Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09-28-2006 PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL Minutes of Meeting September 28,2006 Convened: 3:30 p.m. Adjourned:4:55 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Colton called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in Conference Room # 3,2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. Roll call was taken. ß \0\1 \l1il r~ ROLL CALL Members Present: Peggy Cioffi, CORE Program (3:35) Janet Collins Sheriff Ken Mascara Major Pat Tighe, S1. Lucie County Correctional Facility Diamond Litty, Public Defender Thomas Mark, Department of Corrections Bruce Colton, State Attorney Chris Harris for John Ramano, New Horizons of the Treasure Coast Chief Judge Roby Judge Philip Yacucci Members Absent: Commissioner Joe Smith Others Present: Mark Godwin, Criminal Justice Coordinator Ed Fry, Clerk of the Circuit Court Justine Patterson, DOC,DCA Kent Cameron, Public Defender's Office Sarah Prohaska, Palm Beach Post Tyler Treadway, Tribune Sean Baldwin, Fort Pierce Police Garry Wilson, SLC Sheriff's Office Adam Fetterman, SLC Sheriff's Office Ethel Rowland, League of Women Voters Gary Robinson, PSLPD Toby Long, SLC Sheriff's Office Carin Smith, Aide to Commissioner Smith Sandy Sticco, Sentencing Alternatives Trevor Morgenti, SLSO Marc Traum, 19th Circuit Court Bob Benton, Mayor of Fort Pierce D~r,=;;::, râD "17 ì ~~l!.::J ..~~ '1~ " . OCT! 0 _ 200~j CO. ADMIN-~ OFFICE Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28,2006 Page 2 ~il L APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 31sT MEETING After a motion and second, the minutes were unanimously approved. JUDICIAL UPDATE Chief Judge Roby reported that he has assigned effective January 1,2007, an additional part time Circuit Judge to St. Lucie County. Judge Bauer will be here two weeks of every month to assist in the current docket. UPDATE BY CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATOR Mr. Godwin passed out documents (see attached) relating to the Juvenile Assessment Center which St. Lucie County currently funds. He is waiting for responses from the cities of Fort Pierce and Port St. Lucie to the County's request to have them fund 1/3 of it. The numbers were shown for the months of July and August. He received a call from the Sheriff's office saying they got the award package for the $36,000 Byrne grant for the continuation of their project. He is waiting for the Fort Pierce and Port St. Lucie Police Departments to receive their awards. A funding request was approved by the Board of County Commissioners for a forensic case manager to work with New Horizons in the amount of $65,000. The Board of County Commissioners also funded the jail diversion beds,and approved the changes requested to the Court System Advisory Board resolution to include a member from each city. The next meeting should be one hour before the October Public Safety meeting. In regards to the data exchange system, all the data from the Sheriff's department is being transmitted to the data warehouse. Mr. Godwin has to find out if the information is being picked up by the other entities. Hopefully the data moving faster will help the cases to move faster. Mr. Godwin thanked the Sheriff's department, especially Trevor Morgenti, for providing an inmate count that shows the number of inmates waiting to go to State prison. There was an issue several weeks ago that seems to have been resolved. The number last Friday was 13. The average length of stay is running about two weeks, which is down considerably. The case manager position descriptions are in draft format being reviewed by the County Attorney. When approved by the County, they will be sent to the Judges for review. Mr. Godwin gave the members, for their information, a list of the 25 people who have been in the Jail the longest. Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 3 ill GUEST SPEAKER Mr. Mark introduced his deputy, Ms. Patterson, and told the disturbing news of a shooting during a routine traffic stop. The work each member of the Committee does is very important and sometimes very dangerous. Mr. Mark is ecstatic to be back and appreciates the support. He told the rules for the sex offender population for Halloween. His department is very committed to making it a safe holiday for all the citizens. The first Jessica Lunsford statutes became effective September 1, 2005. A lot of local jurisdictions, in addition to the Department of Corrections (DOC), monitor sex offenders. Effective October 1,2006 the DOC is implementing a new program called Rapid 10. Ms. Patterson brought an actual fingerprint device for the members to see. They have been installed and the officers are trained so that in one minute the arrest history will be available from the FDLE database. The device will be used to insure the clients are who they say they are. It should assist in cleaning up the database of aliases and duplicate FDLE numbers. FALCON will take the place of two outdated systems. OTHER ISSUES Major Tighe reported that the Jail population September 28th was 1368. The average for September was 1396. He handed out the report for the month (see attached). The VOPs have gone down the last three months. The number September 2th was 479. 300 were felony State VOPs and 179 were misdemeanor. Mr. Colton brought up the GPS and pretrial release program. Before Dr. Kalmanoff this group had been meeting regularly and talked about instituting some sort of pretrial release program particularly with the GPS system. Dr. Kalmanoff also recommended that there be some sort of pretrial release system. Mr. Colton's concern was that the County Commission thinks while in and of itself the program would not uncrowd the Jail, it would be the biggest factor toward getting people out of Jail so the Jail wouldn't be overcrowded. At the time the thought was by the County that they would not have to open the second pod. We predicted as a group that it was not true. Because of the growth of this County and the growth of crime, the GPS system, while we all favored it, was not the be-all and end-all. But the County Commission seems to put a lot of faith in that and again put pressure on the people running the system and on the Criminal Justice Coordinator to make it work and make it have good numbers. The numbers Mr. Godwin Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 4 reported each month seemed higher than Mr. Colton thought they really should be, based on what he knew about the system. He gave an example of first appearance hearings from the past week. 35 people appeared for first appearance hearings at St. Lucie County. A couple years ago we would have 15 to 20 people on a busy day. 35 is not a busy day anymore. 40-50 is a busy day. Mr. Colton does not feel that many who commit crimes in 81. Lucie County are going to be eligible for release under the GPS or pretrial release system. Of the 35, nine of them had Failures to Appear, 14 were Violations of Probation, five were domestic violence cases, two were warrants where the Judges had already specifically set particular conditions or bonds that would make them ineligible for the pretrial release system. That's 30 out of 35 cases that were ineligible. So even if we released those five, 30 of those people would have to post bond or find some other way to get out of Jail. Mr. Colton is in favor of the pretrial release system but thinks this is an example of a typical day in the system. Mr. Colton took cases where people were released through the Sentencing Alternative system for basically the month of July and part of the month of August. Out of 55 cases, only six actually qualified under the statute and Judge Roby's order to be released through the GPS system. Five were released under the GPS system that clearly, under the law and under Judge Roby's order, did not qualify to be released; yet they were recommended and they were released by Judges who followed those recommendations. 35 or so of them, were released under a combination of a bond and GPS. As a citizen, Mr. Colton doesn't have a problem with that. He feels better protected that these people not only posted a bond but they are being monitored by GPS. His problem is that he doesn't think that is what the County contemplated when they started paying for the system; that people would post bond and have GPS, because the County is paying for the GPS. He has a problem with people who can post bond having the County pay for GPS. He feels those cases should not count toward part of the solution to the Jail overcrowding. These are people who would have bonded out anyway. Another concern is that he thinks it was an unwise move by the County to enter into a contract where the company that runs the system is screening to see who is eligible to be under GPS. They are also the people who are getting paid for every person who is on it everyday. What more incentive is there to recommend that people be placed under the system? It is clearly a conflict of interest. He doesn't blame these people. They didn't do this behind our back. This was the parameters that our County set up and Mr. Colton feels it was unwise. Mr. Colton believes there are faults with the way the system is set up. He thinks it is asking the impossible for Sentencing Alternatives to have a recommendation to the Court by 9:00 a.m. He listed all the criteria to meet Chief Judge Roby's order. He feels they would not be able to verify the items before morning court. It has been reported to him that they are saying people are eligible so the Public Defender tells the Judge and finds out later that they are not eligible. He said the order and statute require Sentencing Alternatives to certify that they have done an investigation and the person qualifies but no one has been Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 5 r requiring them to do that. They have a form and on the second page it does certify that they have investigated the criminal history, community ties, employment status and other information required by law and certifies that the person is eligible. But he believes they get their information from the defendant and have no choice but to take their word in order to get information to the Judge by 8:00 or 8:30 that morning. Mr. Colton proposes that it be changed. He does not want to get rid of the system or the company. He would like the Committee to pass a motion to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that they revisit the contract. He is not suggesting that they do away with the company. He does not think the contract or Chief Judge Roby's order is being followed. He thinks the Committee should urge the Judges to make sure that they require written certification from Sentencing Alternatives that they have checked all the things under the order and statute before they make a recommendation to the Court that the person is eligible. He wants the County Commission to require those who are not declared indigent be compelled to pay the cost of supervision under the Sentencing Alternatives program. And he wants the County to have some other group, County employees or another company, to do the investigation to determine who is eligible for pretrial release. He does not think it should be the people who stand to profit. Mr. Colton has heard of people running off. If he was running the Sentencing Alternatives program and knew that the person had a cash bond and was on GPS, he wouldn't worry too much if they ran off because the bondsman would go look for them because they have a financial stake in it. He questions if a person is on GPS and they run off, is Sentencing Alternatives still being paid for every day that person is gone? He doesn't know that it has happened, but he has the question. He thinks the County needs to realize that while it is a program that is worth having, it's not the program that is going to solve the problem. The Committee needs to plan for the future. He asked about the second pod being opened in phases. Sheriff Mascara explained that because they were so overcrowded in July, they stopped the renovation and opened Pod 2. Mr. Colton feels the Council should be planning for future growth. All the programs should continue. The County must face the fact that this County is growing, crime is growing and arrests are growing. Major Tighe feels the Council should also plan for more State Attorney Offices, Courtrooms and Clerk space. The whole system needs to grow. Mr. Colton feels the Space Needs Study is addressing the other needs but not jail needs. He fears that since Pod 2 is open, the County feels it is a problem they do not have to deal with. Chief Judge Roby suggested a circuit-wide pretrial release program like Alachua County. They used to be the model but have problems with jail overcrowding since the zero Public Safety Coordinating Courx:il September 28, 2006 Page 6 tolerance policy. Each County would pay a percentage of the cost. He would like to see a 24-hour, sufficiently staffed program with people who could go and speak to employers or contact them on the phone and contact family members to find out the ties to the community. It would require a full-time staff, significant expense and the other three counties to buy in. A real in-depth review would