be informed about what was happening with their
clients. Thus, the defense perceived themselves as always having to catch
up. The first year of defense advocacy was rigorous because the ideas of
collaboration and the goals of the detention reform were challenging
everyone’s traditional roles and “turf.” Even after the Juvenile Community
Justice Department established staff positions and policy regarding earlier
access to clients and discovery, the change was still very difficult, since roles
and responsibilities were constantly being challenged and in a state of flux.
An essential piece to instituting a defense advocate position is to develop a
clear job description and educate all involved parties as to the role of the
advocate.

The development of an efficient system of information retrieval also proved
to be difficult. With so many defense firms and the rotating appointment
schedule, there were multiple problems in determining which firm would
receive which appointments. After many meetings involving Juvenile
Community Justice Department staff and members of the defense,
agreements were made regarding early notification to firms of Preliminary
Hearings and identification of the last known defense representative on each
case. This allows the firm receiving new appointments to determine which
youth needed an attorney.

An additional obstacle for defense was learning information about new
programs or changes in the system when they were being considered or
before they were implemented. A lack of knowledge of the different
detention alternatives and how to best use them hampered defense
advocacy. The development of the defense advocate position has created a
“point person” to monitor program development and changes, to learn the
intricacies of the various existing programs, and to educate attorneys about
how to use the available resources most effectively.

Finally, a huge obstacle for defense was funding for the advocate position.
Since each defense firm has an individualized contract with the State, with
varying caseloads and staff numbers, it was impossible to establish defense
advocates across the board. Each firm responded to detention reform as
their resources permitted. For the Juvenile Rights Project, after the one-year
grant for a half-time advocate expired, the office juggled its staffing
arrangements within the existing funding scheme to allow for a continued
half-time defense advocate. Ultimately, funding continues to be an obstacle.


                 Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                        Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                              Section 12 – Page 11
                                   August, 2006
THE NEW REFORMED SYSTEM
Early access to clients and discovery has improved defense representation in
many ways. Currently, the defense is able to actively and knowledgeably
advocate for clients early in the process because they can meet with clients
and discuss their circumstances prior to the Preliminary Hearing. By doing
so, defense is able to gain more knowledge of client needs and resource
availability, facilitating the ability to match the client to an appropriate
resource at Preliminary Hearings. Appropriate client/service matching can
help improve a defendant’s chances of success while in the community.

Early access to discovery also enables defense to prepare better arguments
regarding probable cause. Those involved in the reform process developed a
system for retrieving the discovery in enough time to allow advocates to
meet with detained clients before the 11:30 Meeting. Currently, the
Preliminary Hearing processor produces a daily list of all youth having
Preliminary Hearings and faxes it to the various firms as early as 8:30 a.m.
Police reports and copies of the RAI are usually available in trays in the
Placement Coordinator’s office by 9:30 a.m. Juvenile Court Counselor
worksheets, designating the recommendation for the Preliminary Hearing,
and Community Detention reports are available throughout the morning, but
no later than the 11:30 Meeting. Additionally, Juvenile Court Counselors are
more receptive to the defense advocates and their inquiries as roles and
reputations have been established after three years of developing the
defense advocate positions.

Furthermore, early exposure of the defendant to the defense process and
personnel helps to build trust and to increase the level of investment the
defendant has in his/her own case. This is extremely beneficial in the later
portions of the case, when the defendant is required to schedule an interview
in the office and consult with his/her attorney. Client-initiated contact and
case participation has improved since advocates began meeting with clients
prior to detention. Because many delinquent youth return to the juvenile
justice system on repeat offenses, a defense advocate can also assist with
continuity of contact and representation, thereby furthering the client’s trust
and investment in his/her attorney and case.

Advocates also provide an important service for the parents and families of
defendants. Many parents and families do not understand the intricacies of
the juvenile justice system. An advocate is able to explain various release
options to families, thereby increasing the chance that they might agree to
the defendant being released to their custody. Advocates can also ease the
anxiety felt by many families by explaining what is happening in the court
hearing and what the family can expect from working with a public defender.
Invested families are a better support to defendants, again increasing their
chances of success in the community. Overall, the defense advocate is able
to provide a consistent contact point for clients and families.

