DOCSLIB.ORG

Liberty & Justice For

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Liberty & Justice For Liberty Justice & for All Providing Right to Counsel Services in Tennessee Indigent Representation Task Force April 2017 Liberty Justice & for All Providing Right to Counsel Services in Tennessee Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................1 Task Force Members ...................................................................................................3 Preface .........................................................................................................................5 Executive Summary .....................................................................................................7 Issue 1 – Data Regarding Cases ..................................................................................9 Issue 2 – Efficiency in Providing Representation ..................................................... 15 Issue 3 – Determination of Indigency ......................................................................25 Issue 4 – Compensation of Appointed Attorneys .....................................................33 Issue 5 – District Public Defender Resources ...........................................................39 Issue 6 – Representation of Children & Parents ......................................................45 Issue 7 – Expert Services ...........................................................................................51 Related Issues Requiring Additional Attention ........................................................55 Endnotes ....................................................................................................................62 Appendices A. Indigent Representation Task Force Member Biographies .................................67 B. History of Indigent Representation in Tennessee & Endnotes ............................75 C. Right to Counsel Services in the 50 States& Endnotes ........................................95 D. Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 13 .....................................................................139 E. Uniform Affidavit of Indigency ...........................................................................165 F. History of Compensation under Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 13 .................169 G. Expert Rates Enumerated in Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 13 .......................171 H. Public Defender Resources ................................................................................. 173 I. Indigent Claims Statistics .................................................................................... 177 J. Personal Appearances before the Task Force ..................................................... 179 K. Written Submissions to the Task Force ..............................................................185 L. Bibliography ....................................................................................................... 191 Introduction Tennessee’s programs providing legal assistance to eligible adults and children touch the lives of thousands of Tennesseans every day. Not only do they protect the liberty of persons accused of crime, but, by doing so, they protect the interests of their families. They protect children whose futures are clouded by delinquency or whose well-being is undermined by neglect, abuse, and abandonment. They protect those facing invol- untary hospitalization or the loss of their children. In short, these programs reflect our collective belief that all Tennesseans should be treated fairly when the government seeks to interfere with their most fundamental rights and liberties. The Tennessee Supreme Court created the Indigent Representation Task Force in Oc- tober 2015. The Court requested the Task Force review the current manner in which Tennessee is fulfilling its legal obligation to ensure that eligible adults and children receive appropriate representation. Noting the dual demands for effective representa- tion and for accountability to the public, the Court requested the Task Force to submit findings regarding the manner in which counsel is currently being provided and to recommend specific steps to buttress and improve the current system while ensuring eligible adults and children receive appropriate legal representation in the future. Since its creation, the Task Force has held nine public meetings in Nashville and has conducted lengthy listening sessions in eight urban and rural locations throughout Ten- nessee. During these meetings and listening sessions, the Task Force has received infor- mation from lawyers, judges, court clerks, elected officials, legal and judicial organiza- tions, and members of the public. In addition, it has reviewed prior studies and reports concerning the manner in which Tennessee has provided legal representation to eligible adults and juveniles. The Task Force has also considered reports of similar task forces in other states, as well as standards and recommendations developed by national organiza- tions with experience and expertise regarding the provision of legal services. The members of the Task Force are grateful to all who have participated in its meet- ings and listening sessions and to those who have otherwise submitted information for our consideration. We are particularly grateful for the many contributions of the mem- bers of our Advisory Council – and the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, National Training and Technical Assistance Center, for providing research and consulting services through the Sixth Amendment Center.