I.
HIGHLIGHTS
·
The Board's final vacancy was filled in the fall of 1999
with the addition of Rev. Rogers Kirk, Jr. Clarence Key, Jr., was also appointed
new Executive Director of the Board in November, 1999.
·
The Board in FY2000 approved 1,108 work release applications
and 2,854 paroles. Of the 5,493 individuals on parole
caseloads during the year, only 484 were revoked, with four of these
revocations due to new forcible felonies.
·
Of all those paroled since July 1, 1989, only 17.2 percent
have been revoked from parole. Less than half of one percent have been
revoked for committing new forcible felonies.
·
In FY2000 the Board continued its innovative use of the Iowa
Communications Network, which enables the board to maximize productive use
of its time and permit interested parties the opportunity to view parole
hearings without extensive travel. The Board continued extensive use of the
ICN in conducting hearings in FY2000, and the families of victims and
inmates also attended hearings via the ICN. The ICN was also used as an educational
tool for high school students, permitting them to view Board hearings and
question members and staff about their activities.
·
The Board continued to expand its list of registered
victims, ensuring that victims are notified of parole, work release, and
revocation hearings, and providing them the opportunity for input in the
deliberative process.
·
The Board continued an experiment in the Sixth Judicial
District, using the Senior Administrative Parole Judge for probation
revocation hearings in which the original sentence was a suspended prison
sentence, thereby providing additional consistency in these
proceedings.
The legality of using administrative judges to handle probation
revocations was upheld in a Linn County District Court ruling in
September, 1999.
·
The Board continued its use of risk assessment in granting
or denying work release or parole. This tool has enabled the Board to
better protect the public while not delaying release for inmates who are
good risks.
·
The board continued using the Violator Program as an
intermediate sanction for parolees and work releases who need additional
supervision but who do not need to be revoked. The existence
of this program helps to individualize treatment and supervision regimens
and provide a wider range of alternatives for those having difficulty on
parole or work release.
Objectives:
·
Comprehensive and efficient consideration for parole
and work release of offenders committed to the Department of
Corrections.
·
Expeditious revocation of paroles of persons who
violate release conditions.
·
Careful consideration of victim opinions concerning
the release of offenders and prompt notification to victims of Board of
Parole release decisions.
·
Quality advice to the Governor in matters relating to
executive clemency.
·
Timely research and analysis of issues critical to the
performance of the Board of Parole.
III.
AGENCY
OVERVIEW
The
Iowa Board of Parole consists of five members appointed by the
Governor.
The chairperson and vice-chair are full-time salaried members of
the Board.
Three members are on a per diem basis and all five members serve
staggered, four-year terms.
Iowa
law states that the membership of the Board must be of good character and
judicious background, must include a member of a minority group, may
include a person ordained or designated a regular leader of a religious
community and who is knowledgeable in correctional procedures and issues,
and must meet at least two of the following three requirements:
1) contain one member who is a disinterested
layperson;
2) contain one member who is an attorney licensed to
practice law in this state and who is knowledgeable in correctional
procedures and issues;
3) contain one member who is a person holding at least
a master's degree in social work or counseling and guidance and who is
knowledgeable in correctional procedures and issues.
BOARD OF PAROLE
MEMBERSHIP
CHARLES W.
LARSON, Chairperson, Cedar Rapids. Larson was appointed to the Board of
Parole in May, 1998, after serving as Iowa's Drug Policy Coordinator since
1993.
This is his second term with the Board of Parole. Larson also
served for seven years as United States Attorney for the Northern District
of Iowa.
From 1979 to 1982 he served in Saudi Arabia as a consultant to the
Kingdom's Highway Patrol Project. From 1973 to 1979 he served as Iowa's
Commissioner of Public Safety. Larson retired as a colonel from the
Active Army Reserves.