                 Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                        Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                              Section 12 – Page 12
                                   August, 2006
Defense advocates also assist when a youth is not released from Detention at
the Preliminary Hearing. The Juvenile Community Justice Department has
agreed that youth can be placed back on the Preliminary Hearing list at a
later date to reconsider additional release options after the initial detention
decision. The defense advocate continues to work on the case after the
Preliminary Hearing to locate community resources and develop a pre-trial
release plan.

Early investigation into a client’s circumstances and needs also improves
dispositional arguments. Case processing is expedited by a greater
knowledge of the client’s service needs, enabling the defense to utilize
appropriate services, such as mental health evaluations, specialized
residential resources, and educational services. At the dispositional hearing,
defense is better prepared to make recommendations to the Court and able
to provide further options. More in-depth knowledge of the clients and their
needs facilitates communication between the parties, thereby increasing the
appropriate matching of clients to services and reformative plans.
The 11:30 Meeting provides defense with many benefits as well. It serves as
an opportunity for information gathering and advocacy, not for strategy
sharing. Thus, the defense is able to collaborate (without compromising their
position) by supporting an alternative plan and obtaining acceptance of the
plan by all parties, thereby streamlining the Preliminary Hearing process.
Defense is able to hear the perspectives of the Juvenile Community Justice
Department, District Attorney, Community Detention program, etc. so that
they are more prepared for the Preliminary Hearing with a reasonable
argument. The discussion at the meeting allows for correction of social
history and legal history for more accurate assessment of risk potential.
Some of the more subtle benefits of the meeting include getting to hear
everyone’s thoughts about the case. These can provide some particularly
interesting (and often helpful) insights.

Having a defense advocate working with members of the Juvenile Community
Justice Department enhances communication between members of the
defense and the Juvenile Community Justice Department. This is helpful in
many ways, including incorporating the defense into various aspects of the
program and policy development within the Juvenile Community Justice
Department. This aids in the promotion and continuation of detention
reform. Improved communication between Juvenile Court Counselors and
the defense has facilitated dispositional planning, as the various parties are
able to discuss options with one another. Furthermore, the defense
advocates’ intimate involvement with the juvenile justice system places them
in a position where they are more capable of noting changes or problems
within the system. These issues can then be addressed by the defense bar
through early and effective advocacy, improving the system and resources
for clients.


                 Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                        Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                              Section 12 – Page 13
                                   August, 2006
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
   Preliminary Hearings Intake Sheet
   Client Profiles
     Scenario I
     Scenario II




                      Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
                             Juvenile Detention Reform Initiative
                                   Section 12 – Page 14
                                        August, 2006
                    PRELIMINARY HEARINGS INTAKE SHEET
DATE:
*NAME:                               AGE:       DOB:
*CHARGE for this PRELIM:

*CURRENT PROBATION STATUS: Y or N Date:
PRIOR DEL. HISTORY:         chg:          date:       chg:        date:
                            chg:          date:       chg:        date:
                            chg:          date:       chg:        date:
                            chg:          date:       chg:        date:
                            chg:          date:       chg:        date:
*JCC:
*Temporary Custody to OYA?/SCF?: Y or N CASEWRKR:________
*Notes from Atty:


*Notes from interview with client:




*Preferred placement options:

                                                                  ____________
*Placement notes:




                                 ********11:30 meeting*********

*RAI SCORE: OVERRIDE?: Y or N              APPROVED?: Y or N
*REASONS FOR OVERRIDE:


**RECOMMENDATION:
     D.A. Agrees?
     Comm. Det. Agrees?
     Placement Coord. Agrees?

*NOTES FROM THE MEETING:




*MISC INFO:
CLIENT PROFILES
Scenario I
Maria Sanchez is a 15 year-old girl who has lived in Portland her whole life.
She comes from a single-parent home with a mother who has a history of
alcohol abuse and of choosing abusive partners. Her father left the family
when Maria was young. Maria disclosed sexual abuse by her father at age 7,
however her mother allowed him to remain in the home for some time
thereafter. Mother’s current boyfriend is physically abusive to Maria, her
siblings, and the mother. The mother has extensive local family members
who have been concerned about Maria’s situation. Mother says that Maria
will not mind her and neither she, nor her relatives, can handle her.

