Vanguard Court Watch has analyzed newly available data on the number of prison inmates by county, and determined that Yolo County has a disproportionately high number of prison inmates compared to its size and crime rate.
To put that into perspective, Yolo County ranks higher in the rate of people in prison than Fresno (9), San Joaquin (10), Solano (13), Sacramento (15), Los Angeles (16), San Diego (17), and Alameda (24).
This summer, the California legislature passed AB 109, which operationalizes Governor Jerry Brown’s prison transfer program that transfers non-violent, non-serious and non-sex offenders from state prison to local custody.
In order to do so, AB 109 expands the role of the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP), to develop and recommend to the board of supervisors an implementation plan for the 2011 public safety realignment.
For our purposes, it means that data is now available to analyze the number of individuals by county who are currently serving prison terms in the California Department of Corrections.
The bulk of our analysis focused on populations of more than 100,000 people ages 18 to 64, which is the age group most likely to be in prison. However, if expanded to all 58 California counties, Yolo County still ranks near the top with a prison rate ranked 13th in the state and a crime rate ranking 32nd in the state. In other words, it ranks in the upper 20 percent in prison rate, but in the middle of the pack in crime rate.
We ran a basic statistical analysis and found overall in the state, there is a strong and positive relationship between the crime rate and prison rate. Indeed, looking at the top 10
counties in prison rate, five are in the top ten in both categories with Yolo County representing the large gap between the two.
Among the major valley counties, Yolo County ranks at the top in prison rate, with a much higher rate than the surrounding counties of Solano and Sacramento which are well down on the list despite having a much higher overall crime rate.
Among comparable sized counties, only Shasta County has a higher prison rank. Butte is similar, but most counties of this size have a lower prison rate. Only Merced and Santa Cruz are high crime counties. The rest are all in the lower half of the state in crime rates.
Anecdotally, we have often heard out-of-county defense attorneys complain that Yolo County charges felonies in cases that would be considered misdemeanors in other locations.
While the perception that Yolo County charges offenses more stringently than other counties is, of course, difficult to analyze directly, these data show that Yolo County sends more people to prison with respect to population than other counties.
Furthermore, the fact that Yolo County has a lower crime rate demonstrates that more people are not being sent to prison due to there being more crime.
Nor are Yolo County residents committing more violent crimes than their surrounding counties. Yolo County ranked 24th out of 30 counties with more than 100,000 people in the 18 to 64 age bracket in violent crime.
The notion that Yolo County simply charges more stringently can be reflected in a number of factors outside of these numbers.
As we have cited a number of times, Public Defender Tracie Olson back in March spoke of the fact that the number of trials have increased, despite the fact that the crime rate has remained relatively stable.
“It’s absolutely true that we’re having more and more jury trials,” she told the Yolo County Board of Supervisors. “I think we had 112 last year, 121 each of the two years prior which prior to that I think we had 50 or 60 jury trials. So, workload is still very, very high.”
Ms. Olson told the board, “It is my opinion that the number of jury trials has nothing to do with the crime rate.”
Tracie Olson’s chief complaint is embedded in her comments, but it comes down to the fact that the DA’s office does not give reasonable offers.
Later this week we will have an analysis that demonstrates that, because of the overcharging, the public defenders have had to take cases to trial that could have been settled before the expensive trial process and more often than not, juries agree with the public defender’s office that the charges do not fit the crime.
In addition to this evidence, we have what amounts to an admission, at least, by Deputy District Attoney Ryan Couzens.
The fact that Yolo County charges cases more stringently was given some credibility when Deputy DA Ryan Couzens made his closing argument in the Kalah case, a case that would seem to embody such a complaint.
Suddenly, Mr. Couzens found his operation, and indeed the Yolo County DA’s policies, under attack while laying out what might be considered the DA’s Manifesto – in essence agreeing that Yolo County charges minor crimes very harshly.
