LV’s crackdown on homeless criticized

By Timothy Pratt (contact)

Thursday, July 8, 2004 | 11:09 a.m.

Richard Ernst tries to ignore his Vietnam flashbacks and when he gets depressed, he lies down and tries not think too much. Sometimes, he drinks.

The depression and a heart condition together would probably make the 58-year-old combat veteran eligible for Social Security benefits of up to $900 a month, which homeless advocate Linda Lera-Randle El, his caseworker, said would be a first step to ending his two years of life on the streets of Las Vegas.

But for now, anyway, his ticket off the streets is a 90-day stay in a jail cell, since his June arrest for trespassing led him to miss his medical appointments for the government benefits.

Ernst is one of dozens of men and women, mostly homeless, who in recent weeks have been given stiffer sentences in Las Vegas Municipal Court for repeat arrests on charges such as trespassing, misuse of a bus stop bench or jaywalking.

The shift in practice is alarming a range of critics, including civil liberty activists who say the city is inappropriately pressuring municipal court judges to go along with the change; defense attorneys who say the trend makes for a bad use of the criminal justice system; and advocates, who say the homeless need social services, not jail time.

Several attorneys who handle the cases of the accused confirmed the trend, with one saying she saw up to 20 cases in a day. At that rate, the shift in sentencing could involve hundreds of defendants.

Chief Judge Toy Gregory said, "it seems the city attorney has decided that these people aren't learning their lesson."

Gary Peck, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, said the city attorney's office invited judges, Metro Police and downtown business leaders to a meeting last month to discuss the issue -- but didn't invite defense attorneys. He said that the meeting was called in part to pressure the court to "get with the program."

The judges declined the invitation because, "while it wouldn't be ex parte, it also wouldn't be appropriate ... since defense attorneys weren't present," said James Carmany, court administrator. But Carmany did attend. He described the meeting as a "group in the criminal justice system more effectively trying to address a problem."

Peck disagreed. He said "the acknowledgement that the judges declined itself belies any claim that what went on was ... not out of the ordinary."

"It seems apparent to lawyers and others I have talked to that there is pressure being placed on judges to go along with city policy to lengthen jail sentences and increase bail," Peck said.

Carmany countered, "I do not see pressure being placed on municipal court judges to do anything different from what they're doing -- I don't feel it, I don't sense it." He also said that while there were " individuals who would like to see harsher sentences at that meeting ... the fact of the matter is that judges have to take each decision on a case-by-case basis."

Peck also pointed to the timing of the meeting, the change, and a pay raise of $11,100 for each municipal court judge that was approved in Wednesday's city council meeting.

Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman, speaking Wednesday before the city council voted on the raise, said the message the city was sending out was, "We don't want (repeat offenders) here in Las Vegas."

After the meeting, Goodman said the raise was never tied