Home Blog Page 50

BMAGIC to Distribute Backpacks, Uniforms to Bayview Kids

-
0

San Francisco, CA — In an effort to ensure every student starts school with the tools to succeed, the San Francisco Public Defender’s BMAGIC program will provide backpacks stuffed with school supplies to more than 3,000 youth in the Bayview on Saturday, Aug. 16.

The BVHP Annual Back to School Celebration will be held from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. in the recently-renovated Youngblood Coleman Park,  1398 Hudson Ave. Children and parents must attend together to receive a free backpack and school supplies. School uniforms, provided by the Buddhist Tzu Chi Foundation, will also be provided. The event serves students from kindergarten through 12th grade and their families.

“Providing resources to youth in underserved neighborhoods is more important than ever. Many longtime San Francisco families are struggling to stay in the city and raise their children during a time of tremendous income inequality,” said San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi. “By providing these basic tools for academic success, we hope we can alleviate a bit of the burden on parents.”

The San Francisco Recreation and Park Department will welcome students at the annual event, now in its 11th year.

“We are very proud to be part of the ‘MAGIC’ and in partnership with the Public Defender to provide much needed resources for our kids,” said Phil Ginsburg, SF Rec and Park General Manager.  “This program definitely continues SF Rec and Park’s mission to keep our families thriving in our City.”

BMAGIC (Bayview Hunters Point Mobilization for Adolescent Growth in our Communities) was initiated by the Public Defender’s Office in 2004. Along with Mo’ Magic, its sister organization in the Fillmore, BMAGIC works to reduce the number of kids who enter the juvenile justice system or fall through social service gaps by efficiently coordinating opportunities, support and resources.

The Golden State Warrior’s dunk team, the Flying Ws, will perform at the event, which will also feature https://www.wizardslots.com/all-games/slots/starburst, sports and games, and live entertainment. Nearly 50 community-based organizations working in the areas of health, environment, juvenile and social justice, faith-based and after-school programming will be represented, along with elected officials, city agencies, local merchants, funders, grass roots activist, and organizers.

“This event is more than a backpack giveaway,” said BMAGIC Executive Director Lyslynne Lacoste. “It is an opportunity for families to connect with services in their community as well as each other.  It’s about building a positive and safe community for our children and youth.”

Fresh, seasonal, organic fruit will be available, and families will be able to access free health, wellness and financial services at the event. Sponsors include the San Francisco 49ers Foundation, Union Bank, San Francisco Federal Credit Union, Bayview Hunters Point YMCA, Willie Mays Boys and Girls Clubs, Bayview Merchants Association, Bay Area Deputy Sheriffs’ Charitable Foundation, San Francisco Wholesale Produce Market, Sutter Health/California Pacific Medical Center, Comcast, Recology, Rainbow Grocery Cooperative, SB 40, Bayview Opera House and San Francisco Recreation and Parks.

Appeals Court Streamlines Access to Police Misconduct Histories

-
0

San Francisco, CA — In a win for defense attorneys and advocates of government transparency, the state appellate court this week strengthened defendants’ access to police misconduct records affecting their right to a fair trial, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

The ruling, handed down Monday, streamlines the process for disclosing police misconduct issues to defense attorneys prior to trial. Under a precedent set by a 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case, Brady v. Maryland, prosecutors are obligated to turn over to the defense potentially exculpatory evidence, including information that could affect the credibility of witnesses such as police officers.

The appellate court decision simplifies the Brady process by allowing prosecutors direct access to police personnel files in order to identify possible incidents of misconduct. By removing the firewall separating prosecutors from confidential police records, the ruling reduces the chances of an officer’s problem past remaining hidden on the stand.

“A fair trial requires that before a police officer testifies, any history of dishonest or abusive behavior is turned over to the defense,” Adachi said. “This ruling makes it clear that the buck stops with prosecutors. They are ultimately responsible for providing any information about a police officer that could exonerate an innocent person.”