ELIZABETH
ROBINSON-FORD, Vice Chairperson, Davenport. Robinson-Ford
was appointed to the Board in November, 1994, and appointed
Vice-Chairperson in 1999. She was also recently appointed to serve
on the Iowa Prisoner Minority Over-Representation Task Force. Robinson-Ford
has worked for the City of Shreveport, Louisiana, as an Administrative
Assistant and Records Specialist for the Police Department. She is a
member of the Minority Chamber of Commerce, the Iowa Invests Mentor
Program, the Juvenile Justice Committee, Big Sisters, and United Way. She has an
Associate Degree in Applied Sciences from Southern University at
Shreveport and an Associate Degree in Business Administration/Accounting
from Commercial Business College in Alexandria, Louisiana. She retired as
Administrative Assistant with the Scott County Decategorization Program in
1999.
CURTIS S.
JENKINS, West Des Moines. Jenkins was appointed to the Board of
Parole by Governor Terry Branstad in 1997. Jenkins has BS from Southern Illinois
University.
He is the Business Manager of the Corinthian Baptist Church, Member
of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Des Moines Alumni, and is President of
KAPSI Foundation. Jenkins served in the United States Air
Force.
His volunteer work includes Internal Audit Committee and Tax Return
Preparation for the Corinthian Baptist Church; he is an on-call Consultant
for Mid-City Business Center; Speaker, Panel of Americans, NCCJ; and
Speaker on Diversity.
KAREN KAPLAN
MUELHAUPT, Des Moines. Governor Thomas Vilsack appointed
Muelhaupt to the Board of Parole in 1999. She received her BA degree from Drake
University in 1988. She worked for the Department of
Corrections as a Pre-sentence investigator from 1975-1985. In 1985, she
was hired as a rape counselor with Polk County Victim Services. She co-created
one of the Nation's first Homicide Crisis Response teams, and in 1997 was
the recipient of the Presidential Crime Victims award. She retired in
1998.
Muelhaupt is a licensed Social Worker.
ROGERS KIRK,
JR., Davenport. Kirk was appointed to the Board in
November, 1999.
For the past four years he has been the Pastor of the Third
Missionary Baptist Church of Davenport. Pastor Kirk is President of the Iowa
Congress of Christian Education, Dean of the Eastern District Association,
Instructor in the National Congress of Christian Education, and Instructor
at the American Baptist Theological Seminary. He is also
past-president of the NAACP Metro-Com Branch, Quad City Interfaith and
serves on many state and local boards. Pastor Kirk attended Northeast Louisiana
University and has served parishes in Monroe and Ruston,
Louisiana.
BOARD
STAFF
Clarence Key,
Jr., Executive Director. The Board of Parole selected Clarence Key, Jr., as its
Executive Director in November, 1999. Key has a BA degree in Criminal Justice
from Simpson College and has worked in state government for over twenty
years.
Mr. Key has served as a probation officer for the 5th Judicial
District Department of Correctional Services, as an Assistant for
Corrections (Prison Ombudsman) for the Citizen's Aide Ombudsman, and as a
Justice Systems Analyst for the Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice
Planning.
Key also currently serves as an executive board member of the Des
Moines Branch of the NAACP and has been president of the Iowa Corrections
Association (1993-1994).
Richard E. George, Administrative Law Judge
James C. Twedt, Senior Administrative Parole/Probation
Judge
Jerry Menadue, Liaison Officer
Heather Hackbarth, Statistical Research Analyst
Karen Myers, Executive Officer
Lori Myers, Case Coordinator and Liaison Officer
Diane Jay, Victim Coordinator
Jo McGrane, Administrative Secretary
Carol Edmonston, Clerk
Virginia Shannon, Clerk
Michelle Carlson, Clerk Specialist
Theresa Brauer, Clerk Specialist
Paul Stageberg, Ph.D., Report Consultant
The Board wishes to extent its appreciation to Paul
Stageberg, Ph.D., for his assistance in analysis of data and preparation
of this report.
This project was supported by grant number 00C2-1989,
awarded by the Governor's Office of Drug Control Policy (ODCP). Points of view
in this document do not necessarily represent the official position or
policies of either ODCP or the U.S. Department of Justice.
IV.
BOARD
RESPONSIBILITIES
Inmate Reviews and Interviews. By law, the
Board systematically reviews the status of each person committed to the
custody of the Director of the Iowa Department of Corrections and
considers the person's prospects for parole or work release. The Board
reviews at least annually the status of persons other than Class A felons,
Class B felons serving time under the 85% law or felons serving mandatory
minimum sentences. The Board also provides the person
written notice of its parole or work release decision.