make the Judges more apt to accept the recommendations of a pretrial release program if they were confident, not that they are not now, that employers and family members had been spoken to. Mr. Colton feels there are a number of cases where they can't check the information by first appearance. He thinks they should say it looks like they might qualify but the information has not been checked. The Judge could bring them back in a day or two. Chief Judge Roby said it is called a second look program. They are trying to find a way to legally check back after so many days. Mr. Godwin suggested moving first appearance to 1 :00 p.m. Chief Judge Roby answered that they would not have time to check people who are arrested at 8:00 or 9:00 a.m. Ms. Collins didn't realize that $1.8 million had been set aside for Sentencing Alternatives. She thought they would tell the Judges the truth even if the truth was that they could not verify the information. She feels $1.8 million could have gone a long way on running the Pod. She is concerned about accountability. They do not have to do anything but report it if a bracelet is cut off. They could collect the $18 per day for months and then report the bracelet had been cut off and it would be the Sheriff's problem. Ms. Cioffi feels from the taxpayer perspective, the taxpayers are paying for law enforcement to arrest individuals, State Attorneys to prosecute, a Public Defender to defend them if they are indigent, Court costs, the Judge, the JA, Clerk of the Court, and record maintenance. She doesn't want to see taxpayer money spent to take them out of Jail when they have spent so much money to get them to Jail. Her probation opinion is if a person goes to Jail on a VOP from the CORE Program they have done everything they could to get them to comply with the Court's order. If they won't do what they are supposed to, they go through the same expense as before and then they might get out on GPS. She feels that is a free pass. Mr. Colton mentioned that of the 55 cases from July and August there were a number that had GPS as part of their sentence. He thought the GPS program was to be for pretrial. If GPS is part of their sentence, do they payor does the County pay? There was disagreement on the answer. Mr. Godwin explained that when he started, the GPS RFP was already out there. He said that Mr. Anderson suggested a meeting to discuss the concerns. In regard to the statement about the unwise move by the County to have the vendor provide the screening Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 7 ,/ process, the Committee had been formed when Mr. Godwin came on board. It included representatives from the State Attorney's office, Public Defender's office, CORE Probation, and Major Tighe. It was never discussed that the screening issue was a conflict. He wondered why it was not brought up at that time. Mr. Colton believes it was discussed and that Committee's work was thrown out the window when they made a recommendation that this Council adopted. Then without any of our knowledge, someone in the County decided the bidding wasn't done right and the company that was chosen, which was eliminated the first time around, hired a local prominent attorney and all of a sudden were back in the running for the contract. It was brought up as a concern. As a County Commissioner, spending County money, whether or not it was recommended by a Committee, Mr. Colton would be concerned about paying the people who are going to make the money to make the recommendation who goes on the system. He asked Mr. Godwin to not try to turn it around on other people. Mr. Godwin thanked Mr. Colton for clarifying and said that he thinks a meeting would be very useful. Ms. Cioffi said that years ago when Judge Schack started Drug Court, he set a very clear example with the treatment providers and assessment individuals. If you were going to do the assessment on substance abuse you would have to make a choice that you were going to be a provider or assessor. You could not do both. It prevails except New Horizons because they get State money and there is no benefit to their budget. Ms. Sticco expressed her shock. She feels the information presented was inaccurate. Mr. Colton asked her to tell him what. Thirty people who came out were done in open court and Sentencing Alternatives was not there. They don't interview those people. Very few people have been released at first appearance. During the month of August they had Judge Walsh and he does not even acknowledge the program exists. If anyone does not pass the sniff test, they are not recommended. Anyone wavering would not be recommended. She is appalled that they would question her integrity and morality. She asked about the American Bar Association's pretrial standards. She thought the attorneys should know all about it. She asked what Section Three said about pretrial release and detention. She explained that it says that everyone should be considered on the least restrictive means, which does not mean GPS. Everyone should be considered on non- financial means unless it is appropriate to insure appearance in court. The first question Sentencing Alternatives asks is if the defendant is posting a bond. If they say yes, Sentencing Alternatives walks away as a courtesy to the bail bondsmen. That is not the standard of the American Bar Association. Ms. Sticco said that out of the 38 people that were released last month, they recommended six people for GPS and one was released. They recommended eight for standard supervision; only three were released. She read the FL statute concerning GPS. Mr. Colton asked if she had read Chief Judge Roby's order. It goes beyond the statute and that is what they are to follow. Ms. Sticco answered that they do. They were not in open court when the people were released. The State Attorney's staff and Public Defender's Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 8 "'~ staff had an opportunity to speak to the Judge. Sentencing Alternatives was not there. They did not make those recommendations. If it is a bondable offense they are eligible for release. There was discussion on the 5 and 35 cases. Ms. Sticco reported that there are about 40 cases pending on bond reductions and they still can't post the bond to come out on the program. These people are truly indigent. Mr. Colton said that they do not qualify for GPS release. Ms. Sticco asked for the cases. Mr. Godwin gave the names to Mr. Colton. They were not done at first appearance and Ms. Sticco was not present in Court. Mr. Colton explained that he was speaking to the Council about the problems with the program. There was discussion on accuracy. Ms. Litty said that she had not been there in over a year but she had sent a representative and read the minutes. What bothers her is that the program has been touted as relieving jail overcrowding. She agrees with Mr. Colton that if the County Commission wants to spend $1,800,000 to have an extra safety guard on people being released, say that. She does not want it said that the program is a success because it has reduced the jail population. Most of those people would have gotten out of Jail anyway. The sole purpose of hiring a GPS program was to reduce the inmate population. They felt there was a bunch of people in Jail that would be eligible for a GPS program. She and Mr. Colton said at the time that it would help but would not solve the problem. There is a different class of criminal in 81. Lucie County. It is different than Vero, Okeechobee and Indian River. There could be a first appearance where out of 35 to 40 people, nobody would qualify. The bottom line is that now that we have opened the second pod, she is afraid they will be lulled into thinking the expansion could be taken off the agenda because the problem is fixed. Last week the population was 1422. That is 52 over capacity with both pods open. All the programs need to be continued while planning for expansion. Ms. Litty told about a letter that Mr. Godwin sent to her office that contained a list of people that qualify according to Sentencing Alternatives. She said there are three that are charged with domestic violence. They do not qualify pursuant to Chief Judge Roby's order. She is in a position of constantly defending her office. It is not fair. Her response was to show them where they qualify. They would research it and make the appropriate motions. She has not received a reply so they can move forward. Ms. Litty did not know that Chief Judge Roby's order was not being followed. She thought they were certifying the qualifications in writing. When she spoke with the Jailhouse lawyer, she was told that at times she is advocating release based on representation that turns out to be not true. Ms. Litty told her to say to the Judge that she is advocating the release based on Sentencing Alternative's recommendation so that she is covered. A certification is required. Ms. Litty suggested to Sentencing Alternatives that they have a checklist of residence, Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 9 employment, etc. to present to the Public Defender so they know it is correct. It would make a more effective argument. Ms. Litty asked the Committee to please know that this is not going to solve the Jail overcrowding problem. We need to take another look at the program. It is a lot of money that could have been used for Jail expansion for a program that is not doing what it was designed to do. Ms. Cassone asked if Ms. Litty was suggesting the Judges did not understand the law since they are putting people on GPS, not at first appearance, but from open court and Ms. Litty said they do not belong on GPS. Ms. Litty thinks that there have been times when the Judges, based on representations from Sentencing Alternatives that they qualify, place people on GPS when they do not. Ms. Sticco reminded Ms. Litty that they are not in open court. Ms. Cassone reported that 38 people were placed on GPS during the month of August. Sentencing Alternatives recommended 14 and were granted six, three GPS and three non- GPS. Every other client came from the court. They were not there. They did not give references. They did not ask to have clients so they could make more money. Mr. Colton explained that in regard to the 35 or so that were released under a combination of GPS and a bond, he did not say that they misrepresented their status to the court. Those people could have just bonded out. The point is that the County should not be paying for their supervision. If they can make bond and the Judge makes GPS a condition of that bond, they should pay for the GPS. Mr. Colton has names of five who were placed on GPS that do not qualify. Ms. Sticco asked for the names. If Sentencing Alternatives did not recommend these people, he thinks Chief Judge Roby needs to take it up with the Judges. He can't conceive of a Judge placing someone on GPS without someone recommending it. Ms. Sticco disagreed with Ms. Litty that there is a different class of citizens in this county. Failures to Appear are high compared to other jurisdictions. VOPs are high. Mr. Colton's point is that the system is not the be-all and end-all that the County thinks it is, the County is spending money that they shouldn't be spending on it, and the investigations cannot be done properly by first appearance hearings. Ms. Sticco said that Mr. Colton had never been there. Mr. Colton answered that he has staff there. Mr. Godwin said that he thought the motion to revisit the contract would be a good idea. Mr. Colton, as Chair, cannot make a motion. Ms. Litty made the motion asking the County Commission revisit the contract for the GPS system regarding who pays when a person Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 10 iTI' "')' can make bond and whether or not there should be a different person or group doing the background checks than the group that supervises the GPS. Ms. Litty added for the Committee to take a closer look as to whether it had any impact on the Jail population. Sheriff Mascara seconded the motion. Ms. Cioffi told how her agency is audited and gets surprise visits. She thinks there should be a quality assurance review. Ms. Litty agreed to the amendment. Ms. Collins seconded the amendment and wanted some discussion. She said the program has been in effect seven months and there are some kinks to be worked out but the people in the room are completely capable of fixing the kinks and getting it back on track, doing a good job and using the $1.8 million to assist the citizens of 81. Lucie County, both the victims and defendants. She would like the Committee to fix the problem before the Commissioners feel they need to do another study. Mr. Godwin, for the record, said the amount was $1.3 million and informed the group of a benefit to the program. The County and Sheriff's Department have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in inmate medical costs. Mr. Colton said they could save even more money if they let more people out of jail but that isn't the point. Mr. Godwin continued that it is projected that over $500,000 in medical costs will be saved. The $1.3 million will be the cost if there are 200 people on GP8. There had to be a cushion to be sure. Today there are 113 people on active supervision. Ms. Bleyman said that she recommended to the Council that there be a group formed that would sit down with the GPS agency chosen and walk through what was expected step by step so the responsibility would not fall back on the agency. She feels that the Council is responsible to work together for the benefit of St. Lucie County. Mr. Colton explained that Sentencing Alternatives didn't say that it was their condition for them to choose the people and supervise. The County came up with that as part of the contract. If it was done by the Committee comprised of members from each agency, it was a mistake. It needs to be addressed. Chief Judge Roby pointed out from a lawyer's perspective; there are points of a contract that cannot be revisited. The County may be locked in contractually. Mr. Colton said there are things in the contract that have not been followed. That would be another issue subject to renegotiation. There was discussion on the length of the contract. Mr. Godwin clarified that it is a three year contract with two one year add-ons. Ms. Litty brought up that it could be terminated in 30 days. Mr. Godwin believes it is in the contract. Sheriff Mascara informed the group that statutorily the Council is tasked with formulating a five year plan on jail expansion and growth. Since 2004, when the two pods were approved, it has not addressed future expansion. Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 11 Mr. Colton and Sheriff Mascara agreed that it should be done on a regular basis. Ms. Cassone wanted to be sure people understood that each month the number that Sentencing Alternatives recommends is low. They are not recommending people to get more revenue. Most of the clients are recommended by Judges in open court. There was discussion on the statute and Judge's order. Judge Yacucci asked if they were getting misdemeanor or felony cases. Ms. Sticco answered that is was a combination. Mr. Colton repeated the motion to urge the County Commission to revisit the contract as to who pays and when for the supervision under the GPS, the accused or the County. And secondly, to revisit the issue of who should do the background investigation, of whether the group or individual who does the background investigation should be different from the group or individual who does the supervision. And that there be a quality assurance system set up by the County to determine that on an ongoing basis the program is running properly and efficiently in compliance with the court's order. The motion was passed, unanimously except that Chief Judge Roby abstained because it deals with financial issues. Ms. Litty asked the Sheriff if he wanted to make a motion regarding the five year plan. The Sheriff answered that the Council is tasked by the statute to do it. Mr. Colton said that it would be put on the agenda for the next meeting and asked the Sheriff to be prepared to present the population projections for the next five years and what he would envision. Mr. Godwin asked if anyone had items for the agenda for the Court System Advisory Board to let him know. He feels that since the Board will have members from the cities the Jail expansion may be something for them to discuss. Mr. Colton thinks the Public Safety Coordinating Council should decide which way to go and assign the Court System Advisory Board to go into more detailed study. Mr. Colton said the other group would look into needs of the court system, Public Defender, Clerk and State Attorney. Mr. Godwin said that it was his understanding. The Jail needs are the responsibility of the Public Safety Coordinating Council. Sheriff Mascara asked about Chief Judge Roby's recommendation to have the Criminal Justice Complex at Rock Road. Chief Judge Roby answered that he and Judge Conner have spoken to all the County Commissioners and all of the City Commissioners from Port St. Lucie and Fort Pierce and are attempting to build a consensus about where it should be located and where the money would come from. He will also contact other agencies to see if they are interested in a joint use facility. If possible, he will get the players together to Public Safety Coordinating Council September 28, 2006 Page 12 I[i ; [I ;¡. discuss that type of facility. It could be anywhere from Rock Road to downtown Fort Pierce. Ms. Bleyman said the parking would be an advantage of Rock Road. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 4:57 p.m. by Mr. Colton. Submitted by, Brenda Marlin THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE OCTOBER 26, 2006. Mark Godwin - Aug06SLCYTD.xls # of Pro :essed ' il'outh Bv New Charae bther: VOP otal Yo Detained Month Felony Misd/Other PUO, etc. Home & DC "'006 Jul 61 113 89 263 75% "'006 Aua 89 76 139 304 65% I i n-otals 150 189 228 567 INon-Arre ted Yout his Mo. Since July 1 # of Non-I rrested Y ( uth Delive ed: 6 14 % of Non- '\rrested Y buth Admi ted: 100% 100 % Referre to a Cas Manaaer 100% 100 % Aqreed to Service Plan: 5 11 #. Docume nted Refw als: 1 3 St. Lucie JA C St. Lucie County Report for the Month of August, 2006 Page 1 !#Youth Brou ht in b' Law Enforce ment bv Month am Denart ment 12006 Jul 12006 Aua FPPD 64 74 PSLPD 45 37 PSLPD-SRO 0 1 LCSO 50 95 IsLCSO-SRO 0 6 rr otal 159 213 .. Top 25 Longest Incarcerations (in days DOB Housing LOS Booking Date Name Classification 1326 2/112003 893.135 893.13 893.13 HOLD 1197 6/10/2003 893.13(1 )(A) 893.13(1 )(A) 893.13(1 )(A) 893.13 READMIT 893.13 893.13 893.13 895.03 893.13 893.13 893.13 893.13 893.13 893.13 893.13 893.13 893.13 BOB BOB 893.13(1 )(A) 893.13(1 )(A) 1133 8/13/2003 782.04 782.04 782.04 1116 8/30/2003 893.147 810.02 810.02 810_02 9/19120069:58:03 AM GAYLE, CARLTON NMN 3121/1957 RC D1 N-D2-G-D214 - TRAFFICKING IN COCAINE OVER 300 GRAMS(OUT OF COUNTY RESIDENT Pending - POSS MARIJUANA INT / SELL ( OUT OF COUNTY RESIDENT) Pending · POSS MARIJUANA OVER 20 GRAMS ( OUT OF COUNTY RESIDENT) No Info - HOLD/IMMIGRATION Pending BROWN, RICARDO H 12/15/1974 GP A2-D2-B-D212 - CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - SALE OF CANNABIS No Info - POSS OVER 20 GRAMS Pending - READMIT-ROR REVOKED Pending - POSS CANNABIS 0/20 GRAMS Pending - SALE OF CANNABIS Pending - SALE CANNABIS Pending - CT1 RICO-ACa./MAINTAINED THRU PATTERN OF RACKATEERING ACT Pending - CT4 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CT5 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CT6 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending · CT7 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CT8 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CT9 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CT11 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CT12 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CT10 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - BOB- POSS. OF CANNABIS OVER 20 GRAMS Pending - BOB- POSS. OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Pending - CT35 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending - CT36 CONSPIRACY TO SELL OR DELIVER CANNABIS Pending FENNELL, DIANE lORCETT 61411960 SS-CH SG D2W-D1-A-D101 - 2ND DEGREE MURDER Null Presque - FIRST DEGREE MURDER Pending - CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FIRST DEGREE MURDER Pending FOX, EDWARD NMN 8/17/1958 RC D1N-D2-F-D212 - POSSESSION PARAPHERNALIA Null Prosque - BURGLARY Sentenced · CT. 1 BURGLARY Null Presque - CT 1 BURGLARY Null Prosque LOS Booking Date Name DOB Classification Housing 810.02 812.014 810.02 806.13 HOLD HOLD 810.02 810.02 & m.04 HOLD HOLD HOLD HOLD HOLD HOLD HOLD 806.13 812.019(1 ) 539.001 806.13(1 ) 806.13(1 ) 806_13(1 ) 812.014 812.014 806.13 806.13 3 6 989 1/412004 810.02(2B) 806.01 (1) 806.13 810.02(2B) 810.02(2B) 806_01 (1) 806.13 810.02(2B) 810.02(2B) 810.02(2B) 9/19/20069:58:03 AM Null Prosque Null Prosque Null prosque Null prosque - CT. 2 BURGLARY - CT. 3 GRAND THEFT - BURGLARY (ATTEMPTED) - CRIMINAL MISCHIEF - HOLD INDIAN RIVER CO.-CT. 1 BURGLARY OF STRUCTURE - HOLD- INDIAN RIVER CO-CT. 2 GRAND THEFT - CT. 1 BURGLARY - CT.1 ATT. BURGLARY OF STRUCTURE - HOLD-INDIAN RIVER CO.-CT.2 GRAND THEFT - HOLD-INDIAN RIVER CO.-CT. 1 BURGLARY OF STRUCTURE - HOLD-INDIAN RIVER CO.-CT. 1 BURGLARY OF STRUCTURE - HOLD-INDIAN RIVER CO.-CT. 2 GRAND THEFT - HOLD-INDIAN RIVER CO.-CT. 1 BURGLARY OF STRUCTURE - HOLD-INDIAN RIVER CO.-CT. 2 GRAND THEFT - HOLD/INDIAN RIVER CO.-CT. 1 BURGLARY OF A_STRUCTURE - CT2 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF-OVER $2oo/LESS $1000 - DEALING IN STOLEN PROPERTY - GIVING FALSE IFORMATION TO PAWNBROKER - CT.2 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF-OVER $200/LESS THAN $1000 - CT. 3 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF-OVER $200/LESS THAN $1,000 - CT. 2 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF-OVER $2oo/LESS THAN $1000 - CT. 2 THIRD DEGREE GRAND THEFT - CT. 2 THIRD DEGREE GRAND THEFT - CT.3 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF-OVER $2oo/LESS THAN $1000 - CT.3 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF-OVER $2OO/LESS THAN $1000 COURT ORDERS - COURT ORDER-HEARING SET FOR 09/19/06-POST CONVICTION RELEIF AT 0930 HOURS HOLD - HOLD-WASHINGTON CI-ORIG CHG: BURG UNOCC I G/T Sentenced DREVERMAN, HENRY NMN 4/19/1966 SS-MH SG CEN-ISOL-X-F185 - CT 1 BURGLARY TO STRUCTURE (CHURCH) EVIDERING PREJUDICE Pending - CT 2 2ND DEGREE ARSON (OF A CHURCH EVIDERING PREJUDICE) Pending - CT 3 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF GREATER THAN $100000 Pending - CT 4 BURGLARY TO STRUCTURE (CHURCH) CAUSING> $100000 Pending - BURGLARY TO STRUCTURE (CHURCH) ARMED WITH EXPLOSIVE DEVICE No Info - CT 5 ARSON OF A CHURCH EVIDERING PREJUDICE Pending - CT 6 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF OF A CHURCH CAUSING DAMAGE $100000 Pending - CT 7 BURGLARY TO STRUCTURE(CHURCH) CAUSING> $100000 Pending - BURGLARY TO STRUCTURE(CHURCH) ARMED WITH EXPLOSIVE DEVICE No Info - BURGLARY TO STRUCTURE(CHURCH) ARMED WITH EXPLOSIVE DEVICE No Info Sentenced Sentenced Null Prosque Null Prosque Null Prosque Null Prosque Null Prosque Null prosque Sentenced Sentenced Sentenced Null Prosque Null prosque Null prosque Null prosque No Info Null Prosque Sentenced No Info No Info Time Served Pending LOS Booking Date Name Housing DOB Classification 806.01 (1) 806.13 782.04 843.01 810.02(2B) 810.02(2B) 806.01 806.13 806.13(1 )(A) 810.02 782.051 949 2/13/2004 782.04 948.06 790.23 945 2/17/2004 782.04 m.03(2)(A) 790.23 810.02 908 3/25/2004 812.13 843.01 782.04 810.02 948.06 812.13(2)(A) 812.13(2)(A) 843.01 810.02(2) 810.02(2) 875 4/27/2004 782.04 812.014 948.06 948.06 948.06 948.06 782.04 9/19/2006 9:58:04 AM - CT 8 ARSON OF A CHURCH CAUSING DAMAGE OVER $100000 Pending - CT9 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF OVER $1000 DAMAGE Pending - CT 14 ATTEMPTED FIRST DEGREE MURDER OF A LEO Pending - CT 15 RESIST WITH VIOLENCE Pending - CT 10 BURGLARY TO STRUCTURE (CHURCH) CAUSING> $100000 Pending - BURGLARY TO STRUCTURE (CHURCH) ARMED WITH A EXPLOSIVE DEVIC No Info - CT 11 ATTEMPTED ARSON AT A CHURCH EVIDERING PREJUDICE Pending - CT 12 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF OVER $10000 Pending - CRIMINAL MISCHIEF Pending - CT13 BURGLARY OF STRUCTURE Pending CRIMES AGAINST PERSON - CT 16 ATTEMPTED FELONY MURDER Pending RIVERS, FRANKIE LEE 9/17/1983 SS-CH SG 00CH-BRVA-X-F02 - FIRST DEGREE MURDER Pending - VOP- CT1 BATTER ON LEO CT2 RESISTING OFFICER WNlOLENCE Pending - CT 2 POSSESS FIREARM WEAPON BY CONVICTED FELON Pending WILEY, JAMES CORY 2/8/1981 SS-PC SG 00CH-MCSO-X-001 - FIRST DEGREE MURDER Pending - CT4ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT TO FIRST DEGREE MURDER Pending - CT2 POSSESSION FIREARM BY CONVICTED FELON Pending BURGL - CT1 BURGLARY OF A DWELLING WHILE ARMED Pending CADEJUSTE, MARCO NMN 10/28/1984 SS-CH SG D1N-D4-I-D418 - ARMED ROBBERY-FIREARM No Info - CT 6 RESISTING OFFICER WITH VIOLENCE Pending - ATTEMPTED MURDER OF LEO No Info - CT 8 BURGLARY OF OCCUPIED DWELLING Pending - HOLD MARTIN CO /NOP ARMED BURGLARYIIGTAI/PROBABLE CAUSE Sentenced - CT 4 ATT ARMED ROBBERY WHILE WEARING A MASK Pending - CT 5 ATT ARMED ROBBERY WHILE WEARING A MASK Pending - CT 7 RESIST WITH VIOLENCE Pending - CT 9 ATT ARMED BURGLARY OF A STRUCTURE WHILE MASKED Pending - CT 10 A TT ARMED BURGLARY OF A STRUCTURE WHILE MASKED Pending HAMPTON, WILLIE MAE 6126/1954 SS-CH SG D2W-D2-A-D204 - FIRST DEGREE MURDER Pending - GRAND THEFT-MOTOR VEHICLE No Info - VIOL OF PROS-WORTHLESS CHECK Sentenced - VIOL OF PROS-WORTHLESS CHECK Sentenced - VIOL OF PROB-WORTHLESS CHECK Sentenced - VIOL OF PROB-WORTHLESS CHECK Sentenced - CT3 CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT MURDER Pending LOS Booking Date Name Classification DOB Housing 874 4128/2004 01 S-D6-B-D604 8OO.04(5)(B) 794.001 (2) 868 5/412004 782.04 812.014 812.014 848 5/2412004 901.11 784.045(1 )(B) 784.03 784.03 782.04 812.13 775.13 790.23 790.23 843.01 843.02 877.03 784.078 784.078 784.041 784.041 784.07 784.07 843.01 806.1 832 6/9/2004 790.221 784.03 784.045 843.02 893.13(3)(F) 810.09 812.13 812.13 9/19/2006 9:58:04 AM HARRIS, JAMES EDWARD 4/1411938 SS-PC SG - CT 1 LEWD AND LASCIVOUS MOLESTATION TO A CHILD U 12 YRS OF AG Pending - CT 2 SEXUAL SA TT ON A CHILD U/12 BY PREP 0/18 Pending MABRY, JERMAINE LEFRED - ATTEMPTED MURDER LARC - THEFT LARC - THEFT TUMBLIN, ALWIN CHARLES 