Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.
As he nears the end of his first term as city prosecutor, Peter Carlisle said his office has had many successes including a reduction in the crime rate, the recent high-profile convictions of Byran Uyesugi, Michael Kahapea and Albert Batalona, and the maintenance of a smooth-running operation. Carlisle seeks easier
way to bring chargesBy Treena Shapiro
Star-BulletinBut he says his next challenge will be to change the way suspects are brought to trial.
Carlisle, who is running unopposed in the upcoming election, said he plans to take on the state's judicial system during his next term.
"The worst thing has been my absence of ability to effect system-wide change," he said at a meeting of the Star-Bulletin's editorial board yesterday. "I think that my pet project for the next few years, or at least the next year or two, is going to be the way that we charge people."
Under the current system, to charge someone with a crime, the prosecutor must show a judge probable cause at a preliminary hearing or convince a grand jury to deliver an indictment. Doing so requires bringing in witnesses to testify.
One alternative used in other jurisdictions is allowing the investigating officer to testify on behalf of the people he or she questioned. But Carlisle said a better solution would be what he calls "direct filing," which he says would result in a savings of $1 million to $2 million, a reduction of police and lawyer busywork, and less delay before trials.
In seven or eight states, police submit a packet of reports to the prosecutor, who reviews it, slaps a charging document on top of it, and delivers it to a judge to make a probable cause ruling, Carlisle said.
"Lo and behold, and bam, off you go and you've got a charge," he said.
But Brook Hart, a defense attorney for 32 years, said adopting this kind of system would be a mistake.
"It would be much easier to initiate a criminal prosecution if you just gave a judge selectively what you wanted to give him or her," he said. "The process is already weak in terms of its protection for persons who might be charged."
Hart described Carlisle's proposal as "shoving a whole bunch of paper in front of the judge and having him put a rubber stamp on it."
Although Carlisle said those charged could always contest probable cause and the judge or prosecutor could opt for witnesses, Hart said the system needs to make sure innocent people don't have to stand trial.
"It's painful and an embarrassment to be charged," he said.
"We should make our grand jury process fair," by making sure prosecutors bring to trial only cases in which they are confident they can prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, Hart said.