Deputy DA Couzens said that it is irrelevant that Sacramento or Stockton would charge this crime as a misdemeanor. He said that it is on them, and their problem. He said this is Yolo County and we do things differently here.
In the Kalah case, the Yolo County DA, YONET and the West Sacramento Police spent six months investigating what they determined to be a drug operation to fund gang activity. However, when they raided the place they only found 1.4 grams of meth – hardly the quantity one would expect from a major operation.
Mr. Couzens admitted that he is very aggressive about gangs and crimes. He said the same for his office. Further, he acknowledged that they did not find evidence of a huge drug operation – that they only found 1.4 grams of meth.
But he said that if we allow “specks of methamphetamine” to go unchecked, if we allow a fledgling gang to go unchecked, just because it is a fledgling operation, that “that’s throwing in the towel.”
—David M. Greenwald reporting
[quote]As we have cited a number of times, Public Defender Tracie Olson back in March spoke of the fact that the number of trials have increased, despite the fact that the crime rate has remained relatively stable.
“It’s absolutely true that we’re having more and more jury trials,” she told the Yolo County Board of Supervisors. “I think we had 112 last year, 121 each of the two years prior which prior to that I think we had 50 or 60 jury trials. So, workload is still very, very high.”
Ms. Olson told the board, “It is my opinion that the number of jury trials has nothing to do with the crime rate.”
Tracie Olson’s chief complaint is embedded in her comments, but it comes down to the fact that the DA’s office does not give reasonable offers.[/quote]
And if I remember correctly, Olson complained the judges in Yolo County do not do enough pre-trial conferencing to foster settlements out of court. Having worked in the Sacramento Courts, I know the judges there do just that – highly encourage out-of-court settlements through pre-trial conferences.
[quote]Mr. Couzens admitted that he is very aggressive about gangs and crimes. [/quote]
Seems like the voters agree w the DA’s stance on drugs – since Reisig ran unopposed. I would suggest if you don’t like the DA’s policies on drug enforcement, then encourage someone to run against Reisig, and see what the voters think…
I find it interesting Elaine that you chose to ignore the crux of the article, the research and focused on the anecdotal portion. I’d also suggest it is not my job to find people to run against Reisig and that is not the only way to impact policies. I doubt most voters are really aware of his policies on drug and other issues and I wonder if they really agree with him. Look no further to the vote on decriminalizing marijuana that Reisig strongly opposed and the voters of Yolo County supported.
[quote]I find it interesting Elaine that you chose to ignore the crux of the article, the research and focused on the anecdotal portion…[/quote]
Then you entirely missed the point of my observations. I don’t necessarily draw the same conclusions you do from the statistics. You assume the DA is entirely to blame for too many cases going to court and not settling. I’m pointing out there may be other reasons, and apparently the Public Defenders Office thinks so too. The DA’s Office does not work in isolation…
[quote]I doubt most voters are really aware of his policies on drug and other issues and I wonder if they really agree with him.[/quote]
Well you won’t know that for sure until someone run’s against him on a different platform… and my guess is the platform you are suggesting might not go over that well with the voting populace. But at least I’m willing to admit it is merely guessing on my part. I don’t really know…
“You assume the DA is entirely to blame for too many cases going to court and not settling.”
I don’t assume that they are entirely to blame, but they do make the charging decisions and they do make the offers, that puts most of it on them.
“I’m pointing out there may be other reasons, and apparently the Public Defenders Office thinks so too.”
I disagree with you there, you were not reading between the lines very well. Tracie was trying to be diplomatic but her suggested was really about trying to find a way to get the DA to back off their unrealistic reading of cases and she was hoping perhaps having a judge more involved might help.
And that is really a small part of this. The larger part is that the Yolo DA is: (A) charging crimes as felonies that other counties charge as misdos. (B) Charging crimes that essentially do not exist. (C) Overcharging on other crimes.
Over the time it is possible that juries will start to correct these problems as they appear to be this year – more on that later.