Not
less than twenty days prior to conducting a hearing at which the Board
interviews the person, the Board notifies the Department of Corrections
regarding the interview schedule. The Department then makes the person
available to the Board at the person's institutional residence.
Risk
Assessment. The Board has used offender risk
assessment since March, 1981. Its use has enabled the Board to
increase paroles while maintaining a high degree of public safety. An offender is
rated on a scale from one to nine.
Victim
Notification. The Board notifies registered victims of
violent crimes of upcoming interviews with identified offenders and of
decisions made at those interviews. The victim or appointed counsel has the
right to attend the interviews and testify. In addition, all written communications
from victims become a permanent part of offenders' files.
Parole. The Board is empowered to grant,
rescind, and revoke parole, as well as discharge offenders from
parole.
The Board decides the conditions of parole, which may be added to
by the supervising Judicial District. In order to be granted parole, those
receiving a parole risk score of one through six require three affirmative
votes from the Board; a risk score of seven or eight requires four votes;
and a risk score of nine requires all five votes.
Work
Release.
The Board is empowered to grant or rescind work release. Work release
periods are approximately six months, but may be adjusted through Board
action.
Review of Parole
and Work Release Programs. The Board is required to review parole
and work release programs being instituted or considered nationwide and
determine which programs may be useful for Iowa. Each year the
Board also reviews current parole and work release programs and procedures
used in the State of Iowa.
Release
Studies.
The Board is required to conduct studies of the parole and work
release system as requested by the Governor and the General Assembly.
Review of Computer
System.
The Board is required to increase utilization of data processing
and computerization to assist in the orderly operation of the parole and
work release system.
BOARD
WORKLOAD
The information contained in
this section provides a statistical summary of the Board's workload for
FY2000.
As the tables and charts on the following pages indicate, the Board
conducted a total of 9,526 release deliberations. These
deliberations resulted in the Board's granting 2,824 paroles and 1,108
work releases.
The majority of parole and work release grants were derived from
case reviews rather than inmate interviews.
In FY2000 the Board continued
taking particular care in paroling inmates convicted of crimes against
persons.
While 29.2 percent of the 8,524 deliberations involving felons
resulted in paroles, only 11.6 percent of those involving felonies against
persons resulted in paroles. Those convicted of crimes against
persons were also less likely to be granted work release.
Parole
revocation hearings totaled 618 in FY2000, compared to 543 in FY99. Of the total
hearings, 478 resulted in revocation of parole. One hundred
thirty-five of these (or 27.9 percent) were automatic revocations due to
new convictions for felonies or aggravated misdemeanors.
On occasion the Board may
rescind a grant of parole or work release due to inmate misbehavior,
failure to follow through in development of a parole or work release plan,
or at an inmate's request. In FY2000 there were 160 parole
rescissions, with 25 of these resulting from inmate refusal of
parole.
There were also 90 work release rescissions, with 33 of these due
to inmate refusal.
Reviews of applications for
restoration of citizenship totaled 558, with 422 (75.6 percent)
recommended to the Governor. Both these figures were down somewhat
from FY99, when there were 578 reviews and 504 (87.2 percent)
recommendations.
The
Board reviewed 29 appeals from inmates requesting reconsideration of prior
decisions resulting from revocation hearings. Also, the
number of offenders receiving simultaneous parole and discharge totaled
104.
These offenders are typically within 30 days of the end of their
sentences, have had no recent disciplinary reports, are usually
misdemeanants with low risk assessment scores, and are not serving
sentences for felony sex offenses. The Board has concluded that the short
period remaining until expiration of sentence is insufficient for parole
officers to verify parole plans or commence supervision.
While figures suggest
significant decreases in activity involving executive clemency in FY2000,
a change in the Board's computer system may have resulted in some of the
drop.
Note that figures shown here for FY99 were developed on the new
computer system; they differ from those in the FY99 Annual Report.
The research division completed
2,430 offender risk assessments in FY2000, compared to 2,909 in FY99. As shown in
the appendix, the Board makes consistent use of these assessments in
determining whether to approve or deny parole or place inmates on work
release.
