|
|
| Bill to limit charges inmates can bring against COs |
| By Patrick Marley of the Journal Sentinel |
| Published: 03/17/2009 |
|
Madison - A bill rocketing through the Legislature would curb inmates' ability to force judges to launch criminal investigations of correctional officers based on frivolous complaints. Corrections officials say inmates have been relying on the state's John Doe statute to compel judges to conduct secret hearings of correctional officers, even when there is no evidence against them. Judges have little discretion in deciding whether to hold John Doe hearings, which any citizen can request under the 170-year-old law. In recent years, inmates have used the law to allege they have been mistreated by correctional officers. Judges say the hearings often needlessly tie up their courtrooms; officers say the fear of being falsely accused has made some officers overcautious in responding to inmates who act up. "These aren't inmates that are (quietly) doing their time. To be hesitant around them, it could cost somebody their life," said Daniel Meehan, a Waupun Correctional Institution officer and Wisconsin State Employees Union president. Under the law, anyone can force a judge to hold hearings by sending a letter alleging a crime has been committed. The judge must take testimony from the person who sent the letter and any witnesses he or she produces, even if it's clear the complaint is baseless. Some judges even say the law requires them to charge the accused with felonies when there is little evidence against them. The case of Waupun Correctional Institution officer Gabe Umentum illustrates the problem, say those who want to change the law. During a 2007 John Doe proceeding, inmate DuJuan Walker alleged Umentum beat him earlier that year. Umentum could not appear at the secret hearing. Dodge County Circuit Court Judge Andrew P. Bissonnette said the law compelled him to charge Umentum with a felony because Walker's claims were plausible. Bissonnette said the law didn't let him weigh Walker's credibility, though many familiar with the law disagree on that point. Months later, a special prosecutor dismissed the charges. "With just an inmate's word, I was charged with a felony," Umentum told the Assembly Judiciary and Ethics Committee last week. "For six months, an inmate controlled my life . . . I don't want to see anything like this happen to anyone else." He also racked up $4,618 in legal bills - expenses the state later agreed to pay. "For a guy making 17 (or) 18 bucks an hour, it's hard to pay a guy $250 an hour," Umentum said. Bill would set limits The bill before the Legislature would allow district attorneys to use the John Doe law as they do now but would change how others can use the law. Judges would refer any complaints they got to district attorneys for investigation. If district attorneys declined to charge someone, judges would then determine if a crime had been committed and could convene a John Doe hearing to do so. The bill would allow judges to consider law-enforcement records and other documents to determine whether a hearing should be held. Supporters say that would give judges the discretion they need to quickly dispose of frivolous complaints. The bill would also require the state to pay the legal bills of state employees who are the subject of John Doe proceedings. Lawmakers are considering tweaking that portion of the bill to make it clear that those found guilty of a crime would not have their legal expenses paid. Democrats who control the Legislature say they back the bill. An aide to Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker (D-Weston) said that house may pass the bill before it adopts the budget this summer. Critics last year said they feared changing the law would curb some people's access to the courts. The new bill would not change anyone's ability to complain to a judge, though it would end the guarantee of a hearing. Read more. If link has expired, check the website of the article's original news source. |
Comments:
Login to let us know what you think
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
Waco has developed a reputation for a rocket-docket in patent litigation. It’s an important choice to find the right lawyer in Waco for your important patent litigation matter. When people in the know make the hire, they hire Dunnam & Dunnam. Lawyers that are competent, hard-working, focused are a rare find. Few attorneys have the commitment to quality, collegiality, and loyalty of the Waco personal injury attorney, You can search for attorneys with loyalty, leadership, accountability. These attorneys show financial generosity and a sense of fairness to their colleagues. For nearly 100 years, people in Waco have hired the firm when the results matter. at Dunnam & Dunnam are among the most respected in the Central Texas area. They have the experience in trials and mediations to guide your case in the right way. There are few important decisions at the outset of the case that can turn the tide in your favor. Choosing the right lawyer is one of them.