At age 12, Maria began to develop gang associations. She acknowledges
being a member of the “18th Streeters” and displays numerous gang tattoos.
Maria is bright and did very well in school as a young child, but began to
have problems with attendance and behavior in her early teens. She ran
away from her mother’s home once (gone for a week 7 months ago) and is
currently on runaway status (has been gone 2 days). She skipped school
twice during the past month.

On April 20, 1999, Maria encountered a girl at school (Rosa) who is affiliated
with a rival gang and who has been seen with Maria’s (adult) boyfriend.
Maria confronted Rosa in the school bathroom. Maria grabbed Rosa’s hair,
threw her to the floor, and punched and kicked her. Rosa suffered scratches
and a swollen lip. Maria stole Rosa’s pager and backpack and fled the scene.
Maria was arrested soon thereafter at a shopping mall. She was charged
with Robbery III (class C felony), Assault IV (class A misdemeanor),
Possession of a Controlled Substance II (class C felony) and Carrying a
Concealed Weapon (CCW, class B misdemeanor). The drug and CCW
charges resulted from the police finding a small amount of cocaine and a 7”
hunting knife in Rosa’s backpack.

During the arrest, Maria was hostile and uncooperative with the police, and
made threats to “kick Rosa’s ass” if she cooperates with the prosecution.
She calmed down at the detention facility and indicated that she wanted to
go home.

Maria has had limited prior juvenile court contact and has neither been on
probation nor had any delinquency court appearances. She has had no prior
expulsions from school. At the time of this incident, she had a Theft II
(shoplift) and Assault IV pending (both class A misdemeanors), and is in
warrant status for being unable to locate. The warrant indicated that the
Judicial Officer did not oppose release. This is Maria’s first warrant and she
and mother both advise that they had recently moved and had no idea that
the warrant had been issued. She is facing expulsion from school over this
incident.
CLIENT PROFILES
Scenario II

Darrell Ray Stewart is a 12-year-old who comes from a home plagued by
poverty and chronic residential instability. His mother is disabled and stays
at home to care for Darrell and his infant sibling. His father works
sporadically as a laborer for a temporary service.

Darrell has history of learning problems in school. He has skipped school
once during the past month. He has never run away from home. He may be
ADHD but has never been diagnosed or offered medication. He lacks social
skills and is frequently picked on by other students and neighborhood
children. He suffers from the effects of poor nutrition and asthma. His
parents have been concerned for years about Darrell because of his cruelty
to animals and smaller children, his low impulse control, and his poor
boundaries with others. He acts depressed with a flat effect, but his parents
have never had the resources to access services to address these issues.

On May 2, 1999, Darrell was at the bus stop before school when he was
harassed by a fellow student (Cody) about his poor hygiene and ill-fitting
clothing. Darrell became enraged, returned home, and took a loaded
handgun from his parents’ closet. He concealed it in his backpack and
brought it to school. At noon recess, Darrell retrieved the gun, brought it
onto the playground, and pointed it at Cody, threatening to kill him. Darrell
was wrestled to the ground and disarmed by school staff. When searched
incident to arrest, police found several disturbing letters that Darrell had
written expressing a desire to hurt himself and others. He was charged with
Possession of a Firearm in a Public Building (class C felony), Unlawful
Possession of a Firearm (class A misdemeanor) and Menacing (class A
misdemeanor).

Darrell has no prior involvement with the juvenile justice or child welfare
systems. At the Preliminary Hearing, Darrell’s parents indicated that while
they love Darrell and are worried about him, they feel it would be unsafe to
have him home at this time.

								
To top