Also, the victim coordinator
reviewed 564 victim requests and mailed 2,102 notices to registered
victims. Both these figures were up from FY99 (369 requests and 1,767
notices). The total number of registered victims at the end of FY2000 was
3,329, compared to 2,854 in FY99.
In
accordance with Section 906.4 of the Code of
Iowa, the Board collected information from the Judicial District
Departments of Correctional Services on the number of hours of community
service completed by probationers, work releases, and parolees. In FY2000 it
was reported that these clients completed 130,010 hours of community
service. The number of hours completed ranged
from 400 in the Fourth District to 65,714 in the Seventh.
The
table and graphs on the following pages show the workload of the Board and
staff members for FY 1999
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FY1999 |
FY2000 |
% change |
|
RELEASE
DELIBERATIONS: |
|
10,006 |
9,508 |
-5.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INMATE
INTERVIEWS |
|
1,609 |
1,450 |
-9.9% |
|
|
Paroles
Granted |
754 |
535 |
-29.0% |
|
|
Work Release
Granted |
313 |
359 |
14.7% |
|
CASE REVIEWS |
|
8,397 |
8,058 |
-4.0% |
|
|
Paroles
Granted |
2,532 |
2,290 |
-9.6% |
|
|
Work Release
Granted |
582 |
748 |
28.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVOCATIONS/RESCISSIONS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PAROLE REVOCATION
HEARINGS |
|
543 |
618 |
13.8% |
|
|
Parole
Revocations |
373 |
484 |
29.8% |
|
|
Automatic
Revocations |
84 |
135 |
60.7% |
|
PAROLE RESCISSION
REVIEWS |
|
156 |
161 |
3.2% |
|
|
Paroles
Rescinded |
156 |
161 |
3.2% |
|
WORK RELEASE
RESCISSION REVIEWS |
|
101 |
90 |
-10.9% |
|
|
Work Releases
Rescinded |
101 |
90 |
-10.9% |
|
REVOCATION
APPEALS |
|
13 |
29 |
123.1% |
|
|
Affirmed |
10 |
20 |
100.0% |
|
|
Amended |
3 |
9 |
200.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXECUTIVE
CLEMENCY REQUESTS: |
|
231 |
164 |
-29.0% |
|
|
Granted |
133 |
47 |
-64.7% |
|
|
Denied |
128 |
36 |
-71.9% |
|
LIFER
INTERVIEWS |
|
0 |
1 |
-- |
|
|
Commutations
Recommended |
0 |
0 |
-- |
|
PARDON
REVIEWS |
|
29 |
32 |
10.3% |
|
|
Pardons
Recommended |
17 |
8 |
-52.9% |
|
RESTORATION OF
CITIZENSHIP REVIEWS |
|
578 |
465 |
-19.6% |
|
|
Restorations
Recommended |
524 |
397 |
-24.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER
REVIEWS: |
|
|
|
|
|
Inmate Board
Decision Appeals |
|
43 |
29 |
-32.6% |
|
Parole to
Discharge |
|
339 |
104 |
-69.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER BOARD
WORK: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk Assessments
Completed |
|
2,909 |
2,430 |
-16.5% |
|
Registered
Victims, Yearend |
|
2,854 |
3,329 |
16.6% |
|
Victim
Registration Requests |
|
369 |
564 |
52.8% |
|
Victim Notices
Mailed |
|
1,767 |
2,102 |
19.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year |
1992 |
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
%
Change |
|
Parole
Grants |
2,208 |
2,301 |
2,417 |
2,425 |
2,436 |
2,449 |
2,599 |
3,114 |
2,824 |
27.9% |
|
Work Release
Grants |
768 |
895 |
914 |
939 |
967 |
879 |
