Adachi called for an independent investigation one day after San Francisco police halted all drug testing at the lab amid allegations that Deborah Madden, a 29-year employee at the lab, stole and tampered with cocaine evidence on numerous occasions. Police also revealed Madden had a 2008 domestic violence conviction and is currently facing a weapons charge.

Approximately 20 public defender clients saw their felony drug cases dismissed Wednesday morning alone. Those arrested prior to 2008 may never be able to get a fair trial, since all drug evidence has since been destroyed, Adachi said.

Police and prosecutors never disclosed Madden’s arrests to the Public Defender’s office while continuing to call her as an expert witness at trials.

“We have clients who are serving time behind bars based solely on Ms. Madden’s credibility,” Adachi said.

Also on Tuesday, San Francisco police released a November audit by the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors showing the laboratory lacks a secure chain of custody for evidence, fails to keep detailed case records and does not meet standards of cleanliness.

The revelations are the latest in a long history of problems within the crime lab, Adachi said.

• In 1994, the crime lab came under scrutiny because a police lab technician allegedly certified evidence as illegal drugs without performing the required chemicals tests.
• In 1996, the Civil Grand Jury issued a scathing report urging the lab to seek funds to hire additional staff and replace obsolete equipment in order to produce results that meet quality assurance standards.

Despite the crime lab’s history of misconduct and insufficient testing, police have refused to turn over any previous audits or documentation showing how lab workers achieved results in specific cases involving drugs or DNA, Adachi said.

“There must be a review from someone other than the police or district attorney’s office to ensure the lab is operating with transparency,” Adachi said. “This strikes right at the heart of justice in San Francisco.”

###

Commentary By Kwixuan H. Maloof

February 26, 2010

Jason Brown was less than 24 hours from wearing his cap and gown. Instead, the Mission High School student found himself in handcuffs after making the mistake of buying an Ecstasy pill.

Although he had never before been in trouble, Jason (a pseudonym) spent his graduation day in a jail cell.

In an instant, the door to his future began to close. A criminal conviction would affect his ability to go to college, qualify for financial aid and land a job. The minor drug charge carried a sentence of up to a year in jail.

Fortunately, a judge admitted Jason to the Pretrial Diversion program in San Francisco. The program, which is only available in a handful of California counties, allows first-time misdemeanor arrestees to avoid a criminal conviction by completing treatment programs and performing community service.

Jason completed the program, enrolled in college and now works as a camp counselor for young burn victims. His case was dismissed and he has no record of a conviction. Like most diversion participants, Jason has stayed out of trouble.

It’s time to give more people the same chance.

Currently, San Francisco’s court system handles 12,000 misdemeanor offenses annually. Because of the strict eligibility criteria, only 1,500 cases qualify for the Pretrial Diversion program.

Among the three dozen misdemeanors that do not make the cut are resisting arrest, computer crimes, graffiti with a prior offense and certain Fish and Game Code violations such as hunting abalone out of season. Drug possession offenses, like Jason’s, are not usually allowed in the program.

There has never been a better time to expand this program. Making it happen requires that the district attorney’s office, public defender’s office, adult probation and the trial courts agree to change the eligible crimes to include other misdemeanor offenses.

Broadening the program also makes fiscal sense.

San Francisco taxpayers shell out $120 each day to house an inmate at the county jail. Add court, attorney and prosecutors’ costs and a simple case like Jason’s can easily cost taxpayers thousands of dollars. The cost for Pretrial Diversion is only $245 per client, creating a potential windfall in savings by expanding the list of eligible offenses.

In terms of efficiency, Pretrial Diversion is the bullet train to traditional justice’s lumbering freight. It makes citizens safer by addressing the root causes of crime while providing individuals accused of minor crimes an opportunity to handle their cases in an efficient and effective manner. It also saves taxpayers millions of dollars. Most significant, it helps provide restitution to victims of crime. In 2009, Pretrial Diversion participants paid approximately $240,000 in restitution to crime victims.

More than 215,000 community service hours are completed each year by persons who participate in Pretrial Diversion and through Project 20, a program for people who cannot afford to pay their vehicle fines.

Pretrial Diversion also provides case management supervision to nonviolent participants, who receive daily case management. This has boosted court appearances by participants to an average attendance rate of 94 percent. Case managers help their clients navigate access to services like drug and alcohol counseling, anger management and housing placement.

In these tough economic times, we must focus on solutions that work. Pretrial diversion has been proven effective at saving court time and taxpayer money. We must expand this remarkable program to include other misdemeanor offenses — we simply cannot afford to do otherwise.

Kwixuan H. Maloof is the managing attorney in charge of the San Francisco public defender’s misdemeanor unit.