The case, The Superior Court of San Francisco County v. Daryl Lee Johnson, was brought before the 1st District Court of Appeals in San Francisco by the San Francisco District Attorney and San Francisco Police Department. In it, they argue that because police personnel files are confidential, the District Attorney should not have direct access. Instead, they argue, police should provide relevant documents to the trial judge, who will then review them privately and decide what should be disclosed to the defense.

In its ruling, appellate justices noted that because police are considered part of the prosecution team, the two agencies may share relevant personnel files without betraying the laws governing officer confidentiality. The court’s ruling directs the San Francisco Superior Court to modify its Bradypolicy to reflect the change.

While the decision simplifies identifying exculpatory evidence, disclosing the information to the defense is still subject to a court order, the appellate justices ruled.

San Francisco police and district attorney “seek to routinely shift responsibility for performing the initial Brady materiality review of officer personnel files from the prosecutor to the trial court,” the court noted. In denying the request, the court explained that prosecutors are more capable of identifying possible Brady issues than trial judges, who are less familiar with cases at the pretrial stage.

“The prosecutor is the only person with access to the entire landscape of evidence that will or could be presented against the defendant at trial,” the appellate justices wrote.

Deputy Public Defender Chris Gauger, manager of the San Francisco Public Defender’s research unit, called the decision “a win for fair trials.”

“This decision requires and allows prosecutors to honor their obligation to provide evidence of police misconduct to the defense. What is unclear is how defendants can ever learn of crucial evidence that the prosecution missed or was not revealed because this case provides no system for any court to review police personnel files for exculpatory evidence. It is completely in the prosecution’s hands,” Gauger said.

The case arose from a San Francisco case in which Daryl Lee Johnson was charged Nov. 14, 2012 with one count of felony domestic violence and one count of misdemeanor injuring a wireless communication device. Each of the two investigating officers in Johnson’s case had incidents of misconduct in their personnel files, the prosecutor said, but noted that the records were under police control. The district attorney and police requested that to preserve the officers’ privacy, the judge review the files privately. The judge denied the request. Johnson’s case, which had been delayed by the appeal, is expected to resume once exculpatory evidence is turned over, said his attorney, Deputy Public Defender Stephanie Lacambra.

In 2010, the San Francisco District Attorney adopted a formal Brady policy for the first time after it was revealed that dozens of police officers with hidden criminal and misconduct records were testifying in court.

Note: Later overruled. Docket can be viewed here.

Homeless Man Acquitted After Stabbing Bully

-
0

San Francisco, CA — A homeless man who stabbed a bully who had beaten him bloody over a shelter bed was acquitted after a jury determined he acted in self-defense, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

Jurors deliberated less than two hours Tuesday before finding Gregory Ishengoma, 57, not guilty of assault with a deadly weapon causing great bodily injury and battery with serious bodily injury. Ishengoma faced up to seven years in prison if convicted, said his attorney, Deputy Public Defender Kevin Mitchell.

Ishengoma, who worked for 25 years as a merchant seaman before falling into homelessness, was arrested Jan. 8. Earlier that day, Ishengoma made a reservation to spend the night at a homeless shelter inside a Bayview church. Ishengoma arrived early to the shelter, and was the fourth person to check in.

As he settled onto a mat, a fellow homeless man approached him angrily. Though the man had not reserved a space, he claimed Ishengoma was sleeping in his preferred spot. When Ishengoma told the man to find another mat, the man attacked him, pummeling him in the face with his fists until he was bleeding from the nose and mouth. Security escorted both men from the shelter.

The pair began arguing in the street. When Ishengoma walked away, the man followed him. Ishengoma, frightened he would be beaten again, stabbed his attacker once in the abdomen.

Ishengoma cooperated with police, who released him the following day after declining to file charges. The man was transported to the hospital, where he would spend two months due to infection and other complications, resulting in a colostomy bag. When he was released, he was livid that police had not arrested Ishengoma and demanded something be done. Ishengoma was arrested May 8, after the man saw him at a shelter and called police.

During the weeklong trial, the injured man took the stand, testifying that Ishengoma “got his ass whupped” for taking the mat. The man appeared hostile on the stand, admitting he was an angry, short-tempered person who had committed violence against women and men alike.