1,094 |
1,067 |
1,108 |
44.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
Offense Class |
N |
% |
N |
% |
N |
% |
N |
% |
|
Compact Felony not person |
0 |
0.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
4 |
50.0% |
4 |
0.0% |
|
Compact Felony Total |
0 |
0.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
4 |
50.0% |
4 |
0.0% |
|
Other Felony not person |
18 |
29.5% |
13 |
12.5% |
30 |
33.0% |
61 |
0.6% |
|
Other Felony Total |
18 |
27.7% |
13 |
11.6% |
34 |
34.3% |
65 |
0.7% |
|
Habitual vs. person |
13 |
28.3% |
6 |
7.6% |
27 |
37.0% |
46 |
0.5% |
|
Habitual not person |
45 |
23.4% |
30 |
8.8% |
117 |
37.9% |
192 |
2.0% |
|
Habitual Total |
58 |
24.4% |
36 |
8.6% |
144 |
37.7% |
238 |
2.5% |
|
A Felony |
0 |
0.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
4 |
50.0% |
4 |
0.0% |
|
B Felony vs. person |
65 |
6.3% |
66 |
3.3% |
905 |
46.6% |
1,036 |
10.9% |
|
B Felony not person |
20 |
19.2% |
9 |
4.8% |
75 |
41.9% |
104 |
1.1% |
|
B Felony Total |
85 |
7.5% |
75 |
3.4% |
980 |
46.2% |
1,140 |
12.0% |
|
C Felony vs. person |
175 |
14.9% |
110 |
5.0% |
893 |
43.1% |
1,178 |
12.4% |
|
C Felony not person |
656 |
33.1% |
300 |
9.1% |
1,026 |
34.1% |
1,982 |
20.8% |
|
C Felony Total |
831 |
26.3% |
410 |
7.5% |
1,919 |
37.8% |
3,160 |
33.2% |
|
D Felony vs. person |
71 |
13.5% |
45 |
4.6% |
408 |
43.8% |
524 |
5.5% |
|
D Felony not person |
1,425 |
42.1% |
457 |
8.5% |
1,504 |
30.8% |
3,386 |
35.6% |
|
D Felony Total |
1,496 |
38.3% |
502 |
7.9% |
1,912 |
32.8% |
3,910 |
41.1% |
|
Old Code vs. person |
1 |
14.3% |
0 |
0.0% |
6 |
46.2% |
7 |
0.1% |
|
Old Code not person |
0 |
-- |
0 |
-- |
0 |
-- |
0 |
0.0% |
|
Old Code Total |
1 |
14.3% |
0 |
0.0% |
6 |
46.2% |
7 |
0.1% |
|
Total Felonies vs. person |
325 |
11.6% |
227 |
4.3% |
2,243 |
44.5% |
2,795 |
29.4% |
|
Total Felonies not person |
2,164 |
37.8% |
809 |
8.7% |
2,756 |
32.5% |
5,729 |
60.3% |
|
Total Felonies |
2,489 |
29.2% |
1,036 |
7.1% |
4,999 |
37.0% |
8,524 |
89.7% |
|
Agg. Misd. vs. person |
52 |
16.0% |
18 |
3.0% |
254 |
43.9% |
324 |
3.4% |
|
Agg. Misd. not person |
271 |
44.1% |
47 |
4.9% |
296 |
32.5% |
614 |
6.5% |
|
Agg. Misdemeanor Total |
323 |
34.4% |
65 |
4.2% |
550 |
37.0% |
938 |
9.9% |
|
Serious Misd. vs. person |
3 |
14.3% |
2 |
5.1% |
16 |
43.2% |
21 |
0.2% |
|
Ser. Misd. Not person |
9 |
36.0% |
5 |
12.2% |
11 |
30.6% |
25 |
0.3% |
|
Serious Misdemeanor Total |
12 |
26.1% |
7 |
8.8% |
27 |
37.0% |
46 |
0.5% |
|
Total Misd. vs. person |
55 |
15.9% |
20 |
3.1% |
270 |
43.9% |
345 |
3.6% |
|
Total Misd. Not person |
280 |
43.8% |
52 |
5.2% |
307 |
32.5% |
639 |
6.7% |
|
Total Misdemeanors |
335 |
34.0% |
72 |
4.4% |
577 |
37.0% |
984 |
10.3% |
|
All Crimes vs. person |
380 |
12.1% |
247 |
4.2% |
2,513 |
44.5% |
3,140 |
33.0% |
|
All Crimes not person |
2,444 |
38.4% |
861 |
8.4% |
3,063 |
32.5% |
6,368 |
67.0% |
|
Total All Crimes |
2,824 |
29.7% |
1,108 |
6.8% |
5,576 |
37.0% |
9,508 |
100.0% |
Note: Parole release, work release, and denied column
percentages add up horizontally. Total
column percentages add up
vertically.
