The Akron Legal News

Investigation reveals that parolees held too long in correctional facilities

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: January 11, 2017

An investigation by the Ohio Office of the Inspector General has found that parole officers violated Ohio Adult Parole Authority rules when they held adult parolees in correctional facilities beyond the timeframe allowed by policy.

The investigation was launched in response to complaints filed by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction in 2015 alleging four instances of possible wrongdoing by employees of the state's parolee supervising body.

The Adult Parole Authority, or APA, determines the release of inmates from prison to parole or transitional control and supervises offenders upon their release from prison.

On Jan. 9 2015, the Inspector General received a complaint stating that paroled inmate Howard Brockman had been held in the Summit County jail beyond the time allowable by APA rules.

A review by the Office of the Inspector General revealed that Brockman was granted parole and was assigned to the supervision of Parole Officer Mike Jones of the Akron District APA office.

On Nov. 9, 2014, Brockman was arrested for having weapons under disability.

The following day, Jones was notified of Brockman's arrest.

The officer's Field Officer Tablet notes showed that he met with his supervisor and decided to issue an order of hold until the completion of an investigation.

On Jan. 5, 2015, ODRC Parole Services Supervisor Jennifer Boswell discovered that Brockman had been held in jail solely on an APA order of hold since he posted bond on Nov. 10, 2014.

The APA subsequently faxed an order of release and Brockman was released on Jan. 6, 2015.

"Community Corrections Information System log notes indicated that Brockman 'became available' to APA on Nov. 10, 2014," according to the Inspector General's investigation report. "From that date, the APA should have scheduled a parole violation hearing for Brockman."

The investigation revealed that the APA violated ODRC policy which dictates that parole violation hearings are to be conducted no later than 20 days from the date the offender "becomes available."

"APA's failure to meet this timeframe voided any action by the APA to revoke the parolee's parole or impose sanctions," the Inspector General wrote.

Similar incidents involving Kenneth Pickering, Alfred Morris and Michael Ratliff were also reviewed as part of the Inspector General's investigation into the ODRC allegations. Those men were also parolees who were kept in jail on orders of hold from the APA despite being available for parole violation hearings.

"Investigators determined there were many reasons why parole officers missed or were unaware that parolee were being held solely on APA orders of hold, and missed the APA policy timeframes set in place to schedule the parolees for a parole violation hearing," the Inspector General's investigation report stated. "One reason was that the parolee may be arrested on new charges and is released on bond, or after serving a sentence; however, the parolee is held in jail because of the APA order of hold.

"Jails are not required to notify APA when parolee post bond or complete a jail sentence."

Under current APA policy, parole officers are required to check, on a weekly basis, the status of all in-custody offenders who are not serving a local sentence and to document those checks in Field Officer Tablet notes.

For in-custody offenders, the supervising parole officer must register with inmate database provider VINELink and document the offender's status monthly in the tablet notes. VINELink, however, cannot be used to verify orders of hold on parolees.

"Checking the status of an incarcerated parolee by viewing a computerized list of jail inmates will not identify why the parolee is being held," the investigation report states. "While parole officers may have checked jail rosters to verify that a parolee was still being held, there were instances where the parole officer did not check as to why the parolee was being held."

The Inspector General concluded that there was reasonable cause to believe that a wrongful act or omission occurred in the instances of the four parolees.

The office recommended that the policy requiring parole officers to register with VINELink be revised to notify the officer of a status change if an APA order of hold is going to be placed on a parolee.

The Inspector General also recommended that the violation hearing process be revised in instances where a hearing within 20 days is not feasible.

The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction has 60 days to respond to the recommendations with a detailed plan on how they will be implemented.

[Back]