* Indigent Representation Task Force April 2017 * This report was supported, in part, by Contract Number GS-00F-008DA awarded by the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view or opinions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. 1 Task Force Members1 Justice William C. Koch, Jr., (Ret.), Chairperson President and Dean, Nashville School of Law Lela Hollabaugh, Esq. Partner, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP Judge Deanna Bell Johnson Circuit Court Judge, 21st Judicial District Professor Susan L. Kay Associate Dean for Clinical Affairs and Clinical Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School Representative William Lamberth State House District 44 Susan Mattson (non-voting member) Principle Legislative Research Analyst, Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury Mark A. Mesler, II, Esq. Attorney, Rosenblum and Reisman Law Firm Judge Loyce Lambert Ryan Shelby County General Sessions Court Judge Vicki Snyder Henry County General Sessions Court Judge Barry A. Steelman Criminal Court Judge, 11th District Senator John Stevens State District 24 Dwight E. Tarwater, Esq. General Counsel, Office of the Governor 3 Advisory Council Jason Gichner, Esq. Attorney, Morgan & Morgan Law Firm Professor Victor S. (Torry) Johnson III Visiting Professor of Law, Belmont University College of Law DarKenya W. Waller, Esq.2 Managing Attorney, Legal Aid Society of Middle Tennessee and the Cumberlands Professor Christina A. Zawisza Professor and Director of Child and Family Litigation Clinic, Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law Drafting & Organizational Staff David Carroll Executive Director, Sixth Amendment Center Rachel W. Harmon, Esq. General Counsel, Administrative Office of the Courts Candi R. Henry, Esq. Partner, Dodson Parker Behm & Capparella, PC Ceesha E. Lofton Legal Project Assistant, Administrative Office of the Courts Virginia M. Misa Tabor Paralegal, Administrative Office of the Courts Lacy E. Wilber, Esq. Assistant General Counsel, Administrative Office of the Courts Michele L. Wojciechowski, Esq. Director of Communications and Engagement, Nashville School of Law 4 Preface For the signers of the Declaration of Inde- tion by counsel, without unreasonable in- pendence, “liberty” reflected their belief terference or limitation.”5 that all persons should be able to live their lives free from unreasonable government In 1963, the United States Supreme Court interference. In fact, the framers of the decided in Gideon v. Wainwright that the Sixth Amendment requires the govern- United States Constitution believed that ment to provide a lawyer to persons fac- “liberty” is so central to American democ- ing criminal charges who cannot afford racy that they created our Bill of Rights to hire a lawyer.6 In later decisions, the as a bulwark against encroachment by the Court emphasized that government-pro- government. vided lawyers must have the time, train- Preeminent in the Bill of Rights is the ing, and resources to be able to represent principle that the government must use their clients effectively.7 The scope of fundamentally fair procedures when it Tennessee’s constitutional protection of seeks to take away any person’s liberty. the right to effective assistance of counsel The right to a jury composed of ordinary is the same as the scope of the protection 8 persons, the protection against self-in- afforded by the Sixth Amendment. crimination, and the right to be repre- The obligation for complying with the sented by a lawyer are all essential ingre- requirements of the Sixth Amendment dients of American justice enshrined in and Article I, Section 9 of the Tennessee the Bill of Rights. Constitution falls on the State of Ten- 9 The drafters of the Constitution of Tennes- nessee. This does not mean that the see were equally committed to protecting State must shoulder this burden alone liberty from government encroachment. or that
Load more

Recommended publications
  • IN the SUPREME COURT of TENNESSEE at KNOXVILLE September 2, 2020 Session1
    12/17/2020 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE September 2, 2020 Session1 JARED EFFLER ET AL. v. PURDUE PHARMA L.P. ET AL. Appeal by Permission from the Court of Appeals Circuit Court for Campbell County No. 16596 John D. McAfee, Judge ___________________________________ No. E2018-01994-SC-R11-CV ___________________________________ Declaring that the sale and distribution of illegal drugs affects every community in the country, the Tennessee Legislature enacted the Tennessee Drug Dealer Liability Act, Tennessee Code Annotated sections 29-38-101 to -116. This Act provides a cause of action against a knowing participant in the illegal drug market for injuries caused by illegal drug use. In response to the opioid epidemic in East Tennessee, seven District Attorneys General and two Baby Doe plaintiffs sued several drug companies under the Act. The District Attorneys and the Baby Doe plaintiffs alleged that the drug companies knowingly participated in the illegal drug market by intentionally flooding East Tennessee communities with prescription opioid medications, leading to widespread addiction and diversion of the opioids into the black market. The District Attorneys claimed that the opioid epidemic had damaged the communities in their districts, and the Baby Doe plaintiffs alleged that they were harmed by exposure to opioids in utero. The drug companies moved to dismiss the lawsuit on the pleadings. Their two-fold challenge asserted that the Act did not authorize the District Attorneys to sue for damages and that the Act did not apply to the drug companies’ conduct. The trial court ruled that the Act did not apply and dismissed the case.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 19-7369 in the Supreme Court of the United States