4116/1982 SS-CH SG 11/17/1978 SS-CH SG - CT 1 FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A CAREER OFFENDER - CT 1 AGG BATTERY- PREGNANT PERSON - CT2 BATTERY - CT3 BATTERY - CT 3 FIRST DEGREE MURDER - CT 4 ROBBERY WITH A DEADLY WEAPON CRIMINAL REGISTRATION (NOT AN ARREST) - CONVICTED FELON REGISTRATION POSSESSION OF WEAPON - CT5 POSS FIREARM BY CONVICTED FELON OBTS#5601073184 POSSESSION OF WEAPON - ENTERED IN ERROR RESIST OFFICER - RESIT ARREST WITH VIOLENCE RESIST OFFICER - RESIT ARREST WITHOUT VIOLENCE DISORD CONDUCT - DISORDERLY CONDUCT BATTERY - CT1 BATTERY BY EXPELLED FLUIDS BATTERY - CT2 BATTERY BY EXPELLED FLUIDS BATTERY - CT1 FELONY BATTERY WITH GREAT HARM BATTERY - CT2 FELONY BATTERY WITH GREAT HARM SIMPLE ASSL T - CT1 BATTERY ON LEO SIMPLE ASSL T - CT2 BATTERY ON A LEO RESIST OFFICER - CT7 RESISTING OFFICER WITH VIOLENCE HEALTH-SAFETY - PREVENTING OBSTRUCTING EXTINGUISHMENT OF FIRE COWINGS, WALLACE 12/10/1977 SS-CH SG - POSSESSION OF SHORT-BARRELED WEAPON - SA TTERY - AGGRAVATED BATTERY OOC RESIDENT - RESISITING ARREST WITHOUT VIOL - CT 1 POSS MARIJUANA LESS THAN 20 GRAMS - TRESPASS ON SCHOOL GROUNDS W/FIREARM OOC RESIDENT - CT 2 ROBBERY W/FIREARM - CT 3 ROBBERY W/FIREARM 01 N-D4-C-D405 Pending Pending Pending 01 S-D8-D-D807 Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Closed Pending Pending Pending Pending No Info No Info No Info Pending Pending Pending Pending 01 N-D4-H-D416 Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending LOS Booking Date Name DOB Classification Housing 812.13 812.13 812.13 812.13 812.13 790.23 810.02 831 6/10/2004 812.13(2)(A) 812.13(2)(A) 812.13(2)(A) 812.13(2)(A) 812.13(2)(A) 812.13(2)(A) 784.045 790.23 810.095 843.02 316.1935 812.13(2)(A) 810.02 901 .36 HOLD 822 6/19/2004 8oo.04(5)(B) 787.02(3)(A) 800.04 816 6/25/2004 812.133 787.01 810.02(2) 816 6/26/2004 782.04 843.19 812.133 787.01 794.011 (5) 787.01(2) 9/19/2006 9:58:04 AM - CT 4 ROBBERY W/FIREARM - CT 5 ROBBERY W/FIREARM - CT 6 ROBBERY W/FIREARM - CT 7 ROBBERY W/FIREARM - CT 8 ATTEMPTED ROBBERY W/FIREARM - CT 9 POSSESS FIREARM BY CONV FELON OOC RESIDENT - CT 10 BURGLARY OF A STRUCTURE WHILE ARMED THOMAS, DAWAN NMN 1/2411982 RC - ROBBERY W/FIREARM - ROBBERY W/FIREARM - ROBBERY W/FIREARM - ROBBERY W/FIREARM - ROBBERY W/FIREARM - ROBBERY W/FIREARM - AGGRAVATED BATTERY - POSSESS FIREARM BY CONVICTED FELON - ARMED TRESPASSING ON SCHOOL GROUNDS - RESIST ARREST W/O VIOLENCE - FLEElATTEFMPT TO ELUDE LEO - ROBBERY W/FIREARM - CT. 19 BURGLARY OF A STRUCTURE WHILE ARMED - CT. 20 GIVING A FALSE NAME WHILE ARRESTED OR DETAINED - HOLD-BROWARD-VOP-POSS IPURCHI SEW DEU MANU! CANNABIS MARTINEZ, OMAR TORRES 11/1911966 SS-CH SG - CT 1 LEWD & LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION VICTIM U/12 - CT 2 FALSE IMPRISONMENT TO A CHILD U/13 SEX OFFENSE - CT1 LEWD LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION-OFFENDER 18 OLDER VICTIM U/12 SNEED, CLEMON ANTONIO 1118/1984 SS-CH SG - CT 8 CARJACKING W/FIREARM - CT 9 KIDNAPPING W/FIREARM - CT 10 BURG OF CONVEY WHILE ARMED LEVY, BARRINGTON C 2/1/1986 SS-MD SG - CT 1 ATT MURDER LEO BY DISCHARGING FIREARM - CT 2 INJURING 1 KILLING POLICE DOG - CT 3 CARJACKJNG WITH A FIREARM - CT 4 KIDNAPPING WITH A FIREARM - SEXUAL BATTERY UPON 12 YEARS OR OLDER - ATTEMPTED KIDNAPPING WITH WEAPON OR FIREARM Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending ROR Pending 01 N-D2-H-D216 Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending ROR Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending D1 S-D6-I-D617 Pending Pending Pending D1 S-D11-H-D1115 Pending Pending Pending CEN-ISOL-X-F188 Pending Pending Pending Pending No Info Pending LOS Booking Date Name Housing DOB Classification 812.014 TAKE HOLD HOLD BOB BOB BOB BOB BOB 812.13 784.021 784.021 790.19 810.02 843.01 790.23 948.06 814 6/27/2004 893..13 893.13 893.13 CO BOB BOB BOB BOB BOB 914.22 914.22 802 71912004 775.21 782.04 812.13 748 9/1/2004 782.04 782.04 782.04 782.04 729 9/20/2004 9/19/2006 9:58:04 AM - GRAND THEFT MOTOR VEHICLE Pending - TAKE IN CUST-POSS MARl U/20G-Grr AUTO-RAWOV Pending - HOLD-INDIAN RIVER-CT 1 CARJACKING WI DEADLY WEAPON Pending - HOLD INDIAN RIVER COIICT2 KIDNAPPING W A WEAPON OR FIREARM Pending - BOB-AGG ASSAULT W/F/Af GASKIN PWR#AS5356602 10-23-03 Pending - BOB-POSS F/A BY MINOR! GASKIN PWR#AS5356603 10-23-03 Pending - BOB-AGG ASSAULT W/F/Af GASKIN PWR#AS5 356601 10-23-03 Pending - BOB-POSS F/A AFTER BEING FOUND DELlNQ/GASKIN PWR#AS15199642 Pending - BOB-TRESPASS ON SCHOOL GRNDSI GASKIN PWR#AS5 384745 04-21-04 Time Served - ATTEMPTED ARMED ROBBERY Pending - AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (FIREARM) Pending - AGGRAVATED ASSAULT WITH A FIREARM Pending - SHOOTING INTO OCCUPIED DWELLING W/FIREARM Pending - CT 5 BURG OF CONVEY WHILE ARMED Pending - CT 6 RESIST WITH VIOLENCE Pending - CT 7 POSS F/A AFTER BEING FOUND DELINQUENT Pending - VOP TOSG Time Served HESTER, ROBERT JAMES 9/21/1960 GP A4-D2-B-D208 - SALE OR DELIVERY OF CANNABIS No Info - CT 2 POSS COCAINE Null prosque - CT 1 DELIVERY OF COCAINE Null Prosque - COURT ORDER-ORDER ON MOTION FOR PRETRIAL DETENTION Pending - BOB I CT 1 LESSER-POSS MARIJ U120 I POSS MARA WITH INTENT Time Served - BOB I CT 2 FIGHTING OR BAITING ANIMALS Pending - BOB I CT 4 POSS OF COCAINE Sentenced - BOB I CT 5 POSS PARA Not Guilty - BOB I CT 3 CUREL TV TO ANIMALS Pending OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE - TAMPERING WITH WITNESS No Info OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE - CT 1 TAMPERING WIWITNESS Pending MAYES, ANTHONY J 8/11/1980 SS-PC SG OOCH-OKCO-X-2 - FAILURE OF SEX OFFENDER TO REPORT TO DEPART OF MV Awaiting Sentence - FIRST DEGREE MURDER Pending - ROBBERY WITH A DEADLY WEAPON Pending TURNER, ANNETRIA LATOYA SS-CH SG D2W-D1-A-D103 HOMICIDE-WILFUL KILL - SECOND DEGREE MURDER No Info HOMICIDE-WILFUL KILL - cn FIRST DEGREE MURDER Pending HOMICIDE-WILFUL KILL - CT2 ATTEMPTED SECOND DEGREE MURDER Pending HOMICIDE-WILFUL KILL - CT2 ATTEMPTED SECOND DEGREE MURDER Pending JOHNSON, LARCELlOUS LAVERN SS-PC SG D1 S-D7-K-D721 LOS Booking Date Name ClassifICation DOB Housing 843.02 893.147 794.011 810.02 787.02 HOLD 787.01 812.13 108 RESIST OFFICER - CT 1 RAWOV NARCOTIC EQUIP-POSSESS - CT 2 POSS PARA SEX ASSL T - CT. 1 SEXUAL BATTERY -GREAT FORCE WRT # 04CF361 0 BURGL - CT. 3 BURGLARY OF A DWELLING WHILE ARMED O4CF3611 KIDNAP-FALSE IMPRISONMENT - CT. 4 FALSE IMPRISONMENT MISCELANEOUS - HOLD ORANGE COUNTY -ROBBERY W/FIREARM WRT# KIDNAP - CT2 KIDNAPPING ROBBERY - CT5 ROBBERY W/A DEADLY WEAPON 893.13 10/1112004 CAMBRIDGE, JERROD R SS-BP SG 893.147 843.02 893.13 893.147 658 6123/1979 COCAINE-POSSESS - CT 1 POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO SELL OR DELIVER COCAINE NARCOTIC EQUIP-POSSESS - CT 2 USE OR POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA RESIST OFFICER - CT 3 RESISTING OFFICER WITHOUT VIOLENCE MARIJUANA - CT 4 POSS OF CANNABIS UNDER 20G NARCOTIC EQUIP-POSSESS - POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA 11130/2004 MILLS, JOSHUA PAUL 12/10/1983 SS-CH SG 948.06 948.06 782.04 812.13 790.23 790.23 893.13 843.02 HOLD 948.06 948.06 948.06 631 12/21/2004 810.02 810.02 812.014 810.02 812.014 612 1/15/2005 893.13 9/19/2006 9:58:04 AM - VOP CT1 POSS COCAINE - VOP-CT1 SALE OF COCAINElCT2 POSS COCAINE, BOTH CTS CONCURRENT AND CONCURRENT TO CASE 021031 CF - ATT FIRST DEGREE MURDER WITH A FIREARM ROBBERY - ROBBERY W/FIREARM POSSESSION OF WEAPON - POSS F/A BY CONVICTED FELON POSSESSION OF WEAPON - POSS OF F/A BY A CONVICTED FELON MARIJUANA-POSSESS - POSS MARIJ U120 GRAMS RESIST OFFICER - RAWOV MISCELANEOUS - HOLD-BALTIMORE MARYLAND-1 ST DEG ATT MURDER PROB VIOLATION - VOP CT1 POSS OF COCAINE W/INTENT TO SELL PROB VIOLATION - VOP CT1 SALE OF COCAINE CT 2 POSS OF COCAINE PROB VIOLATION - VOP CT 1 POSS OF COCAINE PROFITT, BRIAN DAVID 8130/1979 RC BURGL - CT 8 BURGLARY OCCUPIED DWELLING BURGL - CT 9 BURGLARY OF A DWELLING VEH THEFT - CT 10 THIRD DEGREE GRAND THEFT BURGL - CT 11 BURGLARY OF A DWELLING WHILE ARMED LARC - CT 12 THIRD DEGREE GRAND THEFT DEJESUS, RAYMOND 2/21/1979 GP COCAINE-TRAFFIC - ct 1 TRAFFICING IN MDMA HALLUCINOGEN-MFG - CT 2 POSS COCAINE W/INTENT TO SELL Sentenced Sentenced Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending D1 S-D11-F-D1111 Pending Pending Pending ROR No Info D1 N-D4-B-D404 Pending Pending Awaiting Sentence No Info No Info No Info No Info No Info Pending Pending Closed Closed D1 N-D2-B-D203 Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending B3-D1-C-D105 Pending Pending '1J c: 0'" - -. o (J) Q) ct ,........ '< () o o -, Q. -. :::J Q) ,........ -. :::J cc () o c: T- O -. - o to ~ ex> ð 0') » < (J) a1 cc (J) ::J -< 3 (J) a m (J) ...., -< '1J o ::J '"C 3 c m m CD g '1J ::J o .....f '"C ...., C (J) ::J a 0.. õ' -. ::J ::J (J) N o o o N o o ...... I I N o o N -< CD S» .... N o o w N o o .þ. N o o UI N o o en Average Daily Population ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... -- co U) 0 ...... N W .þ. UI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ...... ~' I\.) 0 0 0 I I\.) 0 0 0) -< CD Q) ".-... ......, » -- en '< 0 ~ ......... en CD CD '"0 ......, ,..... Q) CD 3 (C 0" CD CD 0 ....., I\J -h CJ'1 0 I\.) Q) 0 -. -- 0 '< 0) "-" -- :::J 3 Q) ,...... CD -c 0 "'C c: -- Q) ,...... -. 0 :::J Average Daily I nmate Population .....l. ~ 8 8 ~~ k <»:t- <9ó :í"'~ <»:t- ~ ~(l1 .....l. .....l. .....l. ~ 8 .......¡ ~ .....l. ~ ~ 0 8 0 8 0 0 t/. ~ "'Ÿ~ ~ ~I" ~ ;()& <9~ ~& ~ o ~ó 1/.. t9..... OJ..: <9?;ó <2 t9..... t9Q <9~ ~<9..... -<l $0.;': . 'Í" ~~ ~ ~<9 -~-,-----,-~~.~_._.~------_.._~~.._-""...,.~.. --~.~~._-~."'- en ...... - r c:: o I~g ~ c: 1-, ::1 I ~I ~.~ o ::1 m I: ~~ IN m < o -, (I) ~ en -, I\JQ) II oce N 0(1) § .þ.O o ~- - I\J'< 0-0 00 Q)-c c: - Q) ...... -- o ::1 Average Daily Population ........ ~ -oJ ........ co co co ........ co co co I\.,) o 8 I\.,) 8 ........ I\.,) o ß I\.,) o o V,) I\.,) o ~ I\.,) o o (J'I ~ §S ~ o -< CD Q) -.. I -< CD Q) -.. - ,,-...,"< ~» o < """CD (j)-.. CD Q) -see CD CD 3 0 g......., -So ~Q) - -. "'~ o 0- œ:::J '-'3 Q) ........ CD "U o "'C c: - Q) ........ -. o :::J ~ (0 (0 ~ I i'.) o o a> .....fo N W g C1I CÐ 0 0 8 0 0 8 ~ 0 0 0 ")~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ 't~ CJ Q) (\~ s: -. - 0 '< of. :J < ~) ~ ........ -. ø =r 0 - - ~ 0 '< Q) -+. ........ ':Þ N en ~ -. 0 (1) 0 0 :J ~ .þ. "0 CD ,...... ~ (1) -, 0 3 Q) """"h o-CC -C ~ (1) CD ~ N ...., -, 0 I\J (J) 0 0 ...,~ ow ..þ. N CT ~It I\J 0 Q) r¡t 0 0 ........ -. 0 ..þ. 0 , 0) :J N '-" I ~ 0 0 -C en N cté 0 0 <>.6& 0 "'C ~ c: ~ (J) - z..& Q) ~d ........ ~~ -. <) 0 :J ~& ~ ¡ U.S. Department of Jµstice Office of Justice Programs September 2006, NCJ 213600 Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates Doris J. James and Lauren E. Glaze BJS Statisticians At midyear 2005 more than half of all prison and jail inmates had a mental health problem, including 705,600 inmates in State prisons, 70,200 in Fed- eral prisons, and 479,900 in local jails. These estimates represented 56% of State prisoners, 45% of Federal prison- ers, and 64% of jail inmates. The find- ings in this report were based on data from personal interviews with State and Federal prisoners in 2004 and local jail inmates in 2002. Mental health problems were defined by two measures: a recent history or symp- toms of a mental health problem. They must have occurred in the 12 months prior to the interview. A recent history of mental health problems included a clini- cal diagnosis or treatment by a mental health professional. Symptoms of a mental disorder were based on criteria specified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edi- tion (DSM-IV). Mental health problem Any mental problem Recent history Symptoms Percent of inmates in - State Federal Local prison prison jail 56% 45% 64% 24 14 21 49 40 60 More than two-fifths of State prisoners (43%) and more than half of jail inmates (54%) reported symptoms that met the criteria for mania. About 23% of State prisoners and 30% of jail inmates reported symptoms of major depression. An estimated 15% of State prisoners and 24% of jail inmates reported symp- toms that met the criteria for a psychotic disorder. High prevalence of mental health problems among prison and jail inmates Percent of inmates in - State prison Local jail With With mental mental problem Without problem Without 61% 56% 44% 36% 25 19 26 20 74% 56% 76% 53% 63% 49% 62% 42% 13% 6% 17% 9% 27 10 24 8 39 25 37 19 58% 43% 19% 9% 24 14 8 2 20% 10% 9% 3% Selected characteristics Criminal record Current or past violent offense 3 or more prior incarcerations Substance dependence or abuse Drug use in month before arrest Family background Homelessness in year before arrest Past physical or sexual abuse Parents abused alcohol or drugs Charged with violating facility rules* Physical or verbal assault Injured in a fight since admission *Includes items not shown. · Nearly a quarter of both State pris- oners and jail inmates who had a mental health problem, compared to a fifth of those without, had served 3 or more prior incarcerations. · Female inmates had higher rates of mental health problems than male inmates (State prisons: 73% of females and 55% of males; local jails: 75% of females and 63% of males). · About 74% of State prisoners and 76% of local jail inmates who had a mental health problem met criteria for substance