DUBLIN, Calif. — An arraignment hearing Thursday in Judge Diane S. Meier’s courtroom at the East County Hall of Justice evolved into a broader discussion about probation supervision and the state’s use of electronic monitoring devices. The accused, who was on probation for an unrelated charge, allegedly failed to comply with probation requirements after claiming repeated unsuccessful attempts to charge the GPS monitoring device.
According to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s website, electronic monitoring is used “to monitor offender compliance” with court orders and serves as an “alternative sanction to incarceration.” However, Deputy Public Defender Amy Cheng argued on behalf of her client that the device did not function properly.
Although the accused was compliant with all other terms of the agreement, law enforcement officers still came to his home after the “batteries died after three days.”
According to Cheng, the accused was “trying to charge the GPS device” when officers arrived at his home. Deputy District Attorney Sameer Shukla told the court the accused has demonstrated a pattern of this behavior.
According to Shukla, the accused “failed to charge [the] GPS twenty times” during the course of his probation and has “several violations for similar conduct” involving other probation conditions.
Cheng told the court she is concerned about those other alleged violations as well. She said she personally witnessed the accused, on at least two occasions, attempt to comply with the terms of his probation but fail because of the short turnaround time.
She cited at least one instance in which the accused had been out of court for only 24 hours before officers arrived to take him back into custody for an alleged probation violation.
While these alleged violations could have resulted from the accused’s actions, they could just as easily have been caused by malfunctions in the electronic monitoring equipment. According to an article published by the Reader, a Chicago-based newsroom, “more than 80 percent of the alerts” generated by Chicago’s personal electronic monitoring devices were “false positives.”
The Reader is not alone in raising concerns about the technology.
Nearly four years ago, the ACLU published a statement explaining that although GPS monitors can be used properly “in accordance with due process and fairness principles,” the justice system’s effort to “normalize this technology is troubling for several reasons.”
One of the ACLU’s primary concerns is that electronic monitors are “leading people to physical jails and prisons for minor technical violations, charging malfunctions, and false alarms.”
Judge Meier ultimately concluded that “additional context” is needed before making a decision in the case. A parole revocation hearing is scheduled for next Thursday, and until then, the accused will remain in custody without bail.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
