12.07.2015 Views

2011 Annual Report - Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands

2011 Annual Report - Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands

2011 Annual Report - Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

HISTORY OF PRETRIAL DIVERSIONThe Pretrial Intervention Program has been in existencein <strong>the</strong> <strong>Virgin</strong> <strong>Islands</strong> since 1978. This program wasestablished, in accordance with Title IV § 4611 <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>VI Code, and provides <strong>the</strong> Director or <strong>the</strong> designee <strong>of</strong><strong>the</strong> Pretrial Intervention Office to intervene on behalf <strong>of</strong>defendants <strong>of</strong> misdemeanors and non-felonious charges todivert <strong>the</strong>ir case away from <strong>the</strong> <strong>Court</strong> system for a certainperiod <strong>of</strong> time while <strong>the</strong> client participates in various <strong>Court</strong>mandated activities. As a result, <strong>the</strong> charges against <strong>the</strong>sedefendants are continued pending <strong>the</strong>ir completion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>Pretrial Diversion Program. Additionally, it was <strong>the</strong> goal<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Code to provide a means <strong>of</strong> alleviating <strong>the</strong> <strong>Court</strong>’scalendar <strong>of</strong> cases that may be handled without burdening<strong>the</strong> system while still being fair, impartial and meting outjustice. Pretrial diversion provides a cost effective means <strong>of</strong>supervising first time <strong>of</strong>fenders, <strong>of</strong> misdemeanor <strong>of</strong>fences,in <strong>the</strong> community while guiding <strong>the</strong>m to comply with <strong>the</strong>conditions set by <strong>the</strong> <strong>Court</strong>. This program also enables<strong>the</strong> <strong>Court</strong> to dispense with <strong>the</strong>se cases in an expeditiousmanner, while providing <strong>the</strong> <strong>of</strong>fender with <strong>the</strong> opportunityto have this matter addressed quickly <strong>the</strong>reby aiding in <strong>the</strong>reduction <strong>of</strong> cases within <strong>the</strong> judicial system.St. Thomas-St. John District: Fiscal Year <strong>2011</strong> began withthirteen (13) cases that were pending from Fiscal Year 2010.These cases consisted <strong>of</strong> eight (8) Criminal and five (5)Jury Cases (Fig. 1). During FY11, <strong>the</strong> Pretrial InterventionProgram received a fiscal year high <strong>of</strong> thirty (30) referralsfor diversion.FIG. 1: STT/J FY11 - Pending CasesThe thirty (30) referral cases consisted <strong>of</strong> eleven (11) Juryand nineteen (19) Criminal cases (Fig. 2). Two <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> thirtyreferrals, though eligible for participation in <strong>the</strong> PretrialDiversion Program, were rejected for participation by <strong>the</strong>Attorney General’s Office (Prosecutor). This was <strong>the</strong> firsttime that a client – after qualifying – was denied participationby an Assistant Attorney General and not <strong>the</strong> judge.46

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!