As is suggested in the chart above, expiration of
sentence has played an increasing role as a means of exit from Iowa's
prison population. This is due primarily to the Board's
belief that there are certain types of offenders from whom the public must
be protected as long as possible. While the Board supports the concept of
supervision after release from prison, it is thought that maintaining some
offenders as long as possible in a secure environment will contribute to
public safety.
To illustrate the variation among offender types in release
practices, Table 4 is presented below:
Offense Class and Type |
Expirations |
Paroles |
Expir. % |
|
Total Class B
Felony |
9 |
85 |
9.6% |
|
Total Class C Felony, Persons |
84 |
175 |
32.4% |
|
Total Class C Felony, Non-persons |
73 |
656 |
10.0% |
|
Total Class C
Felony |
157 |
831 |
15.9% |
|
Total Class D Felony, Persons |
108 |
71 |
60.3% |
|
Total Class D Felony, Non-persons |
313 |
1,425 |
18.0% |
|
Total Class D
Felony |
421 |
1,496 |
22.0% |
|
Habitual Criminal |
|
58 |
0.0% |
|
Total Other Felonies |
12 |
19 |
38.7% |
|
Total All Felonies |
599 |
2,489 |
19.4% |
|
Total Aggravated Misdem., Persons |
135 |
52 |
72.2% |
|
Total Aggravated Misd, Non-persons |
148 |
272 |
35.2% |
|
Total Aggravated
Misdemeanor |
283 |
324 |
46.6% |
|
Total Serious Misdemeanor, Persons |
10 |
3 |
76.9% |
|
Total Serious Misdem., Non-persons |
11 |
8 |
57.9% |
|
Total Serious Misdemeanor |
21 |
11 |
65.6% |
|
Total All Misdemeanors |
304 |
335 |
47.6% |
|
Grand Total |
903 |
2,824 |
24.2% |
Readers interested in an expanded version of this
table are urged to consult a supplementary report on time served prior to
release, available through the Iowa Board of Parole.
Due to the provisions of Iowa Code chapter 914,
a
person convicted of a criminal offense has the right to make
application for executive clemency to the Governor of Iowa. The Governor
requests that the Board of Parole make a recommendation regarding these
applications. Requests for restoration of
citizenship may also be submitted directly to the Iowa Board of
Parole within sixty days of discharge from supervision. All
applications for commutation, pardons, special restoration of citizenship
(firearms), restoration of citizenship (after Board's sixty day time
frame) must be submitted to the Governor's office, which then forwards the
applications on to the Board for review. Table 5 shows
activity in this area for FY2000. Note that a number of
applications may be pending
at any given time, so the total number of applications shown in the table
may not equal the number of approvals plus denials.
|
|
|
Application Type |
Received |
Granted |
Denied |
|
Commutation |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
Pardon |
32 |
8 |
12 |
|
Special Citizenship (firearms) |
39 |
13 |
14 |
|
Restoration of Citizenship (Gov.) |
93 |
25 |
10 |
|
Restoration of Citizenship (Board) |
465 |
397 |
68 |
|
Federal Restoration of Citizenship |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
Total |
630 |
444 |
105 |
On July
14, 1994, the Board began to make use of the new Iowa Communications
Network (ICN) to manage the State's prison population more effectively and
efficiently.
The ICN
is a statewide two-way full motion fiber optic communication network that
uses modern technology to connect points throughout all of Iowa's
ninety-nine counties. This network facilitates a variety of
Board functions including parole interviews, registered victim input, and
parole revocation hearings. Further, the ICN has allowed criminal
justice students and the public to observe actual interviews of inmates
being considered for parole or work release.
Iowa is
the first state in the Nation to use its fiber optics system for monthly
parole interviews. Since its initial use of the system in
July of 1994, the Board experienced few difficulties with the ICN; the
benefits (i.e., cost effectiveness, reduced travel time, and ease of use)
have generated positive reactions from the Board, the media, the public,
and other states. Inmates and family members have also
expressed support for participation in the interview process via the ICN.
