HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-08-15; City Council; 18692; RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY FELONY WARRANTSCITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL
AB# 18,692
MTG. 08/15/06
DEPT. POL/CA
RESPONSE TO THE 2005-06 GRAND
JURY'S FELONY WARRANTS - THE
1 IMO/~ll \/Cr> E>D4"\DI EHfl DCD/^OTUNoULVcU rKUDLbM KtrUKI
DEPT. HEAD
CITYATTY. %?&
CITY MGR. -^V>
RECOMMENDED ACTION;
Adopt Kesolution No.
Warrants - The Unsolved
2006-238 , approving the response to the 2005-06 Grand Jury's Felony
Problem Report.
Approve the response to the 2005-06 Grand Jury's Felony Warrants - The Unsolved Problem
report and authorize the Mayor to sign and transmit the response to the presiding judge.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The 2005-06 San Diego County Grand Jury issued its report entitled Felony Warrants - The
Unsolved Problem which addresses the problem of unserved felony warrants in San Diego
County. The report makes four "findings" and seven "recommendations" with respect to the
Mayor of Carlsbad which requires a response. Two of the seven recommendations require a
response from the City Council; and five of the seven recommendations require a response
from the Police Chief. The Mayor, City Council and Police Chief have collectively prepared a
response to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court for the County of San Diego. In this
response (please see Exhibit A to the Resolution), the City addresses each finding and
recommendation of the Grand Jury and concludes with a summary of Carlsbad's position on
this issue.
The City of Carlsbad and the Police Department supports the apprehension of all individuals
with outstanding warrants. However, the City suggests that other measures should be
implemented before the City of Carlsbad and other law enforcement agencies within the County
of San Diego are asked to remove its officers from patrolling the streets to pursue individuals
with outstanding felony warrants on a full time basis. The measures include: some flexibility in
the ability to book all warrants into county jail and a tracking mechanism available to patrol
officers where warrant service efforts and intelligence are documented.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines section 15738, this
action does not constitute a "project" within the meaning of CEQA and therefore, does not
require environmental review.
EXHIBITS:
1. Resolution 2006-238 _, approving the response to the 2005-06 Grand Jury's Felony
Warrants - The Unsolved Problem report (with Exhibit A
attachment thereto).
2. 2005-06 Grand Jury Report Felony Warrants - The Unsolved Problem (June 1, 2006)
Page 2
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Captain Mike Shipley 760-931-2218 mship@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
FOR CITY CLERKS USE ONLY.
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED
DENIED
CONTINUED
WITHDRAWN
AMENDED
'V
Q
D
P
D
CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC
CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN
RETURNED TO STAFF
OTHER - SEE MINUTES
Oaa
D
CD LU O)CO > r^
< Q S
J U. CD ^
< O < <00 £ i |
< > 3 ^z uj co Qtr i DC Q-
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
\
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-238
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
RESPONSE TO THE 2005-06 GRAND JURY'S FELONY
WARRANTS - THE UNSOLVED PROBLEM REPORT
WHEREAS, on or about June 1, 2006, the 2005-06 San Diego County
Grand Jury issued its report entitled Felony Warrants - The Unsolved Problem
consisting of four findings and seven recommendations related to unserved felony
warrants throughout San Diego County, including the City of Carlsbad; and
WHEREAS, the Grand Jury found that the City of Carlsbad along with
other cities and the County should do more and to commit additional resources and
monies to reduce the number of unserved felony warrants; and
WHEREAS, the City Council supports the apprehension of all individuals
with outstanding warrants; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that other measures should be
implemented before the City of Carlsbad and other law enforcement agencies within the
County of San Diego are asked to remove its officers from patrolling the streets to
pursue individuals with outstanding felony warrants on a full-time basis; and
WHEREAS, the City Council responds to the Presiding Judge of the
Superior Court, County of San Diego regarding the Grand Jury's findings and
recommendations in Exhibit A, attached hereto; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the City Council approves of the response to the Presiding Judge
of the Superior Court, County of San Diego.
< o
I?