dependence or abuse. · Nearly 63% of State prisoners who had a mental health problem had used drugs in the month before their arrest, compared to 49% of those without a mental health problem. · State prisoners who had a mental health problem were twice as likely as those without to have been homeless in the year before their arrest (13% compared to 6%). · Jail inmates who had a mental health problem (24%) were three times as likely as jail inmates without (8%) to report being physically or sexually abused in the past. · Over 1 in 3 State prisoners and 1 in 6 jail inmates who had a mental health problem had received treat- ment since admission. · State prisoners who had a mental health problem were twice as likely as State prisoners without to have been injured in a fight since admission (20% compared to 10%). " A quarter of State prisoners had a history of mental health problems Among all inmates, State prisoners were most likely to report a recent his- tory of a mental health problem (table 1). About 24% of State prisoners had a recent history of a mental health prob- lem, followed by 21 % of jail inmates, and 14% of Federal prisoners. A recent history of mental health prob- lems was measured by several ques- tions in the BJS' inmate surveys. Offenders were asked about whether in the past 12 months they had been told by a mental health professional that they had a mental disorder or because of a mental health problem had stayed overnight in a hospital, used prescribed medication, or received professional mental health therapy. These items were classified as indicating a recent history of a mental health problem. State prisoners (18%), Federal prison- ers (10%), and jail inmates (14%) most commonly reported that they had used prescribed medication for a mental problem in the year before arrest or since admission. They were least likely to report an overnight stay in a hospital for a mental health problem. Approxi- mately, 5% of inmates in State prisons, 2% in Federal prisons, and 5% in local jails reported an overnight stay in a hospital for a mental health problem. Prevalence of symptoms of mental disorders among prison and jail inmates The Survey of Inmates in State and Estimates of DSM-IV symptoms of Federal Correctional Facilities, 2004, mental disorder provide a baseline and the Survey of Inmates in Local indication of mental health problems Jails, 2002, included a modified among inmates rather than a clinical structured clinical interview for the diagnosis of mental illness. Major DSM-IV. The surveys collected depression or mania symptoms information on experiences of covered a range of feelings and inmates in the past 12 months that behaviors, such as persistent would indicate symptoms of major sadness, loss of interest in activities, depression, mania, or psychotic insomnia or hypersomnia, disorders. The surveys did not psychomotor agitation, and assess the severity or duration of the persistent anger or irritability. symptoms, and no exclusions were made for symptoms due to medical illness, bereavement, or substance use. Inmates in mental hospitals or otherwise physically or mentally unable to complete the surveys were excluded from the sample. Insomnia or hypersomnia and persistent anger were the most frequently reported major depression or mania episodes with nearly half of jail inmates (49%) reporting these symptoms. Attempted suicide was the least reported symptom by State prisoners (13%), Federal prisoners (6%) and local jail inmates (13%). A psychotic disorder was indicated by any signs of delusions or hallucinations during the 12-month period. Delusions were characterized by the offenders' belief that other people were controlling their brain or thoughts, could read their mind, or were spying on them. Hallucinations included reports of seeing things others said they did not see or hearing voices others did not hear. Approximately, 24% of jail inmates, 15% of State prisoners, and 10% of Federal prisoners reported at least one symptom of psychotic disorder (table 1). Percent of inmates in - Percent of inmates in - Symptoms in past 12 months State Federal Local Number of positive State Federal Local or since admission prison prison jail responses prison prison jail Major depressive or mania symptoms Major depressive Persistent sad, numb or empty mood 32.9% 23.7% 39.6% disorder symptoms Loss of interest or pleasure in activities 35.4 30.8 36.4 0 29_5% 38.8% 22.8% Increased or decreased appetite 32.4 25.1 42.8 1-2 26.1 27.9 23.8 Insomnia or hypersomnia 39.8 32.8 49.2 3-4 20.5 17.1 23.0 Psychomotor agitation or retardation 39.6 31.4 46.2 5 or more 23.9 16.2 30.4 Feelings of worthlessness or excessive guilt 35.0 25_3 43.0 Mania disorder Diminished ability to concentrate or think 28.4 21.3 34.1 symptoms Ever attempted suicide 13.0 6.0 12.9 0 27.3% 35_6% 22.5% Persistent anger or irritability 37.8 30.5 49.4 1 21.5 23.3 17.0 Increased/decreased interest in sexual activities 34.4 29.0 29.5 2 20.5 17.7 20.1 Thoughts of revenge 28.4 21.3 34.1 3 177 14.0 22.0 Psychotic disorder symptoms 4 13.1 9.4 18.4 Delusions 11.8% 7.8% 17.5% Psychotic disorder Hallucinations 7.9 4_8 13.7 symptoms Note: Data are based on inmate self-report in the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Cor- 0 84.6% 89.8% 76_0% rectlonal Facilities, 2004, and the Survey of Inmates in Local Jails, 2002. See References for 1 11.1 7.8 168 sources on measuring symptoms of mental disorders based on a modified Structured Clinical 2 4.2 2.4 7.2 Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. fourth edition (DSM-IV). 2 Mental Health Problems of Pnson and Jail Inmates Symptoms of mental disorder highest among jail inmates Jail inmates had the highest rate of symptoms of a mental health disorder (60%), followed by State (49%), and Federal prisoners (40%). Symptoms of a mental health disorder were mea- sured by a series of questions adopted from a structured clinical interview for diagnosing mental disorders based on the DSM-IV (see box on page 2 and References for sources on DSM-IV measures). The questions addressed behaviors or symptoms related to major depression, mania, or psychotic disorders that occurred in the 12 months before the interview. To meet the criteria for major depres- sion, inmates had to report a depres- sed mood and decreased interest or pleasure in activities, along with 3 additional symptoms of depression. In order to meet the criteria for mania, inmates had to report 3 symptoms during the 12-month period. For a psychotic disorder, 1 symptom of delu- sions or hallucinations met the criteria. The high rate of symptoms of mental health disorder among jail inmates may reflect the role of local jails in the criminal justice system. Jails are locally operated correctional facilities that receive offenders after an arrest and hold them for a short period of time, pending arraignment, trial, conviction, or sentencing. Among other functions, local jails hold mentally ill persons pending their movement to appropriate mental health facilities. While jails hold inmates sentenced to short terms (usually less than 1 year), State and Federal prisons hold offend- ers who typically are convicted and sentenced to serve more than 1 year. In general, because of the longer period of incarceration, prisons provide a greater opportunity for inmates to receive a clinical mental health assess- ment, diagnosis, and treatment by a mental health professional.1 1 Persons who have been judged by a court to be mentally incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity are not held in these cor- rectional facilities and are not covered by this report Table 1. Recent history and symptoms of mental health problems among prison and jail inmates Percent of inmates in - State Federal Local Mental health problem prison prison jail Any mental health problem 56.2% 44.8% 64.2% Recent history of mental health problema 24.3% 13.8% 20_6% Told had disorder by mental health professional 9.4 5.4 10.9 Had overnight hospital stay 5.4 2_1 4.9 Used prescribed medications 18.0 10.3 14.4 Had professional mental health therapy 15.1 8.3 10.3 Symptoms of mental health disordersb 49_2% 39.8% 60.5% Major depressive disorder 23_5 16.0 29.7 Mania disorder 43.2 35_1 54.5 Psychotic disorder 15.4 10.2 23.9 Note: Includes inmates who reported an impairment due to a mental problem. Data are based on the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional. Facilities, 2004, and the Survey of Inmates in Local Jails. 2002. See Methodology for details on survey sample. See References for sources on measuring symptoms of mental disorder based on a Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV). aln year before arrest or since admission_ bin the 12 months prior to the interview. Table 2. Prevalence of mental health problems among prison and jail inmates State prison Federal prison Local jail inmates inmates inmates Mental health problem Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Any mental health problem" 705,600 56_2% 70.200 44_8% 479,900 64.2% History and symptoms 219,700 17.5 13,900 8_9 127,800 17.1 History only 85,400 6.8 7,500 4.8 26.200 3.5 Symptoms only 396,700 31.6 48,100 30_7 322.900 43.2 No mental health problem 549.900 43.8% 86,500 55.2% 267,600 35.8% Note: Number of inmates was estimated based on the June 30. 2005 custody population in State prisons (1,255,514), Federal prisons (156,643, excluding 19,311 inmates held in private facilities), and local jails (747,529). "Details do not add to totals due to rounding. Includes State prisoners, Federal prisoners, and local jail inmates who reported an impairment due to a mental problem. High proportion of inmates had symptoms of a mental health disorder without a history Around 4 in 10 local jail inmates and 3 in 10 State and Federal prisoners were found to have symptoms of a mental disorder without a recent history (table 2). A smaller proportion of inmates had both a recent history and symp- toms of mental disorder: 17% in State prisons, 9% in Federal prisons, and 17% in local jails. An estimated 7% of State prisoners, 5% of Federal prisoners, and 3% of local jail inmates were found to have a recent history of a mental health problem and no symptoms. About 1 in 10 persons age 18 or older in the U.S. general population met DSM-IV criteria for symptoms of a mental health disorder . An estimated 11 % of the U.S. popu- Percent of U.S. population laHon age 18 or older met criteria for age 18 or older with symp- toms of a mental disorder mental health disorders, based on Total Male Female data in the National Epidemiologic Any symptom 10_6% 8.7% 12.4% Survey on Alcohol and Related Condi- Major depressiona 7.9 5.5 10.1 (NESARC) Mania disordera 1.8 1.6 2.0 tions, 2001-2002 . Psychotic disorderb 3.1 3.2 3.1 . Similar to the prison and jail inmate Note: See Methodology for sources on mental populations, females in the general health disorders in the general population. Population had higher rates of mental aln the last 12 months, not excluding symptoms due to bereavement, substance use, or a disorders than males (12% compared medical condition \ \ to 9%). bBased on life-time occurrence. Source: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and I Alcoholism. NESARC, 2001-2002 l Mental Health Problems of Pnson and Jail Inmates 3 ~ Table 3. Prison and jail inmates who had a mental health problem, by selected characteristics Percent of inmates in - State Federal Local Characteristic prison prison jail All inmates 56.2% 44.8% 64.2% Gender Male 55.0% 43.6% 62.8% Female 73.1 61.2 75.4 Race Whitea 62.2% 49.6% 71.2% Blacka 54.7 45_9 63.4 Hispanic 46.3 36_8 50_7 Othera,b 61.9 50.3 69.5 Age 24 or younger 62.6% 57.8% 70.3% 25-34 57.9 48.2 64.8 35-44 55.9 40.1 62_0 45-54 51.3 41.6 52.5 55 or older 39.6 36.1 52.4 aExcludes persons of Hispanic origin. blncludes American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians. other Pacific Islanders, and inmates who specified more than one race. Mental health problems more common among female, white, and young inmates Female inmates had much higher rates of mental health problems than male inmates. An estimated 73% of females in State prisons, compared to 55% of male inmates, had a mental health problem (table 3). In Federal prisons, the rate was 61% of females compared to 44% of males; and in local jails, 75% of females compared to 63% of male inmates. The same percentage of females in State prisons or local jails (23%) said that in the past 12 months they had been diagnosed with a mental disorder by a mental health professional. This was almost three times the rate of male inmates (around 8%) who had been told they had a mental health problem. Percent of inmates in - State prison Local jail Mental problem· Male Female Male Female Recent history 22% 48% 18% 40% Diagnosed 8 23 9 23 Overnight stay 5 9 4 9 Medication 16 39 12 30 Therapy 14 32 9 23 Symptoms 48% 62% 59% 70% ·See table 1 for detailed description of categories. Table 4. Homelessness, employment before arrest, and family background of prison and jail inmates, by mental health status Percent of inmates in - State prison Federal prison Local jail With With With mental mental mental Characteristic problem Without problem Without problem Without Homelessness in past year 13.2% 6.3% 6.6% 2.6% 17.2% 