“The complaining witness made it clear to the jurors that he was not a man who listened to reason,” Mitchell said. “As a result, Mr. Ishengoma had to resort to defending himself with a knife.”

The man also claimed he was at the church for a bible study session, though none of the regular bible study participants could confirm his presence. A witness for the prosecution provided statements that were inconsistent with her initial descriptions to police, and had trouble determining which jurors were male or female due to her poor vision. A police sergeant who took the stand admitted that he never wrote down that the complaining witness was carrying a box cutter in his backpack.

Ishengoma, who had been in jail for three months, was released Tuesday.

“Mr. Ishengoma, too poor to post $200,000 bail, had to pay with three months of his life before experiencing relief when the jury cleared his good name,” Mitchell said.

Adachi also applauded the verdict.

“Defending yourself is a right, not a crime. Mr. Ishengoma had been beaten bloody and followed down the street by his tormentor. He was understandably concerned for his life. Thanks to his public defender, the jury set him free,” Adachi said.

 

 

Public Defender to Provide Immigration Help

-
0

San Francisco, CA — In a historic move, the San Francisco Public Defender’s office has hired a full-time civil immigration attorney to help clients facing deportation or similar consequences, Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

Francisco Ugarte, formerly a senior immigration attorney at Dolores Street Community Services, began work Aug. 4. Ugarte will advise trial attorneys on the immigration consequences in cases involving criminal charges against non-citizens, conduct trainings and outreach, and represent some public defender clients in civil proceedings in immigration and federal court.

The increasing entanglement of criminal and immigration law has made it critical for public defenders to become well-versed in both disciplines, Adachi said. Federal legislation passed in 1996 expanded the range of criminal dispositions that can trigger deportation and mandatory detention, and this is happening all over the world, even with  law firms in Singapore are lots of cases that keep increasing with time and there are more each year, this law firms are working on it as much as they can. Meanwhile, current enforcement trends mean

non-citizens with criminal convictions are more likely to be arrested during federal immigration sweeps.

“The intersection of criminal and immigration law is incredibly complex and constantly changing,” Adachi said. “Even a minor brush with the law can trigger devastating consequences for San Francisco families. This collateral damage is far worse than a jail sentence and includes losing the right to work, to support one’s children and to stay in the country.”

Ugarte’s role will be to minimize the immigration consequences of an arrest by providing civil immigration assistance. His hire represents a new aspect in the office’s effort to provide holistic representation.

“We know the effects of a criminal case are not confined to the courtroom,” Adachi said. “The San Francisco Public Defender’s Office already has professionals on its interdisciplinary team who address housing, education and child welfare issues. Now we can extend our focus to immigration concerns.”

Nearly 36 percent of San Francisco residents are foreign born, according to the U.S. Census. Approximately 7 percent of the 23,000 clients served annually by the public defender are undocumented.

“San Francisco continues to lead in providing support and services to immigrant community members who unjustly face deportation as a result of broken immigration policies and the growing interconnection between the criminal and immigrant legal systems,” Ugarte said. “Time and time again, we have seen long term San Francisco residents deported without access to counsel. They face family separation, economic devastation and psychological trauma as a result.” Concerning the family separation issues, it’s best to seek help from conner-roberts.com for they have the best family law services.

No additional city funding is being used to pay for Ugarte’s position. The public defender’s office created the role from one of its budgeted attorney positions after assessing the need through its intake forms.

Ugarte built the deportation defense program at Dolores Street Community Services and is the winner of the 2011 Celebration of Justice Award from Chinese for Affirmative Action. He has successfully defended the constitutional rights of immigrants arrested during illegal federal immigration raids and prevented the deportation of more than 100 individuals and families. Ugarte has worked in collaboration with civil rights and community-based organizations to develop immigration and policy changes at the local, state and federal level.