Public Defender Jeff Adachi is off to Washington D.C. this week for a national conference on criminal defense for the poor.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is hosting the “National Symposium on Indigent Defense: Looking Back, Looking Forward 2010. More than 600 public defenders, judges and elected officials are expected to attend and discuss ways to better defend those without the means to hire their own attorneys.

Adachi’s presentation on Thursday is sure to bring up the lingering battle with Mayor Gavin Newsom over funding for his office. The public defender has been passing high-profile cases to outside council for months in an effort to save the office money.

National Symposium on Indigent Defense: Looking Back, Looking Forward 2010 will be held Thursday, Feb. 18 and Friday, Feb. 19 in Washington DC. Defenders, key policymakers and representatives of justice systems across the country will converge during the two-day event to form key partnerships and explore ways to improve legal representation for indigent adults and juveniles. More than 600 public defenders, judges and elected officials are expected to attend.

On Thursday, Adachi will give a presentation on the crisis in indigent defense funding and discuss how his office has dealt with the increasing demand for legal services created by the economic recession.

Over the past year, cuts of nearly $1 million crippled the Public Defender’s office and resulted in outsourcing hundreds of cases to private attorneys due to lack of staffing. Adachi has been a vocal opponent of the budget cuts, saying that it costs the city much more to outsource cases than to have his office provide representation. Adachi’s prediction came true, with more than $3.2 million in private counsel costs being requested by the court to cover cases that the Public Defender could have handled with adequate staffing.

“I am honored to be included among the justice officials invited to speak at the Attorney General’s symposium. It is my hope that Attorney General Holder uses the force of his office and the law to help struggling public defender’s offices around the country to provide the legal representation to the poor guaranteed by the Constitution,” Adachi said.

Ian Atkinson, 29, was found not guilty of battery on a code enforcement officer following a two-day trial. Jurors also found Atkinson not guilty of lesser charges of simple battery and simple assault.

The jury deliberated one day before reaching its verdict.

Atkinson was cited by police Aug. 27, 2009 following an argument with the parking officer on the 600 block of Davis Street near the Embarcadero. The officer was approaching a workman’s truck in her motorized cart when Atkinson and a female co-worker decided to help the truck owner avoid a ticket. Atkinson’s coworker fed the meter while Atkinson approached the officer to explain. 

Atkinson’s coworker testified that the officer became furious and immediately began yelling at Atkinson. The officer issued the ticket, and Atkinson admitted to spitting at the back of her vehicle as she drove away.

He testified that the officer abruptly stopped her vehicle, exited and said, “Now I got you” before calling 911 and falsely reporting that Atkinson had spit in her face.

During the trial, the responding police officer testified that he observed spittle on the vehicle’s back window, but not on Atkinson’s face or clothing.

In addition to Atkinson, the parking officer also testified during the trial.

Atkinson’s attorney, Deputy Public Defender Gunnar Rosenquist, said the jury’s decision came down to whose testimony was more believable.

“The jury believed my client. The officer’s story just did not come off as truthful on the stand,” Rosenquist said.

Atkinson, a San Francisco native with no criminal record, works as an office manager and is a longtime volunteer with Bay Area youth and Glide Memorial Church.

“This case hung over Mr. Atkinson’s head for five months, and it was all based on a lie. I’m very happy to see his name cleared,” Rosenquist said.

San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi said the verdict was just.

“Nobody is excusing losing your cool and spitting on someone’s vehicle, but the facts of this case proved that was where the conflict ended,” Adachi said.

Vierra Morris, 21, of Fairfield, was found not guilty of misdemeanor grand theft following a two day trial. The jury deliberated for 90 minutes before reaching its verdict.

Morris, a college student whose family has rehabilitated several rescue dogs, was Christmas shopping in downtown San Francisco on Dec. 4, 2008, when she spotted a Yorkshire terrier that appeared lost. The 4-pound dog–which was wearing a cashmere sweater but no collar, identification tags or leash–was running in and out of stores on the unit block of busy Grant Avenue, witnesses testified.

After a security guard at a nearby store told Morris he didn’t know if the dog belonged to anyone, Morris took the animal home.

Meanwhile, the dog’s owner had been talking on his cell phone inside his parked vehicle while his wife tried on clothes in the Ted Baker store on Grant Avenue.

The 42-year-old San Francisco resident told police that he and his wife had let their $2,500 dog run unleashed as they shopped in the high-end British clothing store. He had been was unaware his pet had followed him when he left the store to take a business call, according to a police report filed in the incident.

By the time he hung up, Morris had already asked passersby about the animal, picked it up, and driven away. Witnesses provided the dog owner with Morris’ description and informed him that her car had been ticketed while she shopped.

