LOUISIANA INDIGENT DEFENDER BOARD
BOARD
MEETING
JONES
WALKER LAW FIRM
BATON
ROUGE, LOUISIANA
November
1, 1996
MINUTES
BOARD MEMBERS
PRESENT: Dr. Ben Barron; Victor Bussie (by proxy);
Thomas Casey, Chair; Samuel Dalton;
Wayne Lee; Robert McLeod; Herman Robinson (by proxy); Walter M. Sanchez,
Vice-Chair; Sonja Spears, Secretary-Treasurer; and Henry Walker.
STAFF PRESENT: Jean M.
Faria.
1.
Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by the Chair
of the Board.
2.
Roll Call. The Chair recognized the members of the Board
present for the meeting and noted the proxy executed by Victor Bussie and given
to Thomas Casey, the proxy executed by Herman Robinson and given to Walter
Sanchez. On the basis of these
introductions, it was noted that a quorum was present.
3.
Welcoming Remarks of the Chair. The Chair welcomed the members
of the Board and the staff and briefly reviewed the agenda for the meeting,
explaining its purpose and scope. Mr.
Dalton moved to approve the minutes of the August 2, 1996 meeting. Mr. Walker seconded the motion, which passed
without opposition.
4.
Review of Budget. At the direction of the Chair, the staff
reviewed the budget report through October, 1996. The first disbursement from the District Assistance Fund occurred
in October. Mr. McLeod asked why there
was a residuum in the program account.
The staff explained that funds are set aside for all districts in the event
the district makes an application to the DAF.
The Twenty-Ninth (St. Charles Parish) and Thirty-First (Jefferson Davis
Parish) had applied for DAF monies for the first time and received funds in the
October disbursement. The staff advised
that Mr. Perkins from Caldwell Parish had requested an extension of time in
which to file the district's first application for funds. On motion of Mr. Walker, seconded by Mr.
Dalton, the Board voted without opposition to allow for payment pending
approval of the late application.
The Board reviewed the 1995 District
Assistance Fund Expenditure Report.
After reviewing the report, Dr. Barron noted that although caseload
reporting in general had improved, accurate caseload data per attorney remained
a problem. Mr. McLeod commented that
with all the information the Board has gathered and developed, determining
which district indigent defense programs are most cost effective cannot be done
absent accurate reporting of each attorney's caseload. Mr. Lee stated that the Board is ethically
bound to justify its expenditures and must gather this information. Mr. McLeod asked whether a form could be
drafted to gather the needed data. Dr.
Barron suggested the form request information beyond case numbers and should
include all data needed to further the work of the Board. The Chair urged the staff to develop the
form quickly to provide the district boards with adequate time to implement the
use of the form.
On motion of Mr. Dalton, seconded by
Dr. Barron, the staff is to design a form for use by the district indigent
defender boards to provide uniform and accurate caseload data to the LIDB. The motion passed without opposition.
5.
Contract. The staff reported the vote of the Executive
Committee to approve the contract with Advanced Litigation Technique, Inc. Several of the chief defenders were finding
that the program was being used as a word processor and not as the system had
been designed. The contract for
$67,000.00 provides additional intensive training over an eight month period. The training will be provided to attorneys,
paralegals and investigators in indigent defender programs using Trial
Scout.
6.
The Annual Report. At the direction of the Chair, the staff
presented the Annual Report. Mr. Lee
and Mr. McLeod expressed their concern regarding the presentation of
information regarding funding levels in the criminal justice system. Mr. Lee expressed his concern that the tone
of the presentation should be more neutral.
Mr. McLeod stated that the section on the development of the Board did
not address the reasons for the creation of the Board. Mr. McLeod further suggested that the
Executive Summary should reflect the Board's commitment to providing cost
effective indigent defense.
The staff was instructed to provide
each Board member with a final draft of the Annual Report for a final vote.
7.
The Statute. The draft
statute was discussed. The Chair, Mr.
Lee and Mr. McLeod expressed their concern that the statute was too
detailed. The standards and guidelines
promulgated by the Board, rather than the statute, should contain the
detail. Mr. Sanchez argued that
inclusion of caseload standards in the statute, making them mandatory, would
precipitate a request for a fiscal note.
The Chair asked whether the Board
should prepare a statute as the special committee would make the final
recommendations. After further
discussion the Board reached a consensus that the staff should redraft a
detailed statute which includes the standards and guidelines. Mr. McLeod felt that commentary to the
statute would enhance the special committee's understanding of the problems in
indigent defense the Board faced at the time it created the LIDB programs,
standards and guidelines. The staff was
directed to include commentary to the statute.
8.
Other Business. The ad hoc committee on computerized
case tracking and management unanimously recommended the use of Data Sources
Case Management System. The program
provides for case tracking and produces statistical and analysis reports by
judge, prosecutor, defense attorney and number of open cases. The program also provides merge from case to
word processing. It is estimated that
$165,000.00 would be required to reimburse the district boards should each
participating district elect to purchase the software. By fax and telephone vote, the Executive
Committee had authorized reimbursement to district indigent defender boards
which purchase the case management system.
Mr. Sanchez asked to be recognized by
the Chair. Citing professional and
personal reasons, Mr. Sanchez resigned from the Board. On behalf of the Board, the Chair thanked
Mr. Sanchez for his commitment and contributions to the Board and its
work. Mr. McLeod personally thanked Mr.
Sanchez, stating that with Mr. Sanchez's experience in indigent defense and his
judgment, he had been an inspiration to him and the Board.
9.
Adjournment. After completion of business, a motion to
adjourn was made, seconded and passed without opposition.