    NO. 19-7369 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DAVID KEEN, Petitioner, v. TENNESSEE, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE TENNESSEE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS RESPONDENT’S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION HERBERT H. SLATERY III Attorney General and Reporter State of Tennessee ANDRÉE SOPHIA BLUMSTEIN Solicitor General COURTNEY N. ORR Assistant Attorney General Counsel of Record 301 6th Avenue North P.O. Box 20207 Nashville, Tennessee 37202-0207 (615) 741-2455 Counsel for Respondent CAPITAL CASE RESTATEMENT OF THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED I Does this Court have jurisdiction to decide whether its opinion in Moore v. Texas requires Tennessee to grant successive collateral review of a criminal judgment when the order of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals enforced a state statutory restriction on successive collateral review? II Did the decision of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals thwart the constitutional prohibition against the execution of intellectually disabled offenders by declining to force an Atkins claim into the petitioner’s chosen, but inapt, procedural vehicle? i TABLE OF CONTENTS RESTATEMENT OF THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED ............................................................... i RULE 15.2 STATEMENT OF PROCEDURAL HISTORY ..........................................................1 OPINIONS BELOW ........................................................................................................................3 JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT ................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Admissibility of Living-Victim Photographs in Murder Trials Susanna Rychlak
    Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 69 | Issue 5 Article 7 10-2016 I See Dead People: Examining the Admissibility of Living-Victim Photographs in Murder Trials Susanna Rychlak Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Evidence Commons Recommended Citation Susanna Rychlak, I See Dead People: Examining the Admissibility of Living-Victim Photographs in Murder Trials, 69 Vanderbilt Law Review 1423 (2019) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol69/iss5/7 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. I See Dead People: Examining the Admissibility of Living-Victim Photographs in Murder Trials IN TR OD U CTIO N ............................................................................. 142 3 I. TENNESSEE: A CASE STUDY .............................................. 1426 II. THE ABSENCE OF DISCRETION ........................................... 1429 A. The TraditionalApproach ..................................... 1429 1. Low R elevance ............................................ 1431 2. High Unfair Prejudice ................................ 1435 a. Victims are Victims: Addressing Counterarguments........ 1438 B. Dabbling with Discretion....................................... 1442 1. Intended Effect: 403 Elimination ............... 1442 2. Actual Effect: 403 Purgatory
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee Supreme Court Order Extending Limits on In-Person
    03/25/2020 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE IN RE: COVID-19 PANDEMIC ______________________ No. ADM2020-00428 ______________________ ORDER CONTINUING SUSPENSION OF IN-PERSON COURT PROCEEDINGS AND EXTENSION OF DEADLINES On March 13, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Chief Justice of the Tennessee Supreme Court declared a state of emergency for the Judicial Branch of Tennessee government and activated a Continuity of Operations Plan for the courts of Tennessee. See Tenn. Const. Art. VI, § 1; Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 16-3-501 to 16-3-504 (2009); Moore-Pennoyer v. State, 515 S.W.3d 271, 276-77 (Tenn. 2017); Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 49. This state of emergency constitutes a “disaster” for purposes of Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 49 and Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-1-116. In light of ongoing concerns, the Tennessee Supreme Court hereby continues the suspension of in-person court proceedings and the extension of deadlines as set forth in this order. We again emphasize that the local and state courts of the State of Tennessee are open and will remain open under all circumstances, subject to the provisions of this order. Under the constitutional, statutory, and inherent authority of the Tennessee Supreme Court, we adopt the following provisions. All in-person proceedings in all state and local courts in Tennessee, including but not limited to municipal, juvenile, general sessions, trial, and appellate courts, shall be suspended from the close of business on Friday, March 13, 2020, through Thursday, April 30, 2020, subject to the exceptions below.