Morris testified that when she was contacted by San Francisco police, she gave them the address of a neighbor who was caring for the dog. Morris believed the matter was resolved and had no knowledge a warrant had been issued for her arrest, she said.

Morris, who had no criminal record, was arrested on the warrant nearly a year later, on Aug. 26, 2009. The case was charged as a felony, causing Morris to lose her college financial aid. A judge reduced the charge to a misdemeanor in January.

Morris’ attorney, Deputy Public Defender Cindy Elias, said both witnesses and store surveillance videos played key roles in clearing her client.

“The surveillance video showed the defenseless dog with no collar or identification running from store to store on Grant Avenue during peak traffic before being scooped up by Ms. Morris,” Elias said. “The intent to steal simply wasn’t there. It was clear to the jurors that Ms. Morris truly believed she was rescuing the dog from a dangerous situation.”

The prosecution’s star witness, a former employee of the nearby Ed Hardy store, testified that the dog had been running up and down the street for 15-20 minutes, contradicting testimony of the owner’s wife, who claimed the dog was out of her sight only 3-5 minutes. The prosecution’s two other witnesses testified that the dog appeared lost.

In the year following the incident, Morris’ neighbor had found a home for the dog.  Morris and her mother helped police inspectors track down the dog, which was recently reunited with its original owners. Morris’ mother, a longtime SPCA worker, now works to recover lost pets.

“The circumstances of this case were so strange that it could have been the plot for a Hollywood movie,” said San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi. “Fortunately, this real life drama ended on a just note after a jury heard the evidence.”

Joc Wilson, 23, Floyd Jackson, 22 and, Emon Brown, 21, faced first-degree murder charges in addition to gang and firearm enhancements. The charges carry a maximum sentence of life in prison.

The jury deliberated for just over one day before reaching its verdict.

All three men were accused of the fatal shooting of Brandon Perkins, 29, on Aug. 2, 2007. Brown and Wilson were charged with gunning down Byron Smith, 32, exactly one month later.

All were indicted by a grand jury Feb. 21, 2008.

Prosecutors alleged the shootings were part of a territorial battle between rival Visitacion Valley gangs.

The six-month trial relied solely on thin circumstantial evidence, said Deputy Public Defender Steve Olmo, who represents Wilson. The prosecution focused on Wilson’s DNA, which was found on the handlebar of a bicycle ridden by one of the gunmen in Smith’s killing.

“The case against Mr. Wilson was all smoke and mirrors,” Olmo said. “The prosecution’s star witness told multiple, conflicting stories about what he claimed to have seen. We were able to show that Mr. Wilson wasn’t even in the area when the shootings occurred, and the initial identification of suspects didn’t match Mr. Wilson’s profile.”

Three witnesses to Smith’s killing did not identify Wilson as being one of the gunmen. Two of the witnesses excluded him from lineups, while a third was emphatic that Wilson was not present, Olmo said.

Olmo also established that the DNA found on the handlebar of the bicycle didn’t prove that his client participated in the killing.

“The DNA was found in the ridges of the handlebar and was likely there long before this crime occurred,” Olmo said.
Meanwhile, the key witness to Perkins’ killing admitted to smoking marijuana when shots rang out. He changed his testimony often, including saying he didn’t witness the crime at all.

The guns used in the killings were never recovered.

“This case shows that DNA evidence can be misused and misinterpreted,” said San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi. “Fortunately, in this case, the defense was able to prove that the presence of DNA on a bicycle doesn’t equate to being guilty of murder.”

Brown was represented by defense attorney Tony Tamburello, while Jackson was represented by Alex Reisman.

###

Michael Dabney, 44, was found not guilty of possession of a controlled substance following a four-day trial. The jury deliberated for an hour and a half before reaching its verdict.

The charge carries a maximum sentence of three years in state prison.

Dabney’s legal saga began March 25, 2009, after leaving his Tenderloin residence to enjoy an afternoon walk with his puppy. After walking uphill and running for part of their journey, Dabney’s puppy appeared thirsty. Dabney spotted a cookie tin near a trash can and picked it up to use as a dog dish. He then headed to a nearby market on Ellis and Jones to buy a bottle of water to fill the tin.

Outside of the store, he ran into a friend, who was accompanied by a woman. The three chatted for a few moments before Dabney opened the tin to dispose of its contents in a nearby garbage can.

At that moment, a motorcycle officer rode up to Dabney and asked what was in the tin.

Police testified Dabney was cooperative. He quickly handed over the tin and replied “I don’t know. Cookies?”