"Z LLJO z
DC DC
O
§2 ^
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3. That the Mayor is authorized to sign and transmit the response to the
presiding judge on or before August 30, 2006.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad held on the 15th day of August
2006 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Hall, Kulchin, Packard, Sigafoose
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST: n
LORRAINE WQOD, City Clerk
City of Carlsbad
Office of the Mayor
August 15,2006
The Honorable Janis Sammartino
Presiding Judge
Superior Court of the State of California
County of San Diego
220 West Broadway
P.O. Box122724
San Diego, California 92112-2724
Hon. Janis Sammartino:
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad has carefully reviewed and considered the San
Diego County Grand Jury 2005-06 Felony Warrants - The Unsolved Problem report
("Report") (June 1, 2006) and respectfully submits its response as required by Penal
Code section 933(c) and as further specifically addressed in Penal Code section
933.05.
The Report makes four "findings" and seven "recommendations" with respect to the
Mayor of the City of Carlsbad which requires a response. Two of the seven
recommendations require a response by the City Council; and five of the seven
recommendations require a response by the Chief of Police for the City of Carlsbad.
The Mayor, Council and Police Chief (collectively, referred to as "Carlsbad") respond to
the findings and recommendations. This response has been prepared in three sections.
First, specific responses to Grand jury Findings as described in California Penal Code §
933(a). Second, specific response to Grand Jury Recommendation as described in
California Penal Code § 933(b). And third, a summary of Carlsbad's position on these
issues.
Findings:
1. Finding: "Currently, little or no progress is being made in the rate of apprehension of
defendants with outstanding felony warrants in San Diego County."
• Carlsbad agrees with this finding.
• Carlsbad disagrees that the San Diego County rate of apprehension applies to or
is reflective of the City of Carlsbad.
2. Finding: "The Grand Jury finds that this computer program [SDLaw, E-Warrant],
(offered free to San Diego law enforcement agencies), if used by City and County law *T
enforcement agencies, would definitely increase apprehension of persons with multiple
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive • Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989 • (760) 434-2830 • FAX (760) 720-9461 @
Honorable Janis Sammartino
Presiding Judge
August 15, 2006
Page 2
felony warrants. However, some municipalities still do not choose to take advantage of
this program."
• Carlsbad agrees with this finding.
• Carlsbad uses the "SD Law" computer program and have a number of reported
incidents where residents have asked that officers stop bothering them because
the suspect no longer resided there.
3. Finding: "More informative outreach must be considered by the San Diego Law
Enforcement community, such as publication of photos of wanted criminals in
neighborhood newspapers, or following the State of Missouri's successful program of
roadside billboards showing large photos of wanted felons with multiple outstanding
Felony Warrants. The community response to this effort was outstanding."
• Carlsbad agrees with this finding.
• Carlsbad has always tried to be a team player in regional efforts. Should
collective effort be initiated throughout the County of San Diego, Carlsbad would
consider contributing its equitable share to support the program.
4. Finding: "The Grand Jury found that every law enforcement agency in San Diego
County has been contacted by the United States Marshal's office and invited to join
their San Diego Regional Task Force. Currently, only the San Diego County Sheriffs
office has responded positively with the assignment of several deputies to assist with
Felony Warrant apprehension and other activities."
• Carlsbad agrees with this finding.
• Carlsbad would hesitate expending over 2% of its patrol staffing to this effort.
Recommendations:
The Grand Jury recommends to all Mayors and Law Enforcement Agencies in San
Diego City and County, and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors:
06-70: "consider the significant benefit of joining the San Diego Regional Task Force.
This includes outstanding Felony Warrant apprehension already established under the
auspices of the San Diego office of the United States Marshal."
• Carlsbad does not see a significant benefit in joining a regional task force to
serve warrants. Sharing information and having each jurisdiction address active
warrants believed to be within their own area seems to be a more effective use
of resources.
06-71: "that one officer, from each law enforcement agency, be [sic] assigned full time
to this task force."
• Carlsbad has always tried to be a team player and would consider participation
in a Felony Warrant apprehension task force. However, expending over 2% of
its patrol staffing does not seem equitable or justified when Carlsbad averages
only about 8 un-served felony warrants in its jurisdiction each year.
Honorable Janis Sammartino
Presiding Judge
August 15, 2006
PageS
06-72: "create a data base to search all applications presented for any governmental
assistance, benefit or privilege. This would include, but not be limited to, all applicants
for driver's licenses, veteran's benefits, worker's compensation, unemployment
benefits, professional licenses, all vehicle registrations, and other applicable sources."
• Carlsbad sees this recommendation as a very useful tool and willing to
implement its use.
