Prosecutor Candidate Stephanie Hall Responds to Questions on Controversial Procedures
This is a big election, and it comes at an important time. County reform is a little over a year old, and many changes have been instituted by newly elected County Executive Ed FitzGerald and the new County Council. But the reform process that has transformed Cuyahoga County didn’t affect the Prosecutor’s Office, until this election.
On Tuesday, March 6, Cuyahoga County voters will choose between five candidates for the position of Cuyahoga County Prosecutor: Subodh Chandra, Stephanie Hall, James McDonnell, Tim McGinty and Robert Triozzi. Each week, we asked a different set of questions:
WEEK THREE:
Please use a maximum of 700 words total to answer the following three questions:
* What is your position on “open discovery?”
* What is your position on “stacking” indictments?
* What is your position on using “jailhouse snitches?”
Definitions
* Open Discovery is the prosecutor sharing all information discovered during an investigation, no matter which direction that information points in, guilt or innocence.
* Stacking Indictments is when a person gets caught with say a rock of crack in their pocket while driving and the car, the cell phone, the money in their possession all become separate cases … now four instead of one. Three will be dismissed if the person agrees to the plea bargain.
* Jailhouse Snitches: If police believe someone is guilty and have no proof, they will place a paid snitch in the cell with the suspect, with the understanding the snitch will come out the next day and say the suspect admitted the crime to them overnight. They’ll take the witness stand and tell the same story. In some cases professional snitches used to be given a “license” to commit crimes, such as selling drugs, so the police don’t have to pay them out of their funds. Also known as a “get out of jail card.”
Prosecutor Candidate Hall responds:
What is your position on “open discovery?”
I have a strong position on open discovery and am in favor of open discovery. I am of the opinion that information sharing is within the purview of a thorough and fair investigation conducted by law enforcement and no matter which direction the information points (in guilt or innocence) justice will prevail.
Pursuant to Ohio Criminal Rule 16-Discovery and Inspection- all parties in a criminal case shall be provided with the” information necessary for a full and fair adjudication of the facts, to protect the integrity of the justice system and the rights of defendants, and to protect the well-being of witnesses, victims, and society at large. All duties and remedies are subject to a standard of due diligence and apply to the defense and the prosecution equally, and are intended to be reciprocal. Once discovery is initiated by demand of the defendant, all parties have a continuing duty to supplement their disclosures.”
Discovery is an important component of the criminal justice system and must be adhered to by the Prosecutor’s office in order to provide the fundamental rights afforded to a criminal defendant. If discovery is compromised, the justice system fails. If the Prosecutor finds that information requested by the defense would result in harm to the victim, witness or third party, the Prosecutor shall file a motion with the court outlining the reason for non-disclosure. Pursuant to Criminal Rule 16 (D) the Prosecutor shall certify to the court reasonable, articulable grounds setting forth the following: the nature of the case, the specific course of conduct by parties any threats or prior instances of witness tampering or intimidation, whether or not those instances resulted in criminal charges, whether the defendant is pro se, and any other relevant information. As your Prosecutor I will adamantly support open discovery.
* What is your position on “stacking” indictments?
I am against the kind of stacking of indictments you described in your example such as when a person gets caught with a rock of crack in their pocket while driving and the car, the cell phone, the money in their possession all become separate charges. At the time the offender is arrested for the rock of crack, the accessories (the car, cell phone and money) are typically added by the police as possession of criminal tools. The criminal offense “possessing criminal tool,” is generally charged as a misdemeanor. However, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code 2923.24 (C) If the circumstances indicate that the substance , device, instrument or article involved in the offense was intended for use in the commission of a felony, possessing criminal tools is a felony of the fifth degree. The fact that one piece of crack cocaine could result in an offender being charged with multiple felonies instead of a single low level non-violent felony tends to waste unnecessary time and energy at the pre-trail level and during the plea bargaining process. This time could be better spent by the assistant prosecutor and the defense attorney exploring whether the offender is addicted to crack cocaine and whether the offender qualifies for a drug treatment program. I will work diligently with the law enforcement detectives and the assistant prosecutors assigned to the Grand Jury to eliminate stacking indictments.
* What is your position on using “jailhouse snitches?”
Jailhouse snitches have proven to be detrimental to criminal investigations and could cause an otherwise innocent individual to be subjected to incarceration or the death penalty. In September 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a death sentence based on two lying jailhouse snitches. The Prosecutor relied heavily on the testimony of the two snitches because their testimony was the only direct evidence of the defendant’s participation in the homicide. The Court found that one informant described himself as a “chronic liar” and the other falsely testified that he did not expect any benefit for his testimony. The Court held their testimony was unreliable and reversed the defendant’s death sentence. My position is that I am not a proponent of jailhouse snitches and will carefully examine the use of an informant’s testimony in criminal cases.
Click here to read the Prosecutor Candidates’ responses to ALL of Cool Cleveland’s questions.