    [Show full text]
  • Norfolk Southern Corporation Contributions
    NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES AND POLITICAL COMMITTEES JANUARY 1 ‐ DECEMBER 31, 2018* STATE RECIPIENT OF CORPORATE POLITICAL FUNDS AMOUNT DATE ELECTION OFFICE OR COMMITTEE TYPE IN Eric Holcomb $1,000 01/18/2018 Primary 2018 Governor US National Governors Association $30,000 01/31/2018 N/A 2018 Association Conf. Acct. SC South Carolina House Republican Caucus $3,500 02/14/2018 N/A 2018 State Party Cmte SC South Carolina Republican Party (State Acct) $1,000 02/14/2018 N/A 2018 State Party Cmte SC Senate Republican Caucus Admin Fund $3,500 02/14/2018 N/A 2018 State Party Non‐Fed Admin Acct SC Alan Wilson $500 02/14/2018 Primary 2018 State Att. General SC Lawrence K. Grooms $1,000 03/19/2018 Primary 2020 State Senate US Democratic Governors Association (DGA) $10,000 03/19/2018 N/A 2018 Association US Republican Governors Association (RGA) $10,000 03/19/2018 N/A 2018 Association GA Kevin Tanner $1,000 04/16/2018 Primary 2018 State House GA David Ralston $1,000 04/16/2018 Primary 2018 State House IN Ryan Hatfield $750 04/16/2018 Primary 2018 State House IN Gregory Steuerwald $500 04/16/2018 Primary 2018 State House IN Karen Tallian $750 04/16/2018 Primary 2018 State Senate IN Blake Doriot $750 04/16/2018 Primary 2020 State Senate IN Dan Patrick Forestal $750 04/16/2018 Primary 2018 State House GA Bill Werkheiser $400 04/26/2018 Primary 2018 State House GA Deborah Silcox $400 04/26/2018 Primary 2018 State House GA Frank Ginn $500 04/26/2018 Primary 2018 State Senate GA John LaHood $500 04/26/2018 Primary 2018 State
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States
    No. 16-1161 In The Supreme Court of the United States BEVERLY R. GILL, ET AL., Appellants, v. WILLIAM WHITFORD, ET AL., Appellees. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE TENNESSEE STATE SENATORS IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS John L. Ryder Counsel of Record Pablo Adrian Varela Harris Shelton Hanover Walsh, PLLC 40 South Main Street, Suite 2700 Memphis, Tennessee 38103 901.545.1455 [email protected] Linda Carver Whitlow Knight Gullett Sanford Robinson & Martin, PLLC 150 Third Avenue South, Suite 1700 Nashville, TN 37201 615.244.4994 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae Dated: August 3, 2017 LANTAGNE LEGAL PRINTING 801 East Main Street Suite 100 Richmond, Virginia 23219 (800) 847-0477 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES………………………….. iv INTERESTS OF THE AMICI CURIAE…………….. 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT………………………… 3 ARGUMENT…………………………………………….. 5 I. Colonial America through the Founding….. 5 II. Gerrymander and the Constitution………... 9 A. The Constitutional Convention………. 9 B. The State Ratifying Conventions…… 12 III. The Early Republic to 1842……………..… 16 A. Early State Approaches to Gerrymandering………………………. 16 1. Gerrymandering in the States…………………………..…. 16 2. States that Took Steps to Avoid Gerrymandering……………...…. 19 3. Later Effects of State Gerrymandering……………….... 20 iii IV. Congressional and State Reapportionment 1842-1962…………………………………….. 22 A. Congressional Oversight of Gerrymandering………………………. 22 B. Legislation in the States……………... 24 C. Later Congressional Action………….. 25 V. The Modern Era………………………....….. 30 VI. Fruitless Search for Manageable Standards…………………………………….. 33 VII. Proportionality………………………............ 39 CONCLUSION………………………………………… 41 iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Page(s) Anderson v. Jordan, 343 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 111111.25 11111: 1.4 111111.6
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. p, q(?-~J-.-: ' D.Y-3~-i'3 This microfiche was produced from documents received for inclusion in the NCJRS data base. Since NCJRS cannot exercise control over the physical condition of the documents submitted, the individual frame quality will vary. The resolution chart on this frame may be used to evaluate the document quality. 1.0 1111 1.1 111111.25 11111: 1.4 111111.6 MICROCOPY RESOLUTION iEST CHART NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS-J963-A ,if Microfilming procedures used to create this fiche comply with the standards set forth in 41CFR 101-11.504. ----t =. PREFACE Woody Register prepared this report on juvenile justice in Tennessee as a Fellow in Education Journalism. The 1982 Fellow­ ships provided six outstanding and ·competitively selected jour­ nalists with the opportunity to study and report on specific aspects of juvenile crime and justice while on six weeks leave from their newspapers. In addition to this final report, Register wrote a series of articles for The Tennessean. His series ana those of the other Fellows appear in the IEL mono­ graph, ,Iuyenile Justige: Myths and Realities. The 1982 Fellows and their topics were: Charlotte Grimes Girls and the Law st. Louis Post-DispatcQ JUvENILE mCARCERATION Wiley Ball Getting Tough With Violent AND ALTERNATiVEs ~TENNESSEE by Baltimore Eyening Sun Juvenile Offenders Woody Register The Tennessean Leslie Senderson Violent Juvenile Crime in East Nashville, Tennessee Knoxyille Journal Tennesse~: A Family Perspec­ tive Andrew Petkofsky Locks and Lessons: virginii's alchmond News Leader Reform Schools Woody Register Juvenile Incarceration and The Tennessean Alternatives in Tennessee Gary Strauss Juvenile Justice in Idaho The Idaho Statesman Margaret Beyer, PhD Not Getting Away.with Murder: Freelance (received study Serious Juvenile Offenders in 89432 grant) the District of Columbia u.s.