06-73: "fund San Diego law enforcement agencies programs of "Wanted" billboards."
• Carlsbad has always tried to be a team player and would consider participation
in support of a billboard program.
• Carlsbad probably would not erect billboards within the City limits as it is in direct
conflict with Carlsbad Municipal Code.
06-74: "install the E-Warrant computer program in Patrol Vehicles of all community Law
Enforcement Agencies in San Diego County and San Diego City."
• Carlsbad has the "SD Law, E-Warrant" program installed in all of its marked
police units and all investigators have access to the program on their individual
desk top computers.
06-75: "sponsor legislation that will provide law enforcement agencies with additional
tools to apprehend felons through integration of information from DMV, Social Security,
Veterans pensions and other state and federal agencies."
• Carlsbad would be willing to support this type of legislation.
06-76: "give apprehension of outstanding Felony Warrant offenders a greater priority
than currently appears to be the norm."
• Carlsbad believes that patrol officers service outstanding felony warrants
believed to be within Carlsbad at an adequate level. Officers have frequently
reported back that particular residents have become frustrated with the police
department because of repeated efforts to serve the same warrant. There needs
to be a way to better manage service efforts. This subject will be addressed
further in the summary.
Summary:
The City of Carlsbad and its Police Department supports the apprehension of all
individuals with outstanding warrants. However, Carlsbad suggests that other
measures should be implemented before agencies are asked to remove its officers
from patrolling the streets to pursue individuals with outstanding warrants on a full time
basis. These measures include: some flexibility in the ability to book warrants into
county jail and a tracking mechanism available to patrol officers where warrant service
efforts and intelligence are documented.
If field officers were permitted to arrest misdemeanor warrants, the total number of
outstanding warrants could be significantly reduced. Officers frequently encounter
Honorable Janis Sammartino
Presiding Judge
August 15, 2006
Page 4
subjects with outstanding misdemeanor warrants but are unable to take action because
the court is closed and the detention facility will not accept misdemeanor warrant
arrests. Ideally everyone with a warrant would be arrested and taken forthwith. As an
alternative, setting a time threshold for warrants could be a fall-back measure. For
example, any person with a warrant in excess of one year old should be booked. The
current status of not being able to arrest persons with warrants devalues the importance
of a warrant in the mind of the officer and citizen.
There needs to be an easily used tracking program for warrant service efforts. By
adding an additional field to the warrant or an attachment to the warrant where field
notes can be recorded, a number of issues may be addressed. As envisioned, an
officer with information concerning a warrant could click on a button to access "Service
Information" where he/she would find listed in chronological order of entry, all field
information collected regarding the warrant. The time, date and officer identification
would be automatically entered along with the officer's comments in the "Service
Information" field. The most obvious benefit would be a log of all efforts to serve the
warrant which would address and satisfy due diligence concerns. An officer preparing
for an attempt to service a warrant would check this data base to learn of any previously
collected information which could include anything from safety warnings to intelligence
concerns and even more recent residence information. If an officer were to develop
new address information it would be a simple matter to document the information and
contact an allied agency with that information. That agency could in-turn attempt to
serve the warrant. Ideally the second officer would enter his/her efforts and results into
the service information program.
Carlsbad believes the number of outstanding warrants issued to subjects living in
Carlsbad is not as grim as reported. Our records show that since January 1, 2006 a
total of 10 felony outstanding warrants lists an address in Carlsbad remain in the "SD
Law" database. All of those addresses have been checked and officers are confident
that the person wanted no longer resides at the stated location. Additionally our
records show that there are a total of 77 outstanding felony warrants that show a
Carlsbad address and which have been issued in the past 10 years, and a total of 129
outstanding warrants remain in the system that have been issued since 1979 (as far
back as we are able to check). An extremely high number of these warrants listed an
address in areas with a high percentage of rental units leading us to believe that the
individuals wanted have simply moved on.
Carlsbad understands that our warrant service responsibility includes not only wanted
individuals that live in Carlsbad but also to individuals wanted for crimes committed in
Carlsbad. Our data indicates that for the past 10 years an average of 21.3 un-served
Carlsbad initiated felony warrants have been added to the outstanding felony warrant
backlog while the number of outstanding felony warrants issued against addresses
within Carlsbad has averaged 7.7.