Police discovered a small bag of crack cocaine mixed among numerous white cookie wrappers and one broken butter cookie. Dabney’s female acquaintance was handcuffed and searched after an officer claimed she had drugs in her bra. None was found. Police also found no drugs, drug paraphernalia or large amounts of cash on Dabney or his friend.

“Innocent people are sometimes arrested for being at the wrong place at the wrong time. The police officer saw Mr. Dabney for 15 seconds and assumed he was guilty. He was wrong,” said Dabney’s attorney, Deputy Public Defender Sangeeta Sinha. “Whatever it may have looked like, Mr. Dabney’s intention was simply to give his dog some water.”

While under cross examination by Sinha, the arresting officer testified that he observed Dabney mere seconds, and part of that time was through his peripheral vision. On the witness stand, the officer provided several details that contradicted the narrative of his police report, such as who was looking into the tin and how the trio was standing.

Mr. Dabney also took the stand. His story remained consistent throughout intense cross-examination.

San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi said the case illustrates the importance of a jury system.

“It takes very little evidence to justify an arrest. We count on a jury to look at the whole picture. In this case, Mr. Dabney couldn’t possess what he didn’t know he had,” Adachi said.

###

After seven days of deliberation, jury members unanimously found Leroy Brown not guilty of murder in the Oct. 1, 2008 death of 43-year-old Eric Robinson. The jury convicted Brown of involuntary manslaughter, finding that he had no intent to kill Robinson.

He will be sentenced February 18. His attorney, Deputy Public Defender Manohar Raju, plans to ask that Brown be sentenced to probation.

“He has been in jail for 16 months and shouldn’t have to spend any more time behind bars,” Raju said. “While Mr. Brown struggled with addiction, he remained a kind, beloved figure in the Tenderloin.”

The early-morning dispute between the two men began in the 300 block of Ellis Street, when Brown complained to Robinson that Robinson had sold him fake crack cocaine hours earlier.

Robinson responded by slamming the elderly Air Force veteran against a wall and punching and choking him, according to witness testimony during the four week trial.

Brown, who suffers from numerous health conditions, pulled a knife and stabbed Robinson in self-defense.

Character witnesses testified in Brown’s behalf, describing him as a man who volunteered with Glide Memorial Church’s senior program and regularly swept the Tenderloin streets.

Robinson, who was also armed during the incident, had attacked at least four people in the Tenderloin in the year prior to his death, witnesses testified.

Brown had previously worked for California Pacific Medical Center for more than a decade.

###

Felony cases handled by the San Francisco Public Defender’s office rose 21 percent over the past two years, according to the office’s Annual Report and 2010 Calendar, released today.  The document may be viewed by logging on to: http://sfpublicdefender.org/media/2010/01/annual-report-2009/

“In this economy, few people can afford private attorneys,” said San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi.  “As the need for our services increased, we also suffered severe budget and staffing cuts.  However, we have continued to do our very best to provide San Franciscans with the legal representation guaranteed by the Constitution.”

The Public Defender’s office has published its annual report each year since 2003.  The calendar features documentary-style images and true-life accounts of courtroom victories, innovative programs, and the office’s battle for funding parity.  Highlights include:

• 46.5 percent of trials resulting in no conviction, compared to 38.5 percent in 2008.
• $5 million in incarceration costs saved by the office’s Reentry Unit by placing individuals in vocational, educational, substance abuse and mental health programs.
• $2.7 million in annual net savings to taxpayers generated by the Behavioral Health Court.
• $3,000 vs. $356: Hiring a private attorney to handle a driving under the influence case vs. the cost to taxpayers for the Public Defender’s office to handle the same case.
• 3:1 vs. 5:1: Recommended number of attorneys assigned to a single defense investigator vs. actual number of attorneys assigned to a single defense investigator.

These statistics and many more are included in the Public Defender’s office 2009 Annual Report and 2010 Calendar, which is not printed at public expense.  The Public Defender’s office is one of the few city departments that provide printed annual reports to the public.

Adachi noted that the report reflects his office’s commitment to transparency and gives the public a bird’s-eye view of the criminal justice system.

“People often think of what they see on Law and Order when they think of the court system.  Our annual report shows how hard most people struggle to get justice,” he said.

Volunteers from the Public Defender’s office will hand out the reports in San Francisco neighborhoods throughout January.  On Thursday and Friday of this week, volunteers will pass out free calendars between 9 a.m.-10 a.m. at the Hall of Justice, 850 Bryant St. To find other locations and times, log onto sfpublicdefender.org.

The public may also pick up the free calendar at the front desk of the San Francisco Public Defender’s office, 555 Seventh St. (between Brannan and Bryant streets.)

Note to Media: High Resolution Images of Calendar Pages Available

###