THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, March 24, 1996 TAG: 9603240043
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY LYNN WALTZ AND ANGELITA PLEMMER, STAFF WRITERS
DATELINE: PORTSMOUTH LENGTH: Long : 168 lines
The state Supreme Court will review the city magistrate's office, which sets bail bonds and issues warrants, after an investigation by The Virginian-Pilot raised questions about its management practices and the reliability of the statistics it produces.
Supreme Court Technical Assistant Ron Neely said he will begin the review today. It should take about 14 work days.
Chief Circuit Judge Norman Olitsky said he contacted Neely after the issues were brought to his attention during an interview with a newspaper reporter.
The review means the state Supreme Court will be simultaneously examining operations within two branches of the city's judicial system. A review of the Circuit Court clerk's office, which started last month and is continuing, has found problems with record-keeping and management practices in the office.
The study has shown that clerks failed to report at least 3,000 closed criminal and civil cases to the Supreme Court. According to state Supreme Court records, Portsmouth had the state's largest backlog of cases in 1994. Those statistics are now suspect, said the official reviewing the clerk's office.
Now it appears that the data provided by the city magistrate's office to the state high court may also be suspect.
The figures show that the magistrate's office is overworked compared to other cities'. The statistics help the Supreme Court figure out how much money and staffing a magistrate's office needs.
Magistrates are the front line in the state court system, and most cases enter the system through the magistrate's office.
At a time when the criminal justice system in Portsmouth has come under fire on several fronts, including concerns about low bail bonds in some cases, the lack of reliable statistics makes it difficult to measure the performance of the magistrate's office.
The review comes as city, state and federal officials are working together to curb violence in Portsmouth. In light of those efforts, The Virginian-Pilot has been reviewing the judicial system to help identify trouble spots.
Statistics provided by Portsmouth to the Supreme Court and analyzed by the newspaper indicate that:
Portsmouth's magistrates are the third-busiest in the state, behind Henrico County and Newport News. But on a per-capita basis, Portsmouth's seven magistrates report about 50 percent more cases than the other two localities. In 1994, for instance, Portsmouth, with a population of 102,000, reported 37,054 transactions. Newport News, with a population of 179,000, reported 39,670 cases.
The total numbers of hearings offer insight into whether the magistrates are overworked.
The busiest magistrate in Virginia works in the Portsmouth office and reports nearly six hearings an hour. The Supreme Court says two to three an hour are the norm. Only two other magistrates in Virginia reported more than five an hour.
Portsmouth's office has the lowest rate among the state's 31 magistrate's offices for granting arrest and search warrants to police officers, granting requests at a rate of 67 percent. Only three other offices in the state grant warrants at a rate less than 80 percent.
Neely said he has questions about those conclusions and believes the numbers may have been skewed by reporting problems in the office. Portsmouth's magistrates, though busy, are not the busiest in the state, Neely said, based on his personal observations.
Neely also is concerned about the statistics of the state's busiest magistrate, Deborah Clark, who reported 5.77 transactions per hour for 1995.
``To have 5.77 transactions per hour, that's ridiculous,'' Neely said.
Portsmouth is not alone in reporting problems. Across the state, Neely said, there have been so many reporting variations that his office no longer relies solely on magistrate's logs to make staffing decisions.
``We are aware of reporting problems in the statewide statistical system,'' Neely said. ``The office now looks at other factors besides workload statistics.'' Neely said the reporting system may need to be changed to correct the problems.
In his review of procedures in Portsmouth's office, Neely will try to determine if magistrates have been over-reporting the number of hearings they conduct. In addition, he will review all record-keeping practices by magistrates, as well as magistrates' general knowledge of how to conduct hearings, and their scheduling practices, office procedures and office management. He also will look into reports of personnel problems and conflicts and low morale within the office.
Though Neely was surprised by some results of The Virginian-Pilot analysis of magistrate's statistics, he was aware of questions about record-keeping and management in the magistrate's office, he said.