Carlsbad feels that the Grand Jury's Findings and Recommendations are not warranted <7
under the circumstances. Carlsbad does not support a long term assignment of one *
Honorable Janis Sammartino
Presiding Judge
August 15,2006
Page5
officer to a regional Warrant Task Force. This assignment would reduce Carlsbad's
field resources by 2%. Carlsbad would be supportive of short term temporary details,
maybe 2 to 3 months at a time. Long term, we prefer a proactive response on an
individual agency basis coupled with the use of the SD Law, E-Warrant program. Also
Carlsbad recommends an enhanced tracking program that would document warrant
service efforts. It is Carlsbad's belief that with a service effort tracking program and
proactive efforts each jurisdiction is better served by managing its own resources.
Carlsbad's staff will gladly appear before the Grand Jury in person to answer any
questions or provide further information on this issue. It is our understanding that staff
has not been given that opportunity to date. If you or the Grand Jury would like
additional information regarding the above, please contact Mr. Raymond Patchett, City
Manager, at 760.434.2821.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit our comments in response to the Grand Jury's
Findings and Recommendations and clarifyjDur position on these important issues.
Mayor
c: Grand Jury
City Council
City Manager
City Attorney
Police Chief
RECEIVED
MAY 2 4 2006
GRAND JURY
County of San Diego
Hall of Justice
330 W. Broadway, Suite 477
San Diego, CA 92101-3830
(619) 515-8707 Fax (619) 515-8696
Jim Vlassis, Foreman
May 22, 2006
CONFIDENTIAL
See Attached Mailing List
Re: Grand Jury Report: "Felony Warrants-The Unsolved Problem".
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
The 2005-2006 San Diego County Grand Jury herewith provides the referenced
report for your review and comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
in compliance with the Penal Code of California §933(c). This report was
prepared pursuant to §§925 and 925a of the Penal Code.
In accordance with Penal Code §933.05(e), a copy of this report is being
provided to affected agencies two working days prior to its public release and
after being approved by the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.
Please note that §933.05(e) specifies that no officer, agency, department, or
governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report
prior to its public release. This report will be filed with the Clerk of the Court
and released to the public on Thursday, June 1, 2006.
Sincerely,
05-2006 SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY
'JIM VLASSIS
Foreman
JV //lln
enc.
Attached Mailing List
Mayor, City of Carlsbad
City Council, City of Carlsbad
Mayor, City of Chula Vista
City Council, City of Chula Vista
Mayor, City of Coronado
City Council, City of Coronado
Mayor, City of Del Mar
City Council, City of Del Mar
Mayor, City of El Cajon
City Council, City of El Cajon
Mayor, City of Encinitas
City Council, City of Encinitas
Mayor, City of Escondido
City Council, City of Escondido
Mayor, City of National City
City Council, City of National City
Mayor, City of Oceanside
City Council, City of Oceanside
Mayor, City of Poway
City Council, City of Poway
Mayor, City of San Diego
City Council, City of San Diego
Attached Mailing List
Mayor, City of San Marcos
City Council, City of San Marcos
Mayor, City of Santee
City Council, City of Santee
Mayor, City of Solana Beach
City Council, City of Solana Beach
Mayor, City of Imperial Beach
City Council, City of Imperial Beach
Mayor, City of La Mesa
City Council, City of La Mesa
Mayor, City of Lemon Grove
City Council, City of Lemon Grove
Mayor, City of Vista
City Council, City of Vista
Sheriff, San Diego County
Police Chief, City of National City
Police Chief, City of La Mesa
Police Chief, City of El Cajon
Police Chief, City of Coronado
Police Chief, City of Oceanside
Police Chief, City of Carlsbad
Police Chief, City of Chula Vista
Attached Mailing List
Police Chief, City of Escondido
Police Chief, City of San Diego
Board of Supervisors, San Diego County
FELONY WARRANTS—
THE UNSOLVED PROBLEM
A Report by the
2005-2006 San Diego County Grand Jury
June 1, 2006
FELONY WARRANTS - THE UNSOLVED PROBLEM
SUMMARY
The 2005-2006 San Diego County Grand Jury, after having reviewed pertinent
information available, decided to once again look at Felony Warrants currently
outstanding in San Diego County. As of December 29, 2005, outstanding Felony
Warrants in San Diego City and County have increased to 18,254, from 15,688 on March
1,2003.
