As the details of a landmark overhaul to North Carolina’s criminal justice system come into focus, prosecutors and defense attorneys have blasted certain elements of the law, contending they sacrifice public safety to save money, among other concerns.
In the past few months, courthouses, probation offices and prisons have been trying to bring their staffs up to speed on the new policy changes, which began taking effect Dec. 1. The result has been a series of webinars, classroom training sessions and meetings designed to teach employees how their jobs are affected.
The Justice Reinvestment Act is so wide-ranging that it touches nearly every aspect of criminal justice in the state. “It changes everything,” said Chris Thomas, an assistant district attorney in Brunswick County.
In a near unanimous vote last year, the N.C. General Assembly bridged the partisan divide to pass the legislation, and it was subsequently signed by Gov. Beverly Perdue.
Among the changes are provisions that grant probation officers broad new powers, place some low-level lawbreakers into county jail instead of prison and impose weaker sentences for first-time drug possession. Supporters of the measure disagree with the contention that it poses a greater risk to people’s safety. Proponents have trumpeted its projected benefits all the way to Capitol Hill, and cast North Carolina as a model that other states should follow.
“We got tougher on crime. But in addition to that, we also got smarter with how we spent taxpayer dollars,” said then-state Rep. David Guice, speaking at an October congressional staff briefing, a video of which is available online. “We were able to make those tough decisions during a very difficult time, and I believe we set the course for the future.”
A retired probation officer, Guice was a principal sponsor of the legislation when it was introduced in the state House. He retired from the legislature in January after he was named by the governor as the new director of Community Corrections, a division of the N.C. Department of Public Safety.
The Justice Reinvestment Act arose as North Carolina, buffeted by an ailing economy, was seeking to trim government spending. The law is projected to save the state $293 million in corrections spending over the next six years, reduce the inmate population and negate the need for new prisons, thereby saving hundreds of millions more in building and operating costs down the line.
For context, North Carolina spent about $1.46 billion managing the prison and corrections systems during the 2009 budget year.
The new law calls for a portion of the expected savings to be reinvested annually to expand probation and access to treatment programs that attack the root causes of crime.
While proponents bill it as a pragmatic approach to plug a drain on state coffers, the overhaul has injected anxiety into local courthouses.
On one hand, some, namely prosecutors, applaud the measure for clamping down on repeat burglars. But on the other, they fear the measure will clog up the courtroom, strain county budgets and leave dangerous felons on the street.
“I’m concerned that this law goes a little too far,” said New Hanover County District Attorney Ben David, adding later, “If we’re going to be sincere about protecting the community we’re going to have to build more prisons if the population of North Carolina is going to continue to increase.”
One of the concerns is how people on probation are treated under the new measure. Before, if someone violated the terms of their supervision, say testing positive for drugs, a judge could activate their suspended sentence, thus sending them to prison.
Now, minor noncompliance issues are dealt with by a series of short dips, as opposed to long stays, behind bars. Courts can only evoke the full sentence if a person commits a new crime, absconds or racks up at least three violations. In addition, probation officers wield new powers allowing them to put violators in jail for up to three days without a court hearing.
For more serious breaches, a judge may impose a 90-day prison sentence, but cannot revoke probation unless the offender has already served two of those 90-day sentences.
The law’s architects said the changes enabled probation officers to respond swiftly to violations and capture the person’s attention, helping offenders improve their behavior and stay out of prison.
They point to research showing that in 2009, 53 percent of prison admissions were the result of probation revocation, many of which were due to technical violations.
Some district attorneys worry, however, about the potential of shouldering the county jail with more inmates and increasing the number probation hearings, raising the possibility of a backlog.
“We estimate it will triple the amount of times people go to court,” said Peg Dorer, director of the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys, adding the law excludes any funding for courthouses to handle that influx.
“They’re stressed out about this,” she said about prosecutors.
Many jails have already seen their inmate populations grow because of the requirement that all those sentenced to six months or less serve their time in jail. Under the old laws, anyone prescribed more than three months went to prison.
Because some jails stood at or near capacity when the law took effect and many counties cried foul over the added costs of incarcerating extra inmates, North Carolina developed a program in which jails voluntarily opt in to accept prisoners when they have available bed space.
The state also pays counties $40 each day they hold a prisoner, plus transportation costs and major medical expenses, said Eddie Caldwell, executive vice president of the N.C. Sheriffs’ Association, which manages the program. To fund the program, the state has raised court costs.
Fifty-two counties, including New Hanover and Brunswick, are participating in the program; as of Thursday, Pender County had not informed the state of its decision.
New Hanover County Sheriff Ed McMahon likes that the sheriff’s association runs the program. He said housing an inmate in the jail costs an average of $80 each day, twice what the state is paying, but the sheriff noted that figure is misleading because his expenses do not increase just because an inmate has been added to the population.
“At this point, I’m not concerned about this costing us a lot of money,” he said. “But we’re going to watch our population and try … to keep the numbers down.”
Another contentious element of the new law is a requirement that judges impose a period of supervision for first-time felony drug possession, a change that essentially erases the court’s discretion.
All felons also must undergo a period of supervision after their release from prison. Before, only those convicted of the most violent crimes – about 15 percent of the total prison population – received post-release supervision.
Jennifer Harjo, the chief public defender for New Hanover County, expects that to lead to more cases in which defendants opt to go to trial as opposed to taking a plea deal.
“Someone used to be willing to take responsibility and do their time,” she said. But now if they have to serve a prison term plus supervision, “they might decide to take their case to trial because they have nothing to lose.”
By Brian Freskos
[email protected]
Published: Sunday, January 29, 2012 at 4:48 p.m.