With
the completion of its own classroom in October, 1995, the Board greatly
increased its use of the ICN in the parole process. The Board no
longer needs to prepare volumes of inmate files for transport to an ICN
classroom; files are reviewed from the Board's conference room. Thus,
transportation and security concerns regarding inmate files have been
greatly reduced.
Prior to ICN, victims desiring
input were required to travel to a distant institution, were subjected to
a rigorous security check, and were possibly seated in the same room as
the inmate's family and friends. With the creation of the Board's
TeleVictim Program, a registered victim is notified of the intended
release hearing and is directed to an ICN site near the victim's
home. The
victim travels to the local site, provides input, and returns home. The process
often requires a few minutes instead of many hours under the old process.
Further,
the ICN separates victims from inmates, families, and friends and helps
defuse potentially tense situations. The incorporation of the registered
victim input process via the ICN continues to be a model for parole board
interaction with registered victims.
Nine
hundred twenty-three parole and probation revocation hearings have been
conducted via the ICN since July of 1994. Prior to the creation of the ICN, parole
revocation hearings required travel to counties where the alleged parole
violation occurred, which could involve as many as four hours of travel
one-way.
With the advent of ICN, the Parole Judge travels to a nearby ICN
classroom, conducts the hearings, determines violations and appropriate
sanctions, and proceeds to the next case. Probation revocation cases are handled
as part of the pilot project in the Sixth Judicial District. Of the 471 ICN
hearings conducted in FY2000, 178 were probation revocation hearings. Further
information on these will be found in the chapter on the Sixth Judicial
District pilot program.
The existence of the ICN permitted the Board of Parole
to establish its TeleJustice 2000 Education Project in May of 1998 in
cooperation with the Heartland Area Education Association. The three main
objectives of this project are the following:
·
To provide students with information about the criminal
justice system
·
To provide students with information about actual real life
substance abuse problems.
This project places high school
students in the live Parole interview sessions of the Parole Board via the
ICN.
Students view inmates making pleas for freedom and the Board's
reactions as they occur. At the conclusion of sessions the
students can question the Board or the students' in-class attorney
volunteers. This process enables the students also learn about the
characteristics of incarcerated offenders in Iowa and the behaviors that
resulted in their imprisonment. Since May of 1998 the Board has hosted
over 71 high school classes in this project. Use of the ICN
for this purpose has been met with enthusiasm among students, teachers,
and local media.
A portion of one account follows:
“When Iowa's senior administrative parole judge James
Twedt wanted to bring convicted felons into a Roland-Story classroom, it
sounded like a good idea – as long as the classroom was the district's ICN
room.
“Through a relatively new educational outreach
component of the Iowa Parole Board conceived by Twedt, a freshmen [sic]
study hall supervised by English teacher Batista Simpson recently
witnessed live hearings of the Iowa parole board as they interviewed
inmates from Clarinda, a men's correctional facility.
“The parole board was at the ICN origination site in
Des Moines, with remote sites at the prison, as well as a few college and
high school classrooms around the state. Each classroom site had a legal
professional present, like Judge Twedt at the Roland-Story site, to answer
student questions and explain the process.
“Aside from learning about ways that the justice
system is utilizing the same technology that educational institutions have
been using for some time for distance learning, Twedt also hopes the
experience can serve another purpose – of prevention. By showing the
real life consequences of poor decisions, and demonstrating the way these
decisions have affected the inmates' lives, Twedt hopes that at least a
few students may be diverted from following that path…
“One of the parole board members told the inmate that
the interviews were being witnessed by high school students and asked him
if he had any advice for them in avoiding the position he was currently
in.
‘Listen to people who care about you,' he said. ‘One of my
biggest mistakes was that I didn't listen to people trying the help
me…'
“Aside from the educational benefits of what has
become known as “TeleJustice,” using the state's fiber optic network for
legal purposes has many advantages. As a parole revocation judge, Twedt was
used to driving all over Iowa to preside over hearings. He estimates
that the use of the ICN to place all parties together without the actual
physical presence has saved him hours each week in travel time. Since the
first ICN parole revocation hearing on July 21, 1994, the Board's two
administrative parole judges have conducted more than 250 hearings over
the fiber optic network.