This Grand Jury revisited the issue of outstanding felony warrants in order to see why
this problem persists. The Jury found that there is no uniform Felony Warrant
apprehension procedure currently used by San Diego Cities and County law enforcement
agencies.
PURPOSE
The Grand Jury investigated the impact of the growing number of outstanding Felony
Warrants in our area, and the functions of the current Felony Warrant apprehension and
arrest systems.
The following areas of interest were studied carefully in order to assess the progress
made to date regarding outstanding Felony Warrants in San Diego County:
• To assess the progress that has been made in reducing Felony Warrants
throughout San Diego County.
• To determine how the E-System (Electronic posting of unserved Felony
Warrants) works, its acceptance by the various Law Enforcement departments in
San Diego City and County, and its effectiveness.
• What changes or procedures need to be made to decrease the number of
outstanding Felony Warrants.
• To consider the use of community outreach, such as billboards, news media and
the internet, to find and apprehend wanted felons.
• To study the assistance that the U.S. Marshals office can provide local law
enforcement agencies in locating and apprehending felons.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (filed June 1, 2006)
PROCEDURES EMPLOYED
Site Visits and Tours:
• United States Marshals Office, San Diego, CA
• La Mesa Police Department, La Mesa, CA
• National City Police Department, National City, CA
• Coronado Police Department, Coronado, CA
• Chula Vista Police Department, Chula Vista, CA
• San Diego County Sheriffs Office, San Diego, CA
• San Diego Police Department, San Diego, CA
Documents Reviewed:
• San Diego Regional Fugitive Task Force Training, Arrest Statistics & New
Prosecutions.
• United States Department of Justice, United States Marshals Service Fugitive
Task Force Process.
• Senate Committee on Past Audit and Oversight (Commonwealth of
Massachusetts)(SPAO) Arrest Warrant Management, Senate, No. 2381.
• Listing of Fugitive Task Force database Systems.
• San Diego County Sheriffs Department Process for Proper Execution of Felony
Warrants.
• Chula Vista Police Department Task Force Police Review.
• San Diego County Grand Jury reports for years 1996-1997, 1997-1998 and 2002-
2003.
• All San Diego County Law Enforcement Agencies written responses to the 2002-
2003 San Diego County Grand Jury report and recommendations for serving
Felony Warrants.
Interviews:
Letters were sent from the Grand Jury to all police departments in San Diego County and
the San Diego Sheriffs Department, requesting an interview with each agency. All
responded except Escondido Police Department and Oceanside Police Department.
Representatives from the following agencies were interviewed:
• A California Senator
• A California Assembly member
• The San Diego County Sheriffs Department
• The San Diego City Police Department
• The La Mesa Police Department
• The National City Police Department
• The El Cajon Police Department
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (filed June 1, 2006)
The Carlsbad Police Department
The Cluila Vista Police Department
The Carlsbad Police Department
The United States Marshals Department
The County of San Diego Probation Department
Web Site Information:
E-Warrants-SDLaw Computer Program
Outstanding Warrant Information:
• Synerfax.com/nationwi.htm
• People-Search.com
• Trafficcourtpros.com
• Intelius.com
Office of the San Diego Sheriff- http ://www. sdsheriff. net/home/
Department of Justice - www.usdoj.com
City of El Cajon, Police Department - www.el-cajon.ca.us
Chula Vista Police Department - www.chulavistaca.gov
National City Police Department - www.ci.national-city.ca;us
DISCUSSION
Felonies include some of the most egregious of serious crimes. These are defined in
Section 17 of the California Penal Code as "punishable by death or sentencing to
California State Prison".1 Felony Warrants are issued at the order of Superior Court
judges after persons convicted of serious crimes that have occurred in San Diego County
miss their court date, evade incarceration, do not respond to orders from the Court, or
other criminal actions.
There are currently 18,254 outstanding Felony Warrants in San Diego County. These are
a combination of warrants for criminals who are responsible for serious crimes, which
have escaped from prison or local custody, and have avoided capture by law
enforcement, failed to follow Court orders, or have violated the terms of their probation,
etc.
