Non-Arraignments Add to Problems at Orange County Jail

Hundreds of misdemeanor suspects have been released from the Orange County Jail after 48 hours in recent months because no charges have been filed against them by that deadline, jail records show.

Most of the released suspects have been charged later and ordered to appear in court. But some judges and law enforcement officials express concern that putting these suspects through the system twice crowds the courts and adds to overcrowding of the jail.

Others say the practice is improper, although, they say, it does not violate the constitutional right to due process.

The problem occurs only in the county’s Central Municipal Court. Figures compiled in June by the records division at the Orange County Jail show that 309 of 904 suspects facing misdemeanor charges in Central Municipal Court--34% of the total--could not be arraigned because no charges were filed against them after two consecutive court appearances.

Non-Arraignment Figures

Similar figures for May, only for Central Municipal, show that 355 inmates of 941--or 37%--were released.

And, in a two-week period this month, 162 inmates were released from from the jail because they had not been arraigned, the records show.

“It’s unfair justice,” Central Municipal Presiding Judge Jacqueline Thomason said Monday. “When a person is arrested and sent to jail, he should have a right to know as soon as possible what the crime is.”

The way the system works now is “abominable,” said Deputy Public Defender Paul Stark, Central administrator for his office. “We’ve objected for a long time. A person who gets arrested needs to know what he’s facing so he can get his life in order.”

The June percentages were far lower in the other Municipal courts: West Municipal Court had 11% released because of no arraignments; North Court had 6%; Harbor and South courts had none.

More than 85% of the Central Court misdemeanors for those two months were arrests made by the Santa Ana Police Department.

Reasons for Delay Explained

Police and prosecutors say that in some cases the arresting officers are too overworked to file their reports in time for arraignment. Or, they say, the police might be waiting for test results in alcohol or narcotics cases. In other instances, the prosecutors return cases to the police for further investigation.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Art Koelle, Central Court administrator for his office, said the problem is being blown out of proportion. Koelle said the sheriff’s figures are misleading.

The typical number of non-arraignments is far fewer than what the sheriff’s figures show, Koelle said. He added that the sheriff’s office must have picked a period of an unusually high number of non-arraignments for its survey.

Orange County Jail Commander Wyatt Hart disagreed with Koelle that the records division picked an unusually busy period for compiling figures. And, Hart said, the October figures show that the non-arraigned cases remain a problem.

Central Municipal Judge Robert Jameson, who now handles the misdemeanor calendar, said the situation has improved during the last two weeks. But in recent months the number of inmates who couldn’t be arraigned because no complaint was filed has been a serious problem, Jameson said.

Jail officials are concerned about the non-arraigned inmates because the bed space at the men’s jail is at a premium.

Sheriff Brad Gates and the Board of Supervisors have been under order since March from U.S. District Judge William P. Gray to alleviate overcrowding at the jail.

The county has taken steps that have reduced the population from more than 2,000 to between 1,500 and 1,600 inmates. Beginning Dec. 1, there are to be no more than 1,500 inmates in the jail. Gray already has ordered jail officials to provide a bed for each inmate.

Actually, the inmates released without arraignment do not create a daily logistical problem for the judges. If no charges are filed, the inmates taken to court simply remain in the court’s holding cells instead of going into the courtroom and on the daily calendar.

May Go Back to Jail

The problem, says Judge Thomason, is that these people have to be run through the system again when charges are finally filed.

It works like this:

The arrested person is automatically released from jail after a second day of returning from the courthouse without an arraignment. When the charges are filed, the district attorney’s office sends a letter to the person informing him he has been charged with a misdemeanor crime and that he has 21 days to return to Central Municipal Court for arraignment.

If the person fails to appear in court, a bench warrant is issued for his arrest. If the person is not at home when the marshals appear at his door, the warrant goes into the computer. Later, if the person is stopped for something like a traffic ticket, the warrant will show up, and the person will be arrested again.

Called Unfair for Some

It’s not only more paper work for the court, but it is often unfair to the person arrested, Thomason said.

“Some people released from jail because of non-arraignment think their case is over because they’ve already been to jail,” Thomason said. “If they move, they don’t always get the letter telling them to appear in court. So when they get stopped for a traffic ticket, and the warrant shows up, they say, ‘Hey, I’ve already done my time for that.’ ”

Another problem, she said, is that those not arraigned can end up spending more time in jail than those who are arraigned and plead guilty. Quite often those who plead guilty are given credit for the jail time they have already served and are released. But those not arraigned have served that same amount of time, then may serve more time when they end up in jail again later on a warrant.

COURT COMPLAINT STUDY RESULTS

INMATES RETURN COURT SENT TO RELEASED COURT Central 904 291 (32.2%) 309 (34.2%) West 299 56 (18.7%) 34 (11.4%) North 205 29 (14.1%) 12 (5.9%) Harbor 43 2 (4.7%) 0 South 66 4 (6.1%) 0

Study for the month of June 1985 Source: Orange County Sheriff’s Department