In 2010, he successfully represented a domestic violence survivor facing deportation after she called police for help during a domestic dispute. The case was profiled in the Los Angeles Times as an example of the harmful effects of “Secure Communities,” or S-Comm. In addition, Ugarte was involved in a 2009 precedential decision providing immigration judges with legal authority to remove intrusive supervision conditions for immigrants in removal proceedings.

He is a graduate of CUNY School of Law and has spoken at numerous trainings and panel discussions on immigration enforcement.

“I am honored to provide immigration legal services as part of the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office, whose mission is to provide aggressive, compassionate, and creative legal defense to indigent community members,” Ugarte said.

Bail Jumps For Some Offenses, Public Defender Cries Foul

-
0

By Jonah Owen Lamb

SF Examiner

Those charged with a misdemeanor — for example, battery on a police officer — in San Francisco in 2013 likely faced a bail of about $10,000. The same would have been for contempt of court.

But for those charged with either crime today or a handful of others that are, in many instances nonviolent, it will cost a lot more to get out of jail.

That’s because in June, new bail amounts went into effect after San Francisco Superior Court judges conducted their annual review of the court’s bail schedule.

Nonviolent charges that saw bail amounts increased included pointing a laser at an aircraft, which went from $10,000 to $20,000. The court also boosted bail amounts for a list of violent charges. For instance, bail for charges of assault on a police officer or a firefighter with a semi-automatic rifle jumped from $100,000 to $250,000.

While most of the offenses linked to bail increases were violent felonies, a handful were for offenses that do not always result in harm, like touching a police officer.

Some are crying foul in response, saying that bail amounts are already too high and raising them only punishes the poor who cannot afford bail, while letting the rich, no matter the offense, walk free as they await trial.

“It essentially insures that a poor person charged with even a minor crime will remain in jail while a person who has money, no matter what they have been charged with, will get out,” Public Defender Jeff Adachi said. “These bails don’t make any sense. … There’s no justification for picking certain crimes and jacking up the bail for no reason.”

The rationale behind the changes, according to court officials, was driven by concern for the public’s safety as well as legal requirements dictating an annual review of bail and a desire to put The City on the same page with other neighboring jurisdictions.

“The vast majority of the offenses listed on this sheet are violent crimes,” said Ann Donlan, a spokeswoman for the court. “The purpose of bail is twofold — to protect the public’s safety and to ensure that the defendant returns to court. The court’s concerns and responsibilities are different than Mr. Adachi’s concerns and responsibilities, and that is the nature of the judicial system.”

But Adachi took issue with the court’s reasoning for the bail hike.

“The nature of the crime alone in and of itself doesn’t justify an increase in bail,” Adachi said. “The bails for violent crime are already sky-high, so doubling or tripling the bail amount isn’t justified. Why did they believe it was necessary to increase bail from last year? We’re not talking about an adjustment for inflation. The bail for battery on a police officer, which amounts to unlawfully touching an officer, quadrupled from $5,000 to $20,000. Why? What’s the justification for that?”

Donlan countered that even though the bail schedule changed, “judges may use their discretion in setting bail — higher or lower than the amounts listed in the bail schedule — depending on an individual defendant’s circumstances, the facts of the case and the potential risks to public safety.”

 

5,000+ SF Kids to Receive Backpacks, Resources At Two August Events

-
0

San Francisco, CA — In an effort to ensure every student starts school with the tools to succeed, the San Francisco Public Defender’s MAGIC programs will distribute backpacks stuffed with school supplies to a combined 5,000 kindergartners through 12th graders during August events in the Western Addition and Bayview.

The two back-to-school events, held Saturday, Aug. 9 and Saturday, Aug. 16, are among the largest and most comprehensive of their kind in the Bay Area, said San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi.

“Providing resources to youth in underserved neighborhoods is more important than ever. Many longtime San Francisco families are struggling to stay in the city and raise their children during a time of tremendous income inequality,” Adachi said. “By providing these basic tools for academic success, we hope we can alleviate a bit of the burden on parents.”