Two years ago, Portsmouth's chief magistrate, Gwendolyn C. Barrick, told Neely in a meeting in her office that she suspected Clark was over-reporting statistics on a monthly report that Barrick sends to Neely's office.
Neely said the problem should have been resolved by the local magistrate's office, overseen by the chief judge, a title that rotates among judges. But Barrick said she felt the matter would be handled by the Supreme Court once she reported it.
Barrick continued to certify all statistics as accurate, Neely said. Judge Olitsky, the current chief judge, and Circuit Court Judge Johnny Morrison, the chief judge at the time Barrick met with Neely, both said the allegations of inflated statistics were never reported to them.
Clark said in an interview that Barrick never told her there was a problem with her monthly log. She also said that her figures, as far as she knows, are accurate. She described herself as a hard-working magistrate, which explains why her numbers are high.
Even by Portsmouth standards, her numbers are high. The next-highest Portsmouth magistrate had 3.8 transactions per hour. Clark had 10,388 total transactions in 1995, compared to the next-highest in the office, at 7,391.
Magistrates are appointed by the chief Circuit Court judge and are independent judicial officers. That makes oversight a delicate operation, says chief magistrate Barrick.
Technically, the office is overseen by the chief magistrate, the state Supreme Court and the chief Circuit Court judge.
The chief magistrate is responsible for administrative management, performance evaluations, scheduling, and certifying that monthly logs are accurate.
Barrick oversees six magistrates; the Supreme Court provides administrative support, including training and recommendations for funding and staffing. Full-time magistrates in Portsmouth make between $23,828 and $37,890. Chief magistrates in Barrick's pay class earn between $27,558 and $43,951. Barrick has 17 years' experience.
The chief judge has the power to hire and fire magistrates. Olitsky said in an interview that he knows little about the magistrate's office or how it is run. That's not unusual, Neely said. Chief judges, typically busy with court caseloads, tend to rely heavily on the chief magistrate unless problems arise, Neely said.
Olitsky confirmed that that has been his role. He has visited the office only one time, he said, and he has never had any indication that there were problems in the office.
However, magistrate Clark said in an interview that she has met with Olitsky at least twice to discuss personnel and management issues. She said she also met with Judge Morrison at least once while he was assisting Olitsky in oversight of the office.
Clark said she talked to Olitsky about perceived favoritism in the office and a poor evaluation she had appealed. She said they talked about management and personnel problems. Olitsky said he recalled two personnel issues involving magistrates, but that he could not comment on personnel matters.
``Ultimately, all these problems are the responsibility of local management,'' Neely said. ``It's ultimately the responsibility of the chief magistrate and chief judge. . . . We're like the corporate office. We don't hire and fire. . . . It's (Barrick's) responsibility to inform the judge. We're in a supporting role.
``If local management, the judge and magistrate, feel there's exaggeration and embellishment, they need to handle that head-on,'' he said.
When his review is complete, Neely said, it will be up to the chief judge to decide what to do with the results.
``The idea isn't for me to come in and do a hatchet job,'' Neely said. ``It's to encourage them to change where change needs to be made.'' ILLUSTRATION: Photo
Chief Circuit Judge Norman Olitsky, who oversees magistrates, said
he's had no indication of problems.
Graphic
WHAT THEY DO
Magistrates are the front line in the criminal justice system.
Nearly every case that enters the court system starts in the
magistrate's office.
Police officers go there when seeking arrest warrants and search
warrants. Defendants make their first appearance before a
magistrate, who decides whether the accused will go to jail without
bond or will be allowed to post bail and be released.
The magistrate's office is not a court of record, and no records
of transactions are kept. No record is kept of the defendants'
names, criminal histories or the actions taken. Instead, magistrates
keep tally sheets showing the number of times they hear requests for
arrest warrants or bonds. And they keep a tally of the number of
times they grant the requests.
by CNB