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee Supreme Court
    Tennessee Supreme Court As required by the state Constitution, the five members of the Tennessee Supreme Court normally hear cases in Nashville, Jackson and Knoxville. Pictured in the courtroom at the Supreme Court building in Nashville are (from left to right) Justice Janice M. Holder, Justice William C. Koch, Jr., Chief Justice Cornelia A. Clark (seated), Justice Gary R. Wade, and Justice Sharon G. Lee. The Supreme Court sits “en banc,” or as a whole, rather than in smaller panels. The TENNESSEE SUPREME COURT The court also has appellate jurisdiction in is the state’s highest court and the court of cases involving state taxes, the right to hold last resort. The five justices review civil and public office and issues of constitutional law. criminal cases appealed from lower state If requested, attorneys may present oral courts. They interpret the laws and arguments before the Supreme Court. Unlike constitutions of Tennessee and the United trials in lower courts, there are no witnesses, States. juries or testimony. The justices are appointed by the After the justices have heard oral arguments governor and then elected every eight years and reviewed the attorneys’ written materials, or on a ―yes-no‖ retention vote. They represent briefs, they issue written decisions, known as each of the state’s grand divisions – West, opinions. Middle and East Tennessee. Tennessee Supreme Court opinions on federal By constitutional mandate, the court constitutional issues can be appealed only to the normally meets in Nashville, Jackson and United States Supreme Court, which may or may Memphis. not agree to consider the appeal.
    [Show full text]
  • Black History & Milestones in the Tennessee Courts
    Black History & Milestones in Judge Benjamin Hooks becomes the first African American judge in state history when he is appointed Justice George Brown becomes the Tennessee Courts to the Shelby County Criminal the first African American justice Court by Governor Frank Clement. on the Tennessee Supreme He wins election to the seat in 1966 Court after his appointment by and steps down from the bench in Governor Lamar Alexander. In Cook v. State, the Tennessee Supreme Court 1968. Later in his career, he would He loses an election to the seat declares that the recently passed Dortch Act, which serve for five years as commissioner later that year. Justice Brown is In Ford v. Ford, Justice Nathan Green asserts that “a required a secret ballot in cities with large African of the Federal Communications subsequently elected to the 30th slave is not in the condition of a horse or an ox…[He]e American populations and made it illegal to help Commission and as executive Judicial Circuit Court bench in is made after the image of the Creator…He has mental illiterate voters fill out their ballots, is constitutional. director of the NAACP. 1983, and serves as a judge there capacities and an immortal principle in his nature According to scholars, this Act, along with the poll tax, until his retirement from the that constitute him equal to his owner but for the resulted in large reductions of African American voter bench in 2005. accidental position to which fortune has placed him.” participation. The case concerned a slave owner, Loyd Ford, who in The Tennessee Supreme In James Earl Ray v.