8.8% Employed in month before arrest" 70_1% 75_6% 67.7% 76.2% 68.7% 75.9% Ever physically or sexually abused before admission 27.0% 10.5% 17.0% 6.4% 24.2% 7.6% Physically abused 22.4 8.3 13.7 5.4 20.4 5.7 Sexually abused 12.5 3.8 7.3 1.7 10.2 3.2 While growing up - Ever received public assistanceb 42.5% 30.6% 33.3% 24_9% 42.6% 30.3% Ever lived in foster home, agency or institution 18.5 9.5 9.8 6.3 14.5 6.0 Lived most of the time with - Both parents 41.9% 47.7% 45.4% 50.5% 40.5% 49.1% One parent 43.8 40.8 39.8 38_8 45.4 40.4 Someone else 11.6 10.2 13-5 10_3 12.0 9.4 Parents or guardians ever abused - 39.3 25_1 33.3 20.0 37.3 18.7 Alcohol 23.6 16.9 21.7 15.4 23.2 14.1 Drugs 31 1.9 2.2 1.4 2.7 1.1 Both alcohol and drugs 12.7 6.2 9.4 3_2 11.5 3.4 Neither 60.7 74.9 66.7 80_0 62.7 81.3 Family member ever incarcerated - 51.7% 41.3% 44.6% 38.9% 52.1% 36.2% Mother 7.2 4_0 5.0 3.2 9.4 3.4 Father 20.1 13.4 15.3 9.9 22.1 12-6 Brother 35.5 29.4 29.4 27.0 34.8 25.8 Sister 7.0 5.1 5.5 4.2 11.3 5.1 Child 2.7 2.3 3.4 2.8 4.0 2.6 Spouse 1.7 0_9 2.6 1.8 2.4 0.9 aThe reference period for jail inmates was in the month before admission. bpublic assistance includes public housing, AFDC, food stamps, Medicaid, WIC, and other welfare programs. The prevalence of mental health prob- lems varied by racial or ethnic group. Among State prisoners, 62% of white inmates, compared to 55% of blacks and 46% of Hispanics, were found to have a mental health problem. Among jail inmates, whites (71 %) were also more likely than blacks (63%) or His- panics (51 %) to have a mental health problem. The rate of mental health problems also varied by the age of inmates. Inmates age 24 or younger had the highest rate of mental health problems and those age 55 or older had the low- est rate. Among State prisoners, an estimated 63% of those age 24 or younger had a mental health problem, compared to 40% of those age 55 or older. An estimated 70% of local jail inmates age 24 or younger had a men- tal health problem, compared to 52% of those age 55 or older. 4 Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates Homelessness, foster care more common among inmates who had mental health problems State prisoners (13%) and local jail inmates (17%) who had a mental health problem were twice as likely as inmates without a mental health problem (6% in State prisons; 9% in local jails) to have been homeless in the year before their incarceration (table 4)_ About 18% of State prisoners who had a mental health problem, compared to 9% of State prisoners who did not have a mental problem. said that they had lived in a foster home, agency, or insti- tution while growing up. Among jail inmates, about 14% of those who had a mental health prob- lem had lived in a foster home, agency, or institution while growing up, com- pared to 6% of jail inmates who did not have a mental health problem. t Low rates of employment, high rates of illegal income among inmates who had mental problems An estímated 70% of State prisoners who had a mental health problem, compared to 76% of those without, said they were employed in the month before their arrest. Among Federal prisoners, 68% of those who had a mental health problem were employed, compared to 76% of those who did not have a mental problem. Among jail inmates, 69% of those who had a mental health problem reported that they were employed, while 76% of those without were employed in the month before their arrest. Of State prisoners who had a mental health problem, 65% had received income from wages or salary in the month before their arrest. This percent- age was larger for inmates without a mental health problem (71%). Over a quarter (28%) of State prisoners who had a mental health problem reported income from illegal sources, compared to around a fifth (21 %) of State prison- ers without a mental problem. Percent of State prison inmates With mental problem 65% 6 Sources of incomea Wages, salary Welfare Assistance from family or friends 14 8 Illegal income 28 21 Compensation paymentsb 9 6 alncludes personal income in month before arrest, except for compensation which was in the month before admission. blncludes Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments and pension Without 71% 4 Table 5. Substance dependence or abuse among prison and jail inmates, by mental health status Percent of inmates in - State prison Federal prison With With With Substance dependence mental mental mental or abuse problem Without problem Without problem Without Any alcohol or drugs 74.1% 55.6% 63.6% 49.5% 76.4% 53.2% Dependence 53.9 34.5 45.1 27.3 56.3 25.4 Abuse only 20.2 21-1 18.5 22-2 20.1 27_8 Alcohol 50.8% 36.0% 43.7% 30.3% 53.4% 34.6% Dependence 30.4 17.9 25.1 12.7 29.0 11.8 Abuse only 20.4 18.0 18.6 17.7 24.4 22.8 Drugs 61.9% 42.6% 53.2% 39.2% 63.3% 36.0% Dependence 43.8 26.1 37.1 22.0 46.0 17.6 Abuse only 18.0 16.5 16.1 17.2 17.3 18.4 No dependence or abuse 25.9% 44.4% 36.4% 50.5% 23.6% 46.8% Note: Substance dependence or abuse was based on criteria specified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV). For details, see Substance Dependence, Abuse and Treatment of Jail Inmates. 2002, <http://www.ojp.usdoj_gov/bjs/ abstract/sdatji02.htm> . Local jail Past physical or sexual abuse more prevalent among inmates who had mental health problems State prisoners who had a mental health problem (27%) were over two times more likely than those without (10%) to report being physically or sexually abused in the past. Jail inmates who had a mental health problem were three times more likely than jail inmates without to have been physically or sexually abused in the past (24% compared to 8%). Family members of inmates with mental problems had high rates of substance use and incarceration Inmates who had a mental health prob- lem were more likely than inmates without to have family members who abused drugs or alcohol or both. Among State prisoners, 39% of those High rates of both mental health problems and substance dependence or abuse among State prison and local jail inmates . An estimated 42% of inmates in Mental health State prisons and 49% in local jails problems and substance depen- were found to have both a mental dence or abuse health problem and substance Both dependence or abuse. Dependence or abuse only 24.4 Mental problems only 14.5 None 19.5 . Slightly less than a quarter (24%) of State prisoners and a fifth (19%) of local jail inmates met the criteria for substance dependence or abuse only. Percent of inmates in - State Federal Local prison prison jail 41.7% 28.5% 48.7% 27-3 16.3 27.8 18.9 15.0 17.3 who had a mental health problem reported that a parent or guardian had abused alcohol, drugs, or both while they were growing up. In comparison, 25% of State prisoners without a men- tal problem reported parental abuse of alcohol, drugs, or both. A third (33%) of Federal prisoners who had a mental health problem, com- pared to a fifth (20%) of those without, reported that a parent or guardian had abused alcohol, drugs, or both while they were growing up. An estimated 37% of jail inmates who had a mental health problem said a parent had abused alcohol, drugs, or both while they were growing up. This was almost twice the rate for jail inmates without a mental health prob- lem (19%). The majority of prison and jail inmates who had a mental health problem (52%) reported that they had a family member who had been incarcerated in the past. Among those without a men- tal health problem, about 41 % of State inmates and 36% of jails inmates reported that a family member had served time. Over a third of both State prisoners and local jail inmates who had a men- tal health problem (35%) had a brother who had served time in prison or jail. The rate for inmates without a mental health problem was 29% in State pris- ons and 26% in local jails. Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates 5 , Inmates who had mental health problems had high rates of substance dependence or abuse Among inmates who had a mental health problem, local jail inmates had the highest rate of dependence or abuse of alcohol or drugs (76%), fol- lowed by State prisoners (74%), and Federal prisoners (64%) (table 5). Sub- stance dependence or abuse was measured as defined in the DSM-IV.2 Among inmates without a mental health problem, 56% in State prisons, 49% in Federal prisons, and 53% in local jails were dependent on or abused alcohol or drugs. 2For a detailed description of the DSM-IV mea- sures, see Substance Dependence, Abuse and Treatment of Jail inmates, 2002, <http:// www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/sdatji02.htm . > By specific type of substance, inmates who had a mental health problem had higher rates of dependence or abuse of drugs than alcohol. Among State prisoners who had a mental problem, 62% were dependent on or abused drugs and 51 % alcohol. An estimated 63% of local jail inmates who had a mental problem were dependent on or abused drugs, while about 53% were dependent on or abused alcohol. When dependence was estimated separately from abuse only, local jail inmates who had a mental health problem had the highest rate of drug dependence (46%). They were two and a half times more likely to be dependent on drugs than jail inmates without a mental problem (18%). Table 6. Substance use among prison inmates and convicted jail inmates, by mental health status Type of substance Alcohol or drugs Regular use" In month before offense At time of offense Drugs Regular use" In month before offense At time of offense Alcohol Regular use" 67.9% 58.3% 66.0% 58.2% 72.6% 61.8% In month before offense 61.7 52.5 59_5 53.6 80.7 74.1 At time of offense 34.0 27.5 21.7 15.1 35.0 30.4 Binge drinkingb 43.5 29_5 37.8 25.7 48.2 29_9 "Regular alcohol use is defined as daily or almost daily or more than once a week for more than a month. Regular drug use is defined as once a week or more for at least one month bBinge drinking is defined as having consumed a fifth of liquor in a single day, or the equivalent of 20 drinks, 3 bottles of wine. or 3 six-packs of beer. State prison With mental problem Without 87.1% 80.3 53.2 77.2% 70.4 42_5 75_5% 62.8 37.5 61.2% 49.1 25.8 Percent of inmates in - Federal prison With mental problem Without 82.3% 75.8 411 75.4% 68.1 30.6 Local jail With mental problem Without 89.9% 81.6 53.8 78.7% 69.6 42.8 71.0% 571 31.1 59.2% 45.2 23.0 78.1% 62.1 34.0 57.5% 41.7 19.8 Table 7. Drug use in the month before the offense among convicted prison and jail inmates, by mental health status Percent of inmates in - State prison Federal prison With With Types of drug used mental mental in month before offense problem Without problem Any drug 62.8% 49.1% 57.1% Marijuana or hashish 45.7% 33.3% 41.2% Cocaine or crack 24.4 17.9 21.1 Heroin/opiates 8.9 7.2 7_2 Depressants" 7_3 3.0 6.7 Methamphetamlnes 12_6 8.8 10.9 Other stimulantsb 5.8 2.8 4.5 HallucinogensC 8.0 3.4 9.3 I "Include barbiturates, tranquilizers. and quaaludes. blnclude amphetamines. ¡ clnclude LSD. PCP. and ecstasy. Without 45.2% 32.0% 15.5 4.7 2.7 9.6 2.5 3.0 6 Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates Local jail With mental problem 62.1% 43.4% 24.2 9.6 8.5 11.7 5.2 7.5 Without 41.7% 27.1% 14.7 4.6 2.0 6.2 2.4 2.9 A larger percentage of State prisoners who had a mental health problem than those without were found to be depen- dent on drugs (44% compared to 26%). Among Federal prisoners, 37% who had a mental health problem were found to be dependent on drugs, com- pared to 22% of those without. State prisoners (30%) and local jail inmates (29%) who had a mental health problem had about the same rate of alcohol dependence. A quarter of Federal prisoners (25%) who had a mental problem were dependent on alcohol. Over a third of inmates who had mental health problems had used drugs at the time of the offense Over a third (37%) of State prisoners who had a mental health problem said they had used drugs at the time of the offense, compared to over a quarter (26%) of State prisoners without a mental problem (table 6). Also, over a third (34%) of local jail inmates who had a mental health problem said they had used drugs at the time of the offense, compared to a fifth (20%) of jail inmates who did not have a mental problem. Marijuana or hashish was the most common drug inmates said they had used in the month before the offense (table 7). Among inmates who had a mental health problem, more than two- fifths of those in State prisons (46%), Federal prisons (41%), or local jails (43%) reported they had used mari- juana or hashish in the month before the offense. Almost a quarter of inmates in State prisons or local jails who had a mental health problem (24%) reported they had used cocaine or crack in the month before the offense. A smaller percentage of inmates who had a men- tal health problem had used metham- phetamines in the month before the offense - 13% of State prisoners, 11 % of Federal prisoners, and 12% of jail inmates. Binge drinking prevalent among inmates who had mental problems Inmates who had a mental health prob- lem were more likely than inmates without a mental problem to report a I binge drinking experience. Among State prisoners who had a mental health problem, 43% said they had participated in binge drinking in the past, compared to 29% of State prison- ers without mental problems. Similarly, jail inmates who had mental problems (48%) had a much higher rate of binge drinking than jail inmates without mental problems (30%). Inmates who had a mental problem were more likely than inmates without to have been using alcohol at the time of the offense (State prisoners, 34% compared to 27%; Federal prisoners, 22% compared to 15%; and jail inmates, 35% compared to 30%.) Violent offenses common among State prisoners who had a mental health problem Among State prisoners who had a mental health problem, nearly half (49%) had a violent offense as their most serious offense, followed by property (20%) and drug offenses (19%) (table 8). Among all types of offenses, robbery was the most com- mon offense (14%), followed by drug trafficking (13%) and homicide (12%). An estimated 46% of State prisoners without a mental health problem were held for a violent offense, including . 