“Well you won’t know that for sure until someone run’s against him on a different platform… “
I just don’t view that as my job.
The fact that Yolo County statistics regarding crime and incarceration are out of “whack” with other counties is not surprising.
We have been seeing a pattern of overcharging and making misdemeanor’s into felonies ever since the Yolo Judicial Watch started going to trials.
The problem again is the DA’s policies on charging. A blogger in another article commented on the policies that were written by the DA’s office in a grant. Basically the DA was saying that they look with an eye to getting the maximum sentence.
Interesting how nothing was said about finding the truth. It was all about putting people away as long as possible. So maybe that’s why we have an inordinate amount of people from Yolo County in prison for the low crime rate we have.
“This summer, the California legislature passed AB 109, which operationalizes Governor Jerry Brown’s prison transfer program that transfers non-violent, non-serious and non-sex offenders from state prison to local custody.”
Maybe if the county is responsible for paying for their own inmates, the people of Yolo County will realize how ridiculous sending some of these people to prison really is. Not only does it cost money to house these minor offenders, but they also pay no taxes because they are sitting behind bars.
ERM [quote][/quote]Seems like the voters agree w the DA’s stance on drugs – since Reisig ran unopposed
Are you serious? Is that what that means? Really? The DA ran unopposed because the voters agree with the DA’s stance on drugs? How about we are stuck with him and didnt have the opportunity to vote him out. Trust me, there are enough voters that could if someone else stepped up to the plate. As soon as I get a whiff of someone running, I will volunteer along with many others towards their campaign!
Its not clear from the numbers above if the increased rate of imprisonment is due to more successful police and prosecutorial work in apprehending and prosecuting criminals (in which case kudos to Law Enforcement and the Courts) or if it is due to harsher penalties imposed for the same crime.
David, do you have the numbers on sentencing periods for convictions for the same classes (& subclasses) of crime? Seems to me this would be the more pertinent statistic for comparison between counties.
How do you rebut the argument that Yolo county has a crime rate as low as it does because it has a higher send’em to prison rate? I.e. that the higher imprisonment rate deters crime more effectively than a low one? My guess is that of the 19 counties with a lower crime rate some have a lower imprisonment rate as well. But I haven’t seen the figures.
A slightly off topic, but possibly relevant question. Why did Reisig run unopposed? Is their something inherently undesirable about the Yolo County DA position ? Is their some factor (other than his debatable popularity) that made him appear to be undefeatable ? While it is not your job, David, to find someone to run against him, it might be part of your job to explain why no one did.
One friend commented to me that “Reisig was hand picked by his predecessor”. Any truth to this statement? If so, could it be that we have a
“mini political / judicial machine ” in the county? I am truly just enquiring here since I have no knowledge in this area.
I have some theories.
First of all, on the macrolevel, DA’s rarely get challenged, it’s a particularized skill, the number of challengers is fairly limited, and DA’s can basically eliminate potential competition. After all, who are the most likely candidates? Deputy DA’s.
That leads us to Yolo. Reisig basically spent his first four years purging all possible competition. There are a few former Deputy DAs that had a chance to run, but they all had baggage and other issues.
Yolo unlike other counties does not have a strong base of defense attorneys with the gravitas to challenge.
There were a couple of people inside the department that might have considered running it, one of them was assigned to write the report on the shooting of Gutierrez, and that eliminated him as a candidate.
There is a reason why there has been exactly one contested DA election in the last 30 years in this county.
And Reisig was handpicked by Dave Henderson his predecessor. He did run against another Deputy DA, Pat Lenzi. It was an ugly battle that Reisig very narrowly won (Lenzi carried Davis, Reisig dominated in Woodland).
[quote]I don’t assume that they are entirely to blame, but they do make the charging decisions and they do make the offers, that puts most of it on them. [/quote]
No it doesn’t, necessarily. Judges’ pre-trial conferencing can have a huge effect on what a DA does or doesn’t do. It is essentially a “check” on the system. I have seen it work in Sacto.