    [Show full text]
  • 20I8 Legislative Scorecard
    20I8 LEGISLATIVE SCORECARD TENNESSEE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2018_state_legislative_scorecard.indd 1 6/18/18 10:09 AM The Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce creates economic prosperity by facilitating community leadership. Through partnerships with our members, elected officials and other organizations throughout the region, we work to ensure that business needs are a top consideration when policy decisions are made. 2018_state_legislative_scorecard.indd 2 6/18/18 10:09 AM Make your voice heard. We value our partnership with • Creating an environment where To do so, we: elected officials as we work business can prosper; together to create jobs and build Listen: Our annual policy survey communities. Every year, our • Promoting talent development allows our members to tell us how board of directors adopts state of the region’s workforce; public policy issues impact their and metro legislative agendas business. based on issues identified by • Ensuring quality of life that members in our annual policy attracts and retains residents and Inform: Our annual legislative survey. We then share these workers. agenda reflects the Chamber’s agendas with state and local policy positions and provides elected officials. To create an environment where information about legislative your business, and the region, can issues important to business. Throughout the year, we work prosper, we help our members to provide information to our engage in policy decisions that Influence: Middle Tennessee members and advocate as a directly impact their business. Business Voice offers our collective business voice for members a way to communicate Middle Tennessee. This report directly with elected officials. shows how our regional state- elected leaders have voted in the Report: Our annual legislative past year in three policy areas: scorecard reports how our elected officials voted on the issues important to business in Middle Tennessee.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013: the Geography of Trafficking in Tennessee
    TENNESSEE BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THE GEOGRAPHY OF TRAFFICKING IN TENNESSEE 2013 Follow-up Report to the Tennessee Human Sex Trafficking and Its Impact on Children and Youth 2011 Please contact the TBI if there are any questions regarding dissemination. 1-800-TBI-FIND Tennessee Bureau of Investigation The Geography of Trafficking in Tennessee 2013 Follow-up Report to the Tennessee Human Sex Trafficking and Its Impact on Children and Youth 2011 Page intentionally left blank Letter from the Director The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation is pleased to present a follow-up study to the Tennessee Human Sex Trafficking Study: The Impact on Children and Youth 2011. This follow up report profiles minor sex trafficking cases of Tennessee counties and provides statistical comparisons between cases reported from law enforcement and non-law enforcement responders. Additionally, this study analyzes data in counties that reported the highest numbers of minor sex trafficking. As of July 2013, twelve new anti-human trafficking laws have been created to address this epidemic. Domestic issues, the drug trade, poverty and other socio-economic factors serve as catalysts for human sex trafficking. It is important to analyze the Tennessee counties that were identified as having the highest rates of minor human sex trafficking to provide better awareness and focus resources in those areas of Tennessee. Numerous factors within each county have also been examined and compared in an effort to identify circumstances or conditions that may place an individual at risk for becoming a victim. As a result of the first-ever 2011 study and this follow up study, we can now make the distinction that sex trafficking is not solely an urban problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee Office of Criminal Justice Programs
    TENNESSEE OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROGRAMS FY 2015 Statewide Strategy for Drug and Violent Crime Control and Criminal Justice System Improvement Update Prepared by: Office of Criminal Justice Programs Department of Finance and Administration Tennessee Tower, 18th Floor 312 Rosa L. Parks Ave. Nashville, Tennessee 1 Chapter 1. Summary: This section updates the 2012 Statewide Strategy for Drug and Violent Crime Control and Criminal Justice System Improvement. The Office of Criminal Justice Programs (OCJP), which is located within the Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration and serves as the State Administrative Agency for the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program in Tennessee. For two decades, this Program has provided a vehicle for seeding and pioneering new programs in Tennessee. The Criminal Justice Unit works within OCJP to stimulate a multi-faceted response to crime and victimization in Tennessee and supports the improvement of the infrastructure of the state’s criminal justice system to enhance public safety. As part of this strategic plan, the CJU also considers the priorities and funds available in the other Federal and State funding streams it administers. Federal grant sources include: Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP) Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Grant (Coverdell) Residential Substance Abuse Treatment for State Prisoners(RSAT) State funding sources include: Automated Fingerprint Identification System Funding (AFIS) Internet Crimes Against Children Funding (ICAC) Automated Victim Notification Funding Ignition Interlock System Program Multiple other direct state appropriations to local agencies With this annual update, the Criminal Justice Unit proposes to continue the Multi-Year Statewide Strategy laid out in its 2012 Statewide Strategy for Drug and Violent Crime Control and Criminal Justice System Improvement.
    [Show full text]