Austin Criminal Law Journal : Austin Criminal Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Dax Garvin : Texas, Travis County, Georgetown, Round Rock, Cedar Park

So tonight, I found myself having to work through more of the bureaucratic red-tape that is caused by either the lack of communication, poor training, disorganization, laziness or simply the complete ineptitude by some but not all of the people working in the Williamson County Sheriff's Office. 

The background:

At approximately 3:45 to 4:30 p.m. on Friday, February 13, 2009, I spoke with a client and signed a waiver of magistration to speed up the time of her release from custody in the Williamson County Jail.  She was arrested earlier this date on a warrant with a bond already set by a different judge.  I completed the form that the jail staff provided me and submitted it to one of the jail staff supervisors.  The Waiver was accepted.  The time was now approximately 4:30-4:45 p.m.  I left the jail and spoke with the client's relative who had hired me on her behalf.  In addition, the surety bond itself was posted almost simultaneously to this by a local bonding company.  The client should be released anytime now that these documents were in place.

The result:

At 10:25 p.m. (approximately 6 hours later) I receive a call from the bonding company saying there is a problem with the client's release because "they" (Williamson County Jail) did not have a copy of my bar card with the Waiver.  I called the jail and spoke with the Sgt. working at that time and was told that they must have the bar card with it.  I explained that it had been filed by a Lt. on a previous release, but this Sgt. said that was not sufficient, that it must be with this Waiver.  I asked the Sgt. if she could copy it from a prior file that I turned in on a different client on February 12.  I was told no because that does not verify my identity.  I then asked if it could be pulled from the State Bar of Texas website, where the State of Texas maintains my record as an attorney.  Again, I was told "no".  Then, I was told that if I wanted to wait and discuss the matter with the Lt. or another supervisor, I was free to do that but that the client would not be released without a copy of my bar card.  Of course, I got out of bed and made a special trip back to Georgetown to fulfill this "request".

My opinion:

Granted, we all have opinions and thus they are not necessarily worth anything.  However, I was completely appalled by this entire process for a number of reasons:

1. This information (bar card information) is on file with the Sheriff's Department in a rolodex at the front desk (taken by the Lt. I referenced);
2. This information is available on the Internet, which I provided the link to above and offered to the Sgt. (and given the countless hours that County employees spend surfing the internet when they should be working, this "required information" could have been pulled and put with the Waiver, if it is so important);
3. Most importantly, the Waiver was accepted when I turned it in ... no one told me that they needed my bar card again (previously filed and even checked when I entered the jail on this date, so they knew I was an attorney);
4. Probably of less importance, but I worked at the Williamson County Sheriff's Office from October, 2005 until June, 2008 (granted I doubt everyone knows that or cares, but I know that I am in the County computer system);
5. This was probably just a passive aggressive act to hold the client in jail a few hours longer... afterall, why on earth did it take until 10:25 p.m. for me to even get a call about this "error"?

My plea to anyone with an interest in changing Williamson County:

1. Start paying attention to things that happen here;
2. VOTE (for anyone who runs against the elected members of this monopolized, disfunctional machine);
3. Take note of stories like this and remember them ... it is only a matter of time until something happens to every one of us (directly or indirectly);
4. Question why it took so long to process this release when the documents were submitted before 5:00 p.m.;
5. Respond to my blog ... let's really start a discussion here (I am still incensed by the lack of professionalism, communication, and integrity that pervades the very core of the Williamson County Criminal Justice System and so should every person who resides in that County... unless you are part of the problem rather than the solution).

I purposely omitted names of the parties and other entities involved, as there is no reason for me to name them individually, however, the ranks of the people I spoke with were accurate and gender was purposely excluded.  As a criminal defense attorney who regularly defends people accused of crimes in Williamson County, Texas, I see a direct need for getting that system to change, as it is overrun with problems just like this on so many levels and with a very few exceptions, most people are not willing to speak against it to urge that Change come to this place.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Many of Grits for Breakfasts blog postings receive numerous hits and initiate heated debate, but Williamson DA Sees Drug Penalty Debate as Turf War really grabbed my attention because it involves Williamson County, which is one of the places I practice criminal defense.

John Bradley, District Attorney for Williamson County, was quoted as saying:

If SJF drug cases become misdemeanors, the shift in workload from district to county courts at law would be substantial. In selfish terms, a DA with only felony jurisdiction (like myself) would suddenly have an enormous percentage of the caseload moved off the docket. A county attorney with only misdemeanor jurisdiction (such as my colleague in Williamson County) would suddenly find herself with lots of new cases.