[quote]I disagree with you there, you were not reading between the lines very well. Tracie was trying to be diplomatic but her suggested was really about trying to find a way to get the DA to back off their unrealistic reading of cases and she was hoping perhaps having a judge more involved might help. [/quote]
That is your INTERPRETATION of what Olsen said. She clearly made reference to the lack of pre-trial conferences by judges being a major part of the problem.
[quote]And that is really a small part of this. The larger part is that the Yolo DA is: (A) charging crimes as felonies that other counties charge as misdos.[/quote]
This is a philosophy that apparently, thus far, the voters seem to approve of…
[quote]Maybe if the county is responsible for paying for their own inmates, the people of Yolo County will realize how ridiculous sending some of these people to prison really is. Not only does it cost money to house these minor offenders, but they also pay no taxes because they are sitting behind bars.[/quote]
I think this is a very valid point. I very much doubt the state is going to give counties enough money to jail all the transfers. The jails will be too crowded, and you may see lighter sentences/no sentences for “petty” crimes. The economic situation may force this issue…
That is the hope.
[quote]Trust me, there are enough voters that could if someone else stepped up to the plate. [/quote]
Someone did run against Reisig at one time – and lost. I believe it was Pat Lenzi? For some reason, the “tough on crime” stance seems to resonate w the voters in this county…
[quote]Its not clear from the numbers above if the increased rate of imprisonment is due to more successful police and prosecutorial work in apprehending and prosecuting criminals (in which case kudos to Law Enforcement and the Courts) or if it is due to harsher penalties imposed for the same crime. [/quote]
Interesting observation!
To medwoman: You ask very good questions. I do know Reisig was a protege of the previous DA – Dave Henderson. Dave Henderson was, IMHO, a questionably DA, since he got caught for drunk driving among other things. I didn’t care for the way Henderson handled the Riggins-Gonzalez (UC Sweetheart murder) case – it was disgraceful as I remember it. I also know Pat Lenzi ran against Reisig and lost. There was much acrimony and charges of unfairness with regard to the campaign. Don’t know if any of it was true or not.
Probably a lot of what you are asking is somewhat unknowable, but certainly worth the asking…
I should retract the claim that Dave Henderson was arrested for DUI – that is my memory which may be faulty, but I did an internet search and could find nothing. However, I stand by my opinion of his handling the Riggins-Gonzalez case…
“For some reason, the “tough on crime” stance seems to resonate w the voters in this county…”
That’s a broad interpretation. Reisig had huge advantages in terms of who backed him and the backing of the DA’s office and yet very narrowly won.
“Judges’ pre-trial conferencing can have a huge effect on what a DA does or doesn’t do. It is essentially a “check” on the system. I have seen it work in Sacto. “
Perhaps, but it does not happen in Yolo. At the pretrial stage, it is basically with very few exceptions a rubberstamp.
“That is your INTERPRETATION of what Olsen said. She clearly made reference to the lack of pre-trial conferences by judges being a major part of the problem. “
She was trying to create the appearance of a diplomatic solution. The only reason you need judges to have more involvement from her perspective is that the DA’s are not offering reasonable offers. But she wasn’t going to say that in front of the BOS with Reisig sitting next her.
“This is a philosophy that apparently, thus far, the voters seem to approve of… “
I think if you polled them, you would find otherwise. And look at the marijuana vote from two years ago. Moreover juries, who are made up of voters, appear to be increasingly disagreeing.
[quote]erm: “For some reason, the “tough on crime” stance seems to resonate w the voters in this county…”
dmg: That’s a broad interpretation. Reisig had huge advantages in terms of who backed him and the backing of the DA’s office and yet very narrowly won.[/quote]
The voters decide…
[quote]She was trying to create the appearance of a diplomatic solution.[/quote]
Reading minds again?