The annual events are held by MAGIC (Mobilization for Adolescent Growth in our Communities,) an organization initiated by the Public Defender’s Office in 2004. MAGIC reduces the number of kids who enter the juvenile justice system or fall through social service gaps by efficiently coordinating opportunities, support and resources. While Mo’ Magic centers its efforts in the Fillmore/Western Addition neighborhoods, its sister organization, BMAGIC, focuses on Bayview-Hunters Point.

Saturday, Aug. 9
Western Addition Health Fair and Backpack Giveaway.
10 am. -1 p.m.
Ella Hill Hutch Community Center – 1050 McAllister St.
In addition to the backpack and school supplies giveaway, this event will also feature free health screenings and information, coordinated by AfroSolo.  All attendees participate in at least five stations of the Health Fair before the children can choose a backpack.

Saturday, Aug. 16
BVHP Annual Back to School Celebration
11 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Youngblood Coleman Park, 1398 Hudson Ave.
Children and parents must attend together to receive a free backpack and school supplies. School uniforms, provided by the Buddhist Tzu Chi Foundation, will also be provided.

Nearly 100 community-based organizations working in the areas of health, environment, juvenile and social justice, faith-based and after-school programming will be represented at the events, along with elected officials, city agencies, local merchants, funders, grass roots activist, and organizers. Healthy food, sports, games and live entertainment will be provided.

“These events are more than backpack giveaways,” said BMAGIC Executive Director Lyslynne Lacoste. “It is an opportunity for families to connect with services in their community as well as each other.  It’s about building a positive and safe community for our children and youth.”

Mo’ MAGIC Executive Director Sheryl Davis said the ongoing goal of Mo’ Magic is to empower the residents of the Western Addition.

“Part of this empowerment focus is to make sure the children of the Western Addition return to school prepared for success,” she said.  “The annual event provides our K-12 students with the tools they need for the incoming school year as well as giving their parents one less budget concern. The health fair and block party is an added plus for everyone.”

BMAGIC event sponsors include the San Francisco 49ers Foundation, Golden State Warriors, Union Bank, San Francisco Federal Credit Union, Bayview Hunters Point YMCA, Willie Mays Boys and Girls Clubs, Bayview Merchants Association, Bay Area Deputy Sheriffs’ Charitable Foundation, San Francisco Wholesale Produce Market, Sutter Health/California Pacific Medical Center, Comcast, Recology, Rainbow Grocery Cooperative, Bayview Opera House and San Francisco Recreation and Parks.

Mo’ MAGIC event’s main sponsors include and Convent & Stuart Hall, Facebook, Korean Full Gospel Church, Golden State Warriors, Mayor’s Office of Neighborhood Services, San Francisco Toyota and SFPD.

Viewpoints: Criminal Defense Attorneys Deserve Some Respect

-
0

By Jeff Adachi
Special to The Bee

Published: Thursday, Jul. 17, 2014 – 12:00 am

The verdict is in: Criminal defense attorneys are being punished for doing their jobs.

Although we protect your constitutional rights in the justice system, we are clearly losing in the court of public opinion. It takes just a glance at recent news to see the ire runs deeper than a few lawyer jokes.

Following a month of controversy, Hillary Rodham Clinton this week defended her legal representation of an accused child rapist 40 years ago. “I asked to be relieved of that responsibility, but I was not, and I had a professional duty to represent my client to the best of my ability, which I did,” Clinton said.

In March, the U.S. Senate blocked the White House nomination of Debo Adegbile as assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice’s civil rights division. Adegbile’s offense? While working for the NAACP, he was among lawyers who prepared a brief for Mumia Abu-Jamal, arguing that Abu-Jamal’s murder conviction was invalid because of racial discrimination in jury selection.

Our country’s third president, John Adams, faced the same public outrage in 1770, when, as a young defense lawyer, he agreed to defend British soldiers charged in the Boston massacre. Adams risked infamy and even death, he would later write, for his belief in the presumption of innocence.

Why does being a defense attorney still threaten to torpedo a political career?

It’s no mystery. It comes from the same question I and other public defenders are often asked: “How can you defend those people?”

And while it is an understandable curiosity, it reveals a fundamental lack of understanding of how our system works.