13% for homicide and 11 % for robbery. Table 8. Most serious offense among prison and jail inmates, by mental health status Percent of inmates in - State prison Federal prison Local jail With With With mental mental mental Most serious offense problem Without problem Without problem Without Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Violent offenses 49.0% 46.5% 16.0% 13.2% 26.5% 23.7% Homicide 11.6 12.9 2.5 2.3 2.6 2.5 Sexual assault* 11.0 10.4 1.1 0.7 3.4 3.6 Robbery 13.6 11.3 9.6 7.6 5.7 51 Assault 10.5 9.7 2.0 1.9 12.5 10.5 Property offenses 19.6% 17.7% 7.2% 6.1% 26.9% 19.7% Burglary 8.6 7.7 0.7 0_3 7.9 4.2 , Larceny/theft 4.2 3.5 0.5 0.4 7.7 5.6 Fraud 3.0 2.7 4.9 4.5 5.3 4.2 Drug offenses 19.3% 23.8% 51.3% 58.3% 23.4% 27_0% Possession 5.7 6.3 2.0 3.8 10.1 12.3 Trafficking 12.9 17.0 47.7 52.6 11.6 12_9 I Public-order offenses 11.9% 11.9% 22.3% 19_0% 22.6% 29.3% I Weapons 2.6 2.4 14.0 8.5 2.3 1.4 DWI/DUI 2.2 3.2 02 02 5.5 8.1 Note: Summary categories include offenses not shown. *Includes rape and other sexual assault. Table 9. Use of weapon, by mental health status of convicted violent State prison and local jail inmates Percent of inmates in - State prison Local jail With With mental mental Use of weapons problem Without problem Without Any weapon 37.2% 36.9% 20.6% 212% Firearm 24.4 27.5 12.3 13.1 Knife or sharp object 10.2 7.4 6.1 5.1 Other weapons* 3.7 2.7 2.8 4.0 No weapon 62.8% 63.1 % 79.4% 78.8% Number of violent inmates 328,670 242.524 60,787 34,305 Note: Details do not add to total because inmates may have used more than one weapon. 'Other weapons include blunt objects, stun guns, toy guns, or other specified weapons. About 24% of State prisoners without a mental problem were held for drug offenses, particularly drug trafficking (17%). Almost an equal percentage of jail inmates who had a mental health prob- lem were held for violent (26%) and property (27%) offenses. About 12% were held for aggravated assault. Jail inmates who had a mental health prob- lem were two times more likely than jail inmates without a mental problem to be held for burglary (8% compared to 4%). Use of a weapon did not vary by mental health status Convicted violent offenders who had a mental health problem were as likely as those without to have used a weapon during the offense (table 9). An estimated 37% of both State prison- ers who had a mental problem and those without said they had used a weapon during the offense. By specific type of weapon, among convicted violent offenders in State prisons who had a mental health prob- lem, slightly less than a quarter (24%) had used a firearm, while a tenth (10%) had used a knife or sharp object. Violent criminal record more prevalent among inmates who had a mental health problem State prisoners who had a mental health problem (61 %) were more likely than State prisoners without (56%) to have a current or past violent offense. Percent of State prison inmates with violent criminal record With mental problem 61% Violent criminal record Any violent offense Current violent offense, no prior 13 Violent recidivist 47 Note: Details may not add to total due to rounding. Without 56% 17 39 Among repeat offenders, an estimated 47% of State prisoners who had a mental health problem were violent recidivists, compared to 39% of State prisoners without a mental problem (table 10). Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates 7 Nearly a third (32%) of local jail inmates who had a mental health prob- lem were repeat violent offenders, while about a quarter (22%) of jail inmates without a mental problem were violent recidivists. A larger proportion of inmates who had a mental health problem had served more prior sentences than inmates without a mental problem (table 11). An estimated 47% of State prisoners who had a mental health problem, com- pared to 39% of those without, had served 3 or more prior sentences to probation or incarceration. Among jail inmates, 42% of those with a mental health problem had served served 3 or more prior sentences to probation or incarceration, compared to 33% of jail inmates without a mental problem_ State prisoners who had mental health problems had longer sentences than prisoners without Overall, State prisoners who had a mental health problem reported a mean maximum sentence that was 5 months longer than State prisoners without a mental problem (146 months compared to 141 months) (table 12). Among jail inmates, the mean sen- tence for those who had a mental prob- lem was 5 months shorter than that for jail inmates without a mental problem (40 months compared to 45 months). By most serious offense, excluding offenders sentenced to life or death, both violent State prisoners who had a mental health problem and those with- out had about the same mean sen- tence length. Violent State prisoners who had a mental health problem were sentenced to serve a mean maximum sentence length of 212 months and those without, 211 months_ Among prisoners sentenced to life or death, there was little variation in sen- tence length by mental health status (not shown in table). About 8% of State prisoners who had a mental health problem and 9% of those without were sentenced to life or death. Among Fed- eral prisoners, 3% of both those who had a mental health problem and those without were sentenced to life or death. Table 10. Criminal record of prison and jail inmates, by mental health status Percent of inmates in - State prison Federal prison Local jail With With With mental mental mental Criminal record problem Without problem Without problem Without No prior sentence 20.5% 27.0% 322% 36.9% 34.9% 43.3% Current violent offense 13.4 16.9 5.1 4.9 12.1 13_8 Current drug offense 3.1 5.1 15.2 21.6 8.8 12.6 Current other offense 4.1 5.0 11.9 10.4 14_0 16.8 Violent recidivist 47.4% 39.2% 27.5% 23.8% 31.9% 22.4% Current and prior violent 17.2 13.4 7.4 4.4 9.9 6_8 Current violent only 17.7 15.3 4.9 4.4 11.4 6.9 Prior violent only 12.5 10.4 15.3 15.0 10.5 8.7 Nonviolent recidivist 32.0% 33.8% 40.3% 39.2% 33.2% 34.3% Prior drugs only 3.0 4.0 7.1 9_5 3.0 3.4 Other prior offenses 29.0 29.8 33.2 29.8 30.2 30.9 Note: Excludes inmates for whom offense and prior probation or incarceration sentences were unknown. Table 11. Number of prior probation or incarceration sentences among prison and jail inmates, by mental health status Percent of inmates in - State prison Federal prison Local jail With With With Number of prior mental mental mental sentences problem Without problem Without problem Without 0 22.1% 28.5% 34.1% 38.3% 24_5% 30.6% 1 15.3 16.1 14.9 16.5 16.8 18.9 2 15.5 16.8 15.6 14_9 16.7 17.2 3-5 26.3 24_0 21.3 20.1 22.8 20.3 6-10 13.9 10.6 10.0 7.1 12.4 8.6 11 or more 6.9 4.0 4.0 3.1 6_7 4.4 Note: Excludes inmates for whom prior probation or incarceration sentences were unknown. Table 12. Mean maximum sentence length and mean total time expected to serve, by mental health status and offense Mean maximum Mean total time expected sentence lengtha to serve until releaseb With mental With mental Most serious offense problem Without problem Without State prison inmates All offensesc 146 mos 141 mas 93 mos 89 mas Violent 212 211 139 138 Property 103 96 60 58 Drug 84 94 48 50 Public-order 81 66 51 40 Federal prison inmates All offensesc 128 mos 135 mos 99 mos 106 mas Violent 174 202 119 131 Property 70 53 63 58 Drug 131 139 103 112 Public-order 102 100 87 83 Local jail inmates All offensesc 40 mos 45 mos 14 mos 18 mas Violent 67 73 18 31 Property 41 36 16 14 Drug 40 59 18 25 Public-order 16 16 7 8 aBased on the total maximum sentence for all consecutive sentences. Excludes inmates for whom offense was unknown. bBased on time served when interviewed and time to be served until the expected date of release. Excludes inmates for whom admission date or expected release date were unknown. clncludes other offenses not shown 8 Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates State prisoners who had a mental health problem expected to serve 4 months longer than those without Overall, the mean time State prisoners who had a mental health problem expected to serve was 4 months longer than State prisoners without' a mental problem (93 months compared to 89 months). Among convicted jail inmates who expected to serve their time in a local jail, there was little varia- tion by mental health status in the Table 13. Mean time expected to be served by convicted local jail inmates sentenced to jail Percent of convicted local jail inmates With Mean time expected mental to be served problem Without Less than 3 months 27.4% 26.8% 3 to 6 months 27.9 27.3 7 to 12 months 24.0 22.4 13t024 months 9.7 8.7 25 to 36 months 3.7 3.4 37 to 60 months 3.2 5.0 More than 5 years 4.0 6.4 Number of inmates 115,290 72,356 Note: Excludes inmates for whom admission date or expected release date were unknown. amount of time expected to be served. About 55% of those who had a mental problem, and 54% of those without, expected to serve 6 months or less (table 13). A third of State prisoners who had mental health problems had received treatment since admission State prisoners who had a mental health problem (34%) had the highest rate of mental health treatment since admission, followed by Federal prison- ers (24%) and local jail inmates (17%) (table 14)_ All Federal prisons and most State prisons and jail jurisdictions, as a mat- ter of policy, provide mental health ser- vices to inmates, including screening inmates at intake for mental health problems, providing therapy or coun- seling by trained mental health profes- sionals, and distributing psychotropic medication.3 3See Mental Health Treatment in State Prisons, 2000, <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstractl mhtspOO.htm> and Census of Jails, 1999, <http:l Iwww.ojp_usdoj_gov/bjs/abstractlcj99.htm> . Table 14. Mental health treatment received by inmates who had a mental health problem Type of mental health treatment Ever received mental health treatment' Had overnight hospital stay Used prescribed medications Had professional mental health therapy Received treatment during year before arrest Had overnight hospital stay Used prescribed medications On prescribed medication at time of arrest Had professional mental health therapy Received treatment after admission Had overnight hospital stay Used prescribed medications Had professional mental health therapy Note: Excludes other mental health treatment Percent of inmates who had a mental problem in - State prison Federal prison Local jails 49.3% 35.3% 42.7% 20.0 9.5 18.0 39.5 28.0 32.7 35.4 25.6 31.1 22.3% 14_9% 22.6% 5.8 3.2 6.6 15.8 10.1 16.9 11.3 7.3 12_3 11.5 8.0 12.3 33_8% 24.0% 17_5% 5.4 2.7 2.2 26.8 19.5 14.8 22.6 151 7_3 Table 15. Mental health treatment received by all State prison inmates, 2004 and 1997 Type of mental health treatment Ever any mental health treatment Had overnight hospital stay Used prescribed medications Had professional mental health therapy Had other mental health treatment Received treatment after admission Had overnight hospital stay Used prescribed medications Had professional mental health therapy Had other mental health treatment Number of inmates Percent of State prison inmates 2004 1997 31.2% 28.3% 12.2 10.7 23.9 18_9 21.6 21.8 3.6 3.3 19.3% 17.4% 3.1 3.8 15.1 12.3 12.7 12_3 1.9 1.9 1.226,171 1,059,607 More than a fifth of inmates (22%) in State prison who had a mental health problem had received mental health treatment during the year before their arrest, including 16% who had used prescribed medications, 11 % who had professional therapy, and 6% who had stayed overnight in a hospital because of a mental or emotional problem. Among jail inmates who had a mental health problem, an estimated 23% had received treatment during the year before their arrest: 17% had used medication, 12% had received profes- sional therapy, and 7% had stayed overnight in a hospital because of a mental or emotional problem, Taking a prescribed medication for a mental health problem was the most common type of treatment inmates who had a mental health problem had received since admission to prison or jail. About 27% of State prisoners, 19% of Federal prisoners, and 15% of jail inmates who had a mental problem had used prescribed medication for a mental problem since admission. An overnight stay in a hospital was the least likely method of treatment inmates had received since admission. Among inmates who had a mental problem, about 5% of those in State prisons, 3% in Federal prisons, and 2% in local jails had stayed overnight in a hospital for a mental problem. Use of medication for a mental health problem by State prisoners rose between 1997 and 2004 The proportion of State prisoners who had used prescribed medication for a mental health problem since admission to prison rose to 15% in 2004, up from 12% in 1997 (table 15). There was little change in the percentage of inmates who reported an overnight stay in a hospital since admission (around 3%), or in the percentage who had received professional mental health therapy (around 12%). State prisoners who said they had ever used prescribed medication for a men- tal or emotional problem in the past rose to 24% in 2004, up from 19% in 1997. Overall, 31 % of State prisoners said they had ever received mental health treatment in the past, up from 28% in 1997. Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates 9 Among jail inmates, in 2002 around 30% said they had received treatment for a mental health problem in the past, up from 25% in 1996. The proportion who had received treatment since admission (11%) was unchanged. Mental health treatment Ever any treatment Overnight stay Medication Therapy Other treatment Since admission Overnight stay Medication Therapy Other treatment --Less than 0.5%. Percent of jail inmates 2002 1996 30% 25% 12 10 22 17 22 18 3 3 11% 11% 1 1 9 9 5 4 1 Rule violations and injuries from a fight more common among inmates who had a mental health problem Prison or jail inmates who had a men- tal health problem were more likely than those without to have been charged with breaking facility rules since admission (table 16). Among State prisoners, 58% of those who had a mental health problem, compared to 43% of those without, had been charged with rule violations. An estimated 24% of State prisoners who had a mental health problem, compared to 14% of those without, had been charged with a physical or verbal assault on correctional staff or another inmate. Among Federal prisoners who had a mental health problem, 15% had been charged with a physical or verbal assault on correctional staff or another inmate compared to 7% of those with- out a mental problem. Jail inmates who had a mental health problem were twice as likely as those without to have been charged with Three-quarters of female inmates in State prisons who had a mental health problem met criteria for substance dependence or abuse Female State prisoners who had a mental health problem were more likely than those without to - · meet criteria for substance depend- ence or abuse (74% compared to 54%), · have been homeless in the year before arrest (17% compared to 9%). Characteristics of females in State prison, by mental health status Percent of female inmates With mental problem · have a current or past violent offense (40% compared to 32%), · have used cocaine or crack in the month before arrest (34% compared to 24%), Selected characteristics Criminal record Current or past violent offense 3 or more prior probations or incarcerations Substance dependence or abuse Alcohol Drugs Drug use in month before arrest· Cocaine or crack Methamphetamines Family background Homeless in year before arrest Past physical or sexual abuse Parent abused alcohol or drugs Charged with violating facility rules· Physical or verbal assault Injured in a fight since admission ·Includes items not shown. They were also more likely to report - · 3 or more prior sentences to proba- tion or incarceration (36% compared to 29%), · past physical or sexual abuse (68% compared to 44%), · parental abuse of alcohol or drugs (47% compared to 29%), · a physical or verbal assault charge since admission (17% compared to 6%)_ Without 40.4% 32.2% 35.9 28.7 74_5% 53.6% 41.7 25.8 65.5 45.6 63.7% 49.5% 33.9 24.2 17.1 16_3 16.6% 9.5% 68.4 44.0 46.9 29.1 50.4% 30.6% 16_9 5.7 10.3% 3.8% facility rule violations (19% compared to 9%). Inmates in local jails who had a mental health problem were also four times as likely as those without to have been charged with a physical or verbal assault on correctional staff or another inmate (8% compared to 2%). A larger percentage of inmates who had a mental health problem had been injured in a fight since admission than those without a mental problem (State prisoners, 20% compared to 10%; Federal prisoners, 11 % compared to 6%; jail inmates, 9% compared to 3%). Table 16. Disciplinary problems among prison and jail inmates since admission, by mental health status Percent of inmates in - State prison Federal prison Local jail Type of disciplinary problem With mental With mental With mental since admission problem Without problem Without problem Charged with rule violations· 57.7% 43.2% 40.0% 27.7% 19.0% Assault 24_1 13.8 15.4 6.9 8.2 Physical assault 17.6 10.4 11.0 5.4 4.7 I Verbal assault 15.2 6.7 7.9 2.4 5.2 ¡InjUred in a fight 20.4% 10.1 % 11.4% 5.8% 9.3% I 'Includes violations not shown (fer example: possession of a weapon, stolen property or contraband, drug law violations, I work slowdowns. food strikes, setting fires er riotmg, being out of place. disobeying orders, abusive language. horseplay. er failing to follow sanitary regulations) Without 9.1% 2.4 1.6 0.9 2.9% 10 Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates Methodology The findings in this report are based on data in the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 2004, and the Survey of Inmates in Local Jails, 2002. Conducted every 5 to 6 years since 1972, the BJS' inmate surveys are the only national source of detailed information on criminal offend- ers, particularly special populations such as drug and alcohol users and offenders who have mental health problems. The survey design included a stratified two-stage sample where facilities were selected in the first stage and inmates to be interviewed in the second stage. In the second sampling stage, inter- viewers from the Census Bureau vis- ited each selected facility and systematically selected a sample of inmates. Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) was used to con- duct the interviews_ Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 2004 The State prison sample was selected from a universe of 1,585 facilities. A total of 287 State prisons participated in the survey; 2 refused, 11 were closed or had no inmates to survey, and 1 was erroneously included in the universe. A total of 14,499 inmates in the State facilities were interviewed; 1.653 inmates refused to participate. resulting in a second-stage nonre- sponse rate of 10.2%. The Federal prison sample was selected from 148 Federal prisons and satellite facilities. Thirty-nine of the 40 prisons selected participated in the survey. After the initial sample of inmates was drawn, a secondary sam- pie of 1 in 3 drug offenders was selected. A total of 3,686 inmates in Federal facilities were interviewed and 567 refused to participate, resulting in a second-stage nonresponse rate of 13.3%. Survey of Inmates in Local Jails, 2002 The local jail sample was selected from a universe of 3,365. Overall, 465 jails were selected, and interviews were held in 417 jails; 39 jails refused or were excluded for administrative reasons; and 9 were closed or had no inmates. A total of 6,982 inmates were interviewed; 768 inmates refused to participate, resulting in a second- stage nonresponse rate of 9.9%. Accuracy of survey estimates The accuracy of the survey estimates depends on sampling and measure- ment errors. Sampling errors occur by chance because a sample of inmates rather than all inmates were inter- viewed. Measurement error can be attributed to many sources, such as nonresponse, recall difficulties, differ- ences in the interpretation of questions among inmates, and processing errors. The sampling error. as measured by an estimated standard error, varies by the size of the estimate and the size of the base population. These standard errors may be used to construct confi- dence intervals around percentages. For example, the 95% confidence interval around the percentage of jail inmates in 2002 who had a mental health problem is approximately 64.2% plus or minus 1.96 times .83% (or 62.6% to 65.8%). Standard error tables for data in this report are provided in References American Psychological Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV), 1994. Michael B. First, Robert, L. Spitzer, Miriam Gibbon, and Janet B.W. Williams, User's Guide for the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders, American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. Arlington, Va.. March 2002. \ U.S_ Department of Health and Human Services, National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions, 2002, National Institutes of Health, I National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Bethesda, Maryland. I U.S_ Department of Health and Human Services, National Survey on Drug Use I and Health, 2002, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administra- tion. Office of Applied Studies, Rockville, Maryland. the Appendix which is available in the electronic version of the report at <http://www.ojp. usdoj .gov/bjs/abstractl mhppji.htm>. A detailed description of the method- ology for the State and Federal Prison survey, including standard error tables and links to other reports or findings, is available on the BJS Website <http:// www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract! sicf04.htm>. A detailed description of the methodology for the Survey of Inmates in Local Jails is available at < http://webapp.icpsr.umich . ed u/ cocoon/NACJ D-STU DY /04359 .xml>. Measures of mental health problems in the general population Caution should be used when making comparisons between prison and jail inmates and the general population based on the a 12-month DSM-IV structured interview. There are signifi- cant variations in the questionnaire design and data analysis. For exam- ple, questions on the severity or dura- tion of symptoms and questions about whether symptoms are due to breave- ment, substance use, or a medical condition may vary from survey to sur- vey. For details on the methodology used in the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions, spon- sored by the National Institute on Alco- hol Abuse and Alcoholism, see the Data Reference Manual, <http:// niaa.census.gov/>. For additional infor- mation on the prevalence of mental disorders in the general population, see the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, sponsored by the Sub- stance Abuse and Mental Health Ser- vices Administration, <http:// www.oas.samhsa.gpv/nsduh.htm> . Also, see the National Comorbidity Survey Replication Study, sponsored primarily by the National Institute of Mental Health, <http:// www.nimh.nih.gov/healthinformation/ ncs-r. cfm>. Mental Health Problems of Pnson and Jail Inmates 11 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Washington, DC 20531 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 IIIIIII~ II[ 1IIIt 11111111111111 JIIII)IIII JIIII 111111111 1111 PRESORTED STANDARD POSTAGE & FEES PAID DOJ/BJS Permit No. G-91 The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey L_ Sedgwick is director. Doris J. James and Lauren E. Glaze wrote this report, under the supervision of Allen J_ Beck. Laura M_ Maruschak, Todd D. Minton, and Tracy L. Snell verified the report_ Rebecca L. Medway provided programming assistance. Tina Dorsey edited the report and Jayne Robinson prepared it for final printing, under the supervision of Marianne Zawitz. Tracy L. Snell, under the supervision of Allen J. Beck, was project manager for the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities. For the State and Federal prisoners survey, at the U.S. Census Bureau Steven M. Bittner, Colette Heiston, and Kenneth Mayo carried out questionnaire design, data collection and processing, under the supervision of Marilyn M. Monahan, Demographic Surveys Division. Renee Arion programmed the questionnaire and Dave Keating programmed the listing instrument, under the supervision of Rob Wallace, Technologies Management Office. Programming assistance in the Demographic Surveys Division was provided by Chris Alaura, Mildred Ballenger. Bach-Loan Nguyen, and Scott Raudabaugh, under the supervision of David Watt Dave Hornick and Danielle N. Castelo, Demographic Surveys Methods Division, under the supervision of Thomas F. Moore, designed the sample and weighting specifications. Sydnee Chattin- Reynolds and Luis Padilla, Field Division, under the supervision of Richard Ning, coordinated the field operations. The affiliations for the Census Bureau date to the time of the survey. Contributors to the Survey of Inmates in Local Jails are listed in Profile of Jail Inmates, 2002, at <http://www.ojp. usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/pji02.htm> . September 2006, NCJ 213600 I I' This report in portable document format and in ASCII and its related statistical data and tables- including appendix tables- are available at the BJS World Wide Web Internet ! site: <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/mhppji.htm> Office of Justice Programs Partnerships for Safer Communities http://www. ojp. usdoj .gov 12 Mental Health Problems of Pnson and Jail Inmates