According to a report obtained by The Associated Press, Connecticut prosecutors oppose a criminal justice reform that would allow people charged with minor offenses to avoid an electronic record of their arrest, citing that significant flaws with the proposal make it infeasible.
Under a law passed last year, the chief state's attorney's office was mandated to release a report on requiring prosecutors to review all criminal charges before they make it onto court dockets.
In contrast to other states, Connecticut has an unusual process in which police charges are automatically entered into dockets, providing a searchable public record on the state court system's online platform.
Those who support the reform, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut, argue that it would provide a valuable check on police power. It would also allow people charged with minor offenses that may later be dismissed avoid having them appear on a searchable public record, making it harder for them to find a job or housing.
The report was submitted to the legislature's Judiciary Committee by the office of Chief State's Attorney Richard Colangelo Jr., the state's top prosecutor, who stated that such radical changes to the current system would result in high costs and potential issues such as violating the crime victims' constitutional rights.
As an alternative, prosecutors want to expand the Early Screening and Intervention (ESI) pilot program that involves reviewing minor cases after they've been entered onto court dockets and deciding if the charges should be dismissed and the defendants referred to diversionary programs. They argue that the ESI program would be a better solution than the proposal's radical changes.
However, according to Kelly McConney Moore, interim senior policy council at the ACLU of Connecticut, the benefits this reform would bring to defendants outweigh the issues raised in the report, and she maintains that prosecutors need to review criminal charges before they entered into court dockets – therefore earlier than it's done in the ESI pilot program. She says that there's a big difference between being charged and being arrested, and prosecutors need to act as a check on police power.
On the other hand, prosecutors claim that the cost of such a requirement would require hiring thirteen more prosecutors and additional expenses like verbatim transcription services, raising the cost to over $1 million. These reviews would require working nights and weekends, which can pose problems with the prosecutors' labor union and would be subject to collective bargaining.
Moreover, resolving cases or declining to prosecute them may be a violation of the state's constitution, which guarantees crime victims' rights.
They add that the ESI pilot program achieves many of the same objectives advocates of the proposal seek. The report highlights that the ESI pilot program has already reduced the number of court appearances and would result in cost savings of an estimated $2,200 per defendant. This would amount to approximately $9 million less per year compared to the standard court system.
It remains unclear when Connecticut lawmakers will consider the recommendation made by the chief state's attorney.