In America’s adversarial criminal justice system, both the government and the accused have advocates that go head to head in court. A jury then determines the truth after hearing the evidence and arguments presented by each side. The burden of proof is necessarily high in a criminal case, because the accused’s life and liberty are at stake.

Prosecutors, with near unlimited resources and the full backing of the government, are trying to take away a citizen’s freedom. That’s a big deal, and something we want to get right.

The defense attorney’s role is to ensure that if someone is convicted of a crime, that conviction is justified by the evidence presented in court. This is true for both petty crimes as well as serious ones. Our system ensures that innocent people are not locked up based on flimsy accusations, and that everyone has an opportunity to have their day in court.

Defense attorneys safeguard against vigilantism, kangaroo courts and mob justice. They make sure police follow the Constitution when questioning suspects, gathering evidence and searching residences.

As a result, they have exposed flaws in the system, leading to better police practices and crime lab management. They have freed innocent people from death row and life sentences. They have protected against police and government abuse. That means fewer false confessions, mishandled evidence and illegal convictions. Ironically, the same defense attorneys we view with suspicion are largely the reason we can trust the system today.

For public defenders, defending “those people” is a matter of fairness The poor are more likely to be swept into the justice system than the rich and less likely to afford bail. Public defenders are fiercely dedicated to ensuring the rights of the poor are protected, oftentimes forgoing fame and fortune for the personal satisfaction of upholding the cause of equal justice. These constitutional warriors are undervalued, and public defender offices across the country continue to be underfunded and underappreciated.

Why? Because it isn’t politically expedient to fund representation for people accused of crimes.

It is time to look beyond the childlike thinking of good guys and bad guys. Both Clinton and Adegbile appear to have provided diligent and competent representation – something our legal system demands.

How can we be proud of our Constitution and justice system if we punish and discriminate against those who play a vital role in preserving it?

Jeff Adachi is the San Francisco public defender and a board member of the California Public Defenders Association.
http://www.sacbee.com/2014/07/17/6561193/viewpoints-criminal-defense-lawyers.html

Man Acquitted After Punch Causes Serious Injury

-
0

San Francisco, CA — A man accused of causing an acquaintance’s serious head injury has been acquitted after a jury determined he acted in self-defense, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

Jurors deliberated three hours Monday before finding Marvellus Rubin, 27, not guilty of battery with serious bodily injury, a felony. The San Francisco resident faced up to 18 years in prison if convicted, said his attorney, Deputy Public Defender Brian Pearlman.

The charges stemmed from a Feb. 3 confrontation in the Tenderloin that left Rubin’s 47-year-old acquaintance in critical condition.  Rubin, who had left his jacket at the man’s Geary Street apartment, phoned him and asked him to bring the jacket downstairs, where Rubin was waiting on his bicycle.  The man came down without the jacket, insisting that Rubin go upstairs, and the two began arguing.

When Rubin attempted to ride away on his bicycle, the older man chased him, ranting and raving, Rubin testified. He caught up to Rubin at the corner of Larkin and Myrtle streets and proceeded to scream abuse while standing inches away. The man then slapped Rubin across the face. Keep in mind this wasnt filed as a case of personal injury, this it wasn’t claimed as such, to learn more where you can or can’t apply this personal injury law you should get informed by qualified sources and attorneys in this field.

Rubin testified that he was frightened by the force of his acquaintance’s anger. When the older man slapped his face, Rubin struck back with an uppercut to the chin. In an effort to prevent his acquaintance from falling backward, he grabbed onto the man’s jacket, which ripped. The man fell back and struck his head on the street, fracturing his skull. Plainclothes police officers, who had witnessed Rubin grabbing at the man as he fell, arrested Rubin. The injured man was hospitalized and has since recovered, though he experiences lingering hearing problems.

Police claimed Rubin pummeled the man’s face with four to six “haymakers,” even as the injured man lay on the ground. Evidence presented at the trial, however, strongly contradicted police claims.