This would be an extraordinary movement of resources for no reason other than someone deciding to reclassify the crime from felony to misdemeanor. Punishment would require county dollars (in county jail) rather than state dollars (in state jail)....

The discussion became more heated in the comments that followed Grits blog entry.  Although several of them made very valid points, the one in particular really made a point with me:

kaptinemo said...

How many times must the system be 'tweaked' before the recognition is made that it is the system, itself, that is the problem?

The 'system', in this case, is drug prohibition, which is the font of the complained-about caseload. Prior to 1914 and the Harrison Narcotics Act, which Federalized drug 'crimes' such as possession, we didn't have these problems...or caseloads.

Why bother playing around with trying to unravel the Gordian Knot of drug prohibition and all its' baggage? We've been trying to do that, to the tune of a trillion dollars since 1968, and we're no closer to achieving a drug-free utopia now than they were back then...as the complained about caseload demonstrates. A caseload we can no longer fiscally afford. It's long past time to consider the once unthinkable, and to speak the once forbidden, and talk about alternatives to the present - and punitive - DrugWar.

Now, in these difficult economic times, it may really be time to try something new, and different.  I will be the first to admit that the legalization or the decriminalization of all drugs or even most drugs may not be in society's best interest, I am willing to consider alternatives.  I absolutely agree that these SJF crimes should be reduced to misdemeanor offenses, as too often people are being convicted of felonies for miniscule amounts of an illegal substance.  Even when these people are given deferred ajudication probations, often the conditions are so stringent that a saint would have a difficult time completing them.

So, as kaptinemo wrote about fighting the drug war and spending trillions of dollars, which I agree is a worthless fight and an unwinnable one at that, I propose the following:

• legalize the possession of less than 2 ounces of marijuana;
• criminalize its use when driving (similar to DWI, afterall, is pot really any worse than alcohol);
• allow the government to regulate the sale of marijuana and tax it (similar to tobacco); and
• reduce the levels from SJF to misdemeanor offenses on other drug crimes.

This process would guarantee that the marijuana is not laced with something more addictive or harmful and would allow the government to create revenue to help pay off its trillions of dollars in expenses.  Not to mention, not fighting the "war on pot" would save counties, states, and the government in general large sums of money (purposely I am being vague as I do not have a figure to write).

Further, it would save money on prosecutions and those convicted of the SJF amounts of other substances.  And, as to John Bradley's comment about shifting the burden of work to another office, I believe this would only allow a couple of things to happen:

• assistant district attorney's would have more time to review and handle the other, "more serious" cases; and / or
• given that these ADAs are also county employees, nothing would prevent them, aside from politics, from working on some of these lower level cases, unless the agencies in question absolutely refuse to work together or share responsibilities; afterall, both are paid by county tax dollars and both work for "The County".

To conclude, pushing more people into the criminal justice system, whether it is by placing them on probation or putting them in jail or prison is not the answer. We already have the highest percentage of our population involved in this system, at least among the developed world. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Seeing this story was very exciting to me, as it seems that for too long law enforcement has taken complaints from victims and pursued them, which often results in charges being filed against an individual.  Most of the time, I find that I am representing the person charged as his or her criminal defense attorney, but today, in what is generally considered to be an unpopular action, law enforcement in Williamson County filed charges against someone for falsely reporting an offense.

The reported story may be read on the KEYE website here or on one of several other Austin-area news stations.  But, to summarize the story,

a woman who was experiencing car problems pulled over on Highway 29 west of Ronald Reagan Blvd. Police then say a suspect pulled behind the woman offering her help around 8:30p.m. The individual sexually assaulted her at the location.

The complaining victim was arrested for false report on this past Friday.  Detective John Foster of the Williamson County Sheriff's Office would not provide details about the matter, and this story is available for further review, here.

The reason that I congratulate Williamson County for this action is that too often people call the police and then back out of the charge later.  Meaning, they complain about someone's action, get the person arrested, and then change their mind.  Most often, this is in domestic violence / assault with bodily injury cases involving family violence.  Too often, there are unwritten policies in place not to pursue charges against these complaining witnesses because law enforcement or prosecutors do not want to prevent people for calling for help out of fear of prosecution if they later change their story.

But, I must say, if you are not going to stand behind your testimony, do not cause someone the stress and anxiety of being arrested, jailed, and prosecuted, not to mention the thousands of dollars wasted in defending that matter.  Hence, one more time, Good Job, Wilco!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link