“Because the ICN provides such an easy and inexpensive
way to involve students in the criminal justice system, Twedt plans to
continue providing high school and college students with the opportunity
to witness the process in action.”
The Board has also utilized the ICN for a number of
special projects, including statewide meetings of registered victims and
training of parole and probation officers and local public
defenders.
The
Board has long been a proponent of installing ICN video in county
courthouses.
In Fiscal year 1995 the Board received a GASA grant and cooperation
from Scott County to install a compressed video system from the Davenport
Courthouse to the Board's Offices in Des Moines. This prototype
system worked well until equipment malfunctions disabled the system in
February, 1997.
The
Board's TeleJustice 2000 Video Project is a program to install current
video technology in selected Iowa courthouses (Linn County, Polk County,
Scott County and Sioux County) along with the Polk County Jail and Interim
Jail. The
project will also connect selected criminal justice locations to these
facilities.
The most recent step in this
process involved the installation of a video courtroom in Cedar Rapids,
Iowa.
Courtroom 1B in the Linn County Courthouse became Iowa's first
regularly used ICN TeleJustice Video Courtroom. This courtroom
is a state-of-the-art facility with all Sony video equipment and Jefferson
Audio-Video audio equipment. The prime feature of this court is the
video automatically follows voice (i.e. the camera automatically pictures
the person speaking without any direct action on the part of the speaker)
Another feature of this courtroom is the ability to play back video and
audio from one VCR while recording the playback on another VCR.
At the present time, the
TeleJustice Courtroom is used primarily for Parole and Probation
Revocation Hearings. Senior Administrative Parole and
Probation Judge James C. Twedt has conducted approximately 199 hearings
from his Boone Field Office to Video Courtroom 1B in Cedar Rapids. This process
allows Judge Twedt to avoid the 3-hour drive to Cedar Rapids and the
3-hour return trip.
Future
uses of the TeleJustice Courtroom include remote witness testimony, post
conviction hearings from penal institutions, juvenile hearings, and remote
depositions.
Additional future uses include video arraignments,
bond hearings, mental health hearings, training for law enforcement
officials, and domestic abuse and protection orders.
One of the more unusual future
applications for the TeleJustice courtroom is the ability to have
interpreters and sign language professionals available on site with an ICN
connection.
There is a possibility that Veteran and Social Security disability
hearings may utilize this convenient ICN connection in Cedar Rapids.
|
|
|
|
Board Meetings |
Revocations |
Victims |
Families |
|
|
Fiscal Year |
Mileage |
Hours |
Mileage |
Hours |
Mileage |
Hours |
Mileage |
Hours |
|
1995 |
6,444 |
128.9 |
11,590 |
231.8 |
3,306 |
66.1 |
5,344 |
106.9 |
|
1996 |
6,081 |
121.6 |
22,666 |
453.3 |
1,285 |
25.7 |
5,951 |
119.0 |
|
1997 |
7,416 |
148.3 |
16,726 |
334.5 |
2,480 |
49.6 |
6,016 |
120.3 |
|
1998 |
11,608 |
232.2 |
17,682 |
353.6 |
5,317 |
106.3 |
24,746 |
494.9 |
|
1999 |
10,506 |
210.1 |
17,432 |
348.6 |
3,666 |
73.3 |
15,768 |
315.4 |
|
2000 |
13,976 |
279.5 |
46,086 |
921.7 |
5,094 |
101.9 |
15,333 |
306.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note: hours were calculated as mileage divided by
50.
Mileage for Board meetings and revocations were calculated as the
distance between Des Moines and the institution in which hearings were
held.
Mileage for victims and families was developed by identifying
victims and families who attended ICN hearings, locating their place of
residence, and calculating the distance between there and the site of the
hearing.
The Board plans continued use of
such technological advances as the ICN as it strives to protect the public
from serious crime.
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year |
Hearings |
Interviews |
Costs |
|
|
|
1995 |
68 |
286 |
$3,385.70 |
|
|
|
1996 |
84 |
262 |
$7,348.25 |
|
|
|