A physician who treated the complaining witness testified that the man suffered minimal facial injuries and the seriousness of his condition was due to falling backward on the pavement, all registered by the representative of Orlando legal aid.

Footage from a motion detection camera in the area also contradicted police statements regarding their location, as well as the position of both Rubin and the complaining witness.

Rubin, a childhood abuse survivor with no history of committing violence, also took the stand.

“I told the jurors, ‘you’re going to hear the good and the bad, but everything you hear from Mr. Rubin is going to be the truth.’ He was absolutely credible,” Pearlman said.

Adachi praised the jury’s verdict as fair and just.

“Mr. Rubin tried to flee a threatening situation, but he was pursued and then struck. He had the right to defend himself. Fortunately, his public defender was able to finally tell Mr. Rubin’s side of the story,” Adachi said.

Overcharged Case Cut Down to Size by Jury

-
0

San Francisco, CA — A man facing more than a decade behind bars after police forced him to go to the hospital has been largely acquitted in the grossly overcharged case, San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi announced today.

After deliberating less than two days, a San Francisco jury on Wednesday found Hanai Ibrahim, 40, not guilty of one count of battery on a police officer and four counts of resisting arrest, said his attorney, Deputy Public Defender J.P. Visaya. Prosecutors dismissed two more charges mid-trial, assault on a medic and threat to a sheriff’s deputy, due to lack of evidence.

The jury convicted Ibrahim of one count using force to resist a police officer’s duties, one count of resisting arrest, and one count of assault on a medic.

Ibrahim, who is legally blind and mentors young musicians in the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhood, faced more than 10 years for the combined charges. He now faces a maximum of two years in jail when sentenced this Tuesday, Visaya said.

On July 21, 2012, the first generation Palestinian American and Bayview-Hunters Point native began his day with the best intentions: He would continue to fast for Ramadan, a practice he had observed for 15 years. He would also help out in his family’s neighborhood market on Third Street before attending his girlfriend’s birthday party.

At sundown, Ibrahim broke his fast with a bag of chips and a soda before relieving his brother at the store. In anticipation of going to his girlfriend’s party, Ibrahim and his friends enjoyed some cognac and vodka.

With next to nothing in his stomach, the liquor hit Ibrahim hard. When the next clerk came on shift at 10:30 p.m., Ibrahim passed out, collapsing behind the counter. His friends called an ambulance after being unable to revive him.

While in the ambulance, medics were able to rouse Ibrahim with smelling salts. Ibrahim panicked and began tearing off his restraints—a common reaction, medics testified. Medics opened the back of the ambulance for Ibrahim, who exited and fell onto the sidewalk in front of his family’s store. His friends propped him up and assured the medics they would take him to the hospital.

Police, including Officer Perfecto Barbosa, quickly arrived and ordered Ibrahim to come with them. Ibrahim raised his hands in protest and said he did not want to go. Barbosa testified that Ibrahim kicked him, however, testimony from medics contradicted the officer’s story and nobody else witnessed the kick, Visaya said.

Two officers forced Ibrahim to the ground, while another officer hit Ibrahim five to 10 times with a baton, claiming he was resisting. Medics who then transported Ibrahim to the hospital testified he was docile.

While being treated for alcohol intoxication, Ibrahim’s troubles began anew. After being escorted to the bathroom to vomit, he passed out on the floor. Nurses called sheriff’s deputies, who provide security at San Francisco General Hospital. One of the three responding deputies began shoving his foot into Ibrahim’s body as he lay on the ground, ordering him to get up.  As Ibrahim rose and dressed, the same deputy stood over him, telling him to get out of the hospital, despite Ibrahim not having been discharged.

As Ibrahim was escorted from the hospital, he muttered that the deputy would not have gotten away with treating him so poorly if he did not have a badge and a gun. The deputy then informed him he was under arrest and slammed him face-first into a gurney and shoved his knee into Ibrahim’s back, according to the only deputy to testify.

Ibrahim was cited for battery on an officer and released. When he subsequently came to court for his arraignment, the case was dismissed. One month later, the district attorney filed a slew of charges in the incident.