Outstanding Felony Warrants include Arrest, Bench and Indictment Warrants. The
breakdown of outstanding Felony Warrants in San Diego County is as follows:
San Diego Police Department 5,417
San Diego Sheriffs Department 1,993
San Diego District Attorney's Office 1,100
Oceanside Police Department 764
Escondido Police Department 674
Section 17 of the California Penal Code
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (Hied June 1, 2006)
Chula Vista Police Department 629
El Cajon Police Department 554
California Highway Patrol 496
Carlsbad Police Department 307
National City Police Department 298
La Mesa Police Department 147
San Diego Harbor Police Department 106
Coronado Police Department 41
Other (State, foreign, etc.) 5.728
Total 18,254
The Grand Jury found that the successful service of felony warrants is generally a result
of officers stopping persons for other violations and, in the process, checking for
outstanding warrants. Additional efforts in enforcement usually falls under the
jurisdiction of patrol officers who have completed assigned duties and follow up on
recent addresses and information for the outstanding felony warrants on their beat.
The Grand Jury noted that a new electronic program, covering outstanding felony warrant
apprehension, is being used by several communities in San Diego County. This is an
innovative computer program called "E-Warrants, SDLaw", and was developed by the
San Diego County Sheriffs office.
E-Warrants (SDLaw) can be installed on the computers in every patrol car and all desk
computers in every law enforcement agency in San Diego County. When a suspect's
name is entered, his/her information and picture is immediately available on the screen.
The E-Warrants program consists of 14 law enforcement databases including the listing
of all outstanding warrants that have been issued to this individual. All information for
this program is updated twice every day.
The Grand Jury encourages installation of this program in every police and sheriffs
patrol car to complement all of the systems currently being used to locate Felony Warrant
offenders.
The United States Marshal's office has offered considerable support, including assistance
in applying for grant monies, to any law enforcement agency in San Diego that wishes to
participate in their San Diego Regional Task Force, which includes Felony Warrant
enforcement. The Assistant Chief Deputy Marshal suggested that due to the larger size
of both the San Diego Police Department and the San Diego County Sheriffs Office,
each of these agencies provide at least one Sergeant and several Detectives for this
enhanced Task Force. The smaller police forces could each provide one officer.
The Assistant Chief Deputy of the San Diego United States Marshal's office noted that
all of the officers who participate in this enhanced San Diego Regional Task Force must
attend all Task Force meetings. This should be their primary assignment.
SAN DfEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (Hied June 1, 2006)
The Assistant Chief Deputy Marshal also indicated that the enhanced San Diego Regional
Task Force meetings should be held once a month with coordination of meeting dates and
places.
The Grand Jury also investigated the possibility of "Wanted" billboards. These are
roadside billboards that typically include large photos of many "most-wanted" criminals.
Authorities say that eight of the ten suspects shown on billboards in the Kansas City, Mo.
area have been arrested, seven because of the "Wanted" billboards. This also indicates
the involvement of the community with participation in their capture.
FACTS AND FINDINGS
Fact: There is an increase in the number of outstanding felony warrants in San Diego
County.
Finding: Currently, little or no progress is being made in the rate of apprehension of
defendants with outstanding felony warrants in San Diego County.
Fact: Statistics recently released by the San Diego County Sheriffs office noted a steady
increase in outstanding felony warrants. In the year 2005, these warrants have increased
at a greater rate than in previous years.
Fact: The E-Warrant, (SDLaw) document is an innovative computer program compiled
by the San Diego County Sheriffs office and was demonstrated to The Grand Jury.
Finding: The Grand Jury finds that this computer program, (offered free to San Diego
law enforcement agencies), if used by City and County law enforcement agencies, would
definitely increase apprehension of persons with multiple felony warrants. However,
some municipalities still do not choose to take advantage of this program.
Finding: More informative outreach must be considered by the San Diego Law
Enforcement community, such as publication of photos of wanted criminals in
neighborhood newspapers, or following the State of Missouri's successful program of
roadside billboards showing large photos of wanted felons with multiple outstanding
Felony Warrants. The community response to this effort was outstanding.
Fact: The United States Marshal's Office in San Diego, currently has a Regional Task
Force that includes Felony Warrant apprehension.
Fact: The United States Marshal's office also has offered assistance in obtaining grant
monies to supplement the costs of participating officers' time and training.
Finding: The Grand Jury found that every law enforcement agency in San Diego County
has been contacted by the United States Marshal's office and invited to join their San
Diego Regional Task Force. Currently, only the San Diego Sheriffs office has
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (filed June 1, 2006)
responded positively with the assignment of several deputies to assist with the Felony
Warrant apprehension and other activities.