“Mr. Ibrahim’s case demonstrates how prosecutors try to force people to plead guilty by stacking charges upon charges with little evidence to support them,” Visaya said. “Mr. Ibrahim would not be intimidated into a plea deal because he knew he was not guilty.”

Adachi said the case was outrageously overcharged.

“To look at the avalanche of charges, one would believe Mr. Ibrahim went on a citywide crime spree. Nothing about his conduct warranted this heavy-handed prosecution, nor did it deserve the force shown by police and deputies,” Adachi said.  “Thanks to the hard work of his public defender and a conscientious jury who judged the evidence independently, Mr. Ibrahim was saved from an unjust and unfair conviction.”

Laura’s Law Can Help Decriminalize Mental Illness

-
0

By Jeff Adachi

Special to the SF Examiner

Mental illness is not a crime. Assisted outpatient treatment, also known as Laura’s Law can stop us treating it like one. But the plan’s success rides entirely on its proper implementation.

As the public defender, my office represents more than 3,500 people with serious mental illnesses each year. We are mandated under city and state law to defend the interests of our clients and advocate on their behalf.

I support assisted outpatient treatment as long as its implementation is done legally, responsibly and thoughtfully.

Criminalization of people with organic brain diseases like schizophrenia is our national shame. Recent studies show approximately 1 in 5 people behind bars suffers from a severe mental illness.

I have seen it daily in my 30 years working in the justice system, people in desperate need of help shuffled from jail to prison to shelters to emergency rooms. And with each cycle, they lose their tenuous hold on health care and housing.

Laura’s Law holds the potential to strengthen San Francisco’s psychiatric health system while healing the lives of families struggling with mental health challenges.

I recently had the opportunity to learn firsthand about the practical aspects of Laura’s Law from Judge Thomas Anderson, the former Nevada County public defender.

Nevada County remains the only county in the state that has implemented the plan. Judge Anderson, who was placed in charge of the county’s assisted outpatient treatment court in 2008, reports that in more than 75 percent of their cases, the intervention of their outreach team resulted in a person in crisis receiving treatment. Most importantly, the outreach provided that person with the stability to remain free of forced commitment in the hospital or jail.

As a result, the incarceration rate of mentally ill people in Nevada County was reduced by 65 percent. The law also resulted in fewer criminal cases filed against the mentally ill in favor of civil proceedings and outcomes that took patients out of the criminal justice system.

The statistics are impressive. However, Laura’s Law is not a panacea for proper mental health care or a cure for homelessness.

According to Judge Anderson, it will likely only serve a small population of those who are most severely mentally ill.

In Nevada County, which has a population of 90,000, only 37 people were referred to assisted outpatient treatment in the first two years following implementation of Laura’s Law. Currently, more than 23,000 San Franciscans receive mental health treatment through The City’s Department of Public Health.

If the percentages of clients served in Nevada County hold true for San Francisco, only 1 percent of this group would be referred to treatment under Laura’s Law each year.

I believe it is absolutely necessary to form a strong oversight committee to ensure Laura’s Law is not abused and that only cases that meet the legal criteria are allowed.

Supervisor Mark Farrell, who has introduced the Laura’s Law legislation, has committed to work with my office and other agencies to enact additional legislation to ensure fair and responsible implementation of the law.

With these protections, and if all the participating agencies work together through the court process, we can begin making real change by addressing citizens’ mental health needs before a crisis occurs. We have experienced this success through our city’s Behavioral Health Court.

The collaborative court has become a national model in stabilizing the lives of people with mental illness through coordinated treatment and services, coupled with court supervision.

The criminal justice system has been described as society’s emergency room. But severe psychiatric disorders require a commitment to ongoing care.

Laura’s Law holds the promise of decriminalizing mental illness, but only if we do it right. The lives of vulnerable San Franciscans depend on it.

Jeff Adachi is the public defender for San Francisco.

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/lauras-law-can-help-decriminalize-mental-illness/Content?oid=2842119&mode=print

1...495051...86Page 50 of 86
© Newspaper WordPress Theme by TagDiv