COMMEND A TIONS
The San Diego County Grand Jury Commends the United States Marshal's San
Diego office:
The Grand Jury found that the San Diego office of the United States Marshal has shown a
laudable community effort in establishing the county wide San Diego Regional Task
Force. The members of the United States Marshal's office have also extended their
support to assist in grant funding for the smaller law enforcement agencies that may not
be able to meet inherent costs.
RECOMMENDA TIONS:
The Grand Jury recommends to all Mayors and Law Enforcement Agencies in San
Diego City and County, and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors:
06-70: consider the significant benefits of joining the San Diego Regional
Task Force. This includes outstanding Felony Warrant apprehension
already established under the auspices of the San Diego office of the
United States Marshal.
06-71: that one officer, from each law enforcement agency, be assigned full
time to this task force.
06-72: create a data base to search all applications presented for any
governmental assistance, benefit or privilege. This would include, but
not be limited to, all applicants for driver's licenses, veteran's
benefits, worker's compensation, unemployment benefits, professional
licenses, all vehicle registrations, and other applicable sources.
06-73: fund San Diego law enforcement agencies programs of "Wanted"
billboards.
06-74: install the E-Warrant computer program in Patrol Vehicles of all
community Law Enforcement Agencies in San Diego County and San
Diego City.
The Grand Jury recommends that all Mayors, City Councils and the San Diego
County Board of Supervisors:
06-75: sponsor legislation that will provide law enforcement agencies with
additional tools to apprehend felons through integration of
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (filed June 1, 2006)
information from DMV, Social Security, Veterans pensions and other
state and federal agencies.
06-76: give apprehension of outstanding Felony Warrant offenders a greater
priority than currently appears to be the norm.
REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS
The California Penal Code §933(c) requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has
reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge
of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under
the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the
Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case
of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or
agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such
comment shall be made within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy
sent to the Board of Supervisors.
Furthermore, California Penal Code §933.05(a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in
which such comment(s) are to be made:
(a) As to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall
indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the
finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion
of the finding that is disputed and shall include an
explanation of the reasons therefor.
(b) As to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity
shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a
summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but
will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for
implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an
explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or
study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for
discussion by the officer or head of the agency or
department being investigated or reviewed, including the
governing body of the public agency when applicable. This
time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of
publication of the grand jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is
not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation
therefor.
SAN DFEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (filed June 1, 2006)
(c) If a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or
personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected
officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors
shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the Board
of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters
over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the
elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings
or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.
Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal
Code §933.05 are required from the:
ADDRESSEE WHO MUST RESPOND RECOMMENDATIONS
Mayor, City of Carlsbad
City Council, City of Carlsbad
Mayor, City of Chula Vista
City Council, City of Chula Vista
Mayor, City of Coronado
City Council, City of Coronado
Mayor, City of Del Mar
City Council, City of Del Mar
Mayor, City of El Cajon
City Council, City of El Cajon
Mayor, City of Encinitas
City Council, City of Encinitas
Mayor, City of Escondido
City Council, City of Escondido
Mayor, City of National City
City Council, City of National City
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
DATE
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (filed June 1, 2006)
Mayor, City of Oceanside
City Council, City of Oceanside
Mayor, City of Poway
City Council, City of Poway
Mayor, City of San Diego
City Council, City of San Diego
Mayor, City of San Marcos
City Council, City of San Marcos
Mayor, City of Santee
City Council, City of Santee
Mayor, City of Solana Beach
City Council, City of Solana Beach
Mayor, City of Imperial Beach
City Council, City of Imperial Beach
Mayor, City of La Mesa
City Council, City of La Mesa
Mayor, City of Lemon Grove
City Council, City of Lemon Grove
Mayor, City of Vista
City Council, City of Vista
Sheriff, San Diego County
Police Chief, City of National City
Police Chief, City of La Mesa
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-76
06-75, 06-76
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-74
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
7/31/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (filed June 1, 2006)
Police Chief, City of El Cajon
Police Chief, City of Coronado
Police Chief, City of Oceanside
Police Chief, City of Carlsbad
Police Chief, City of Chula Vista
Police Chief, City of Escondido
Police Chief, City of San Diego
Board of Supervisors, San Diego County
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-74
06-70 through 06-76
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
8/30/06
10
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2005-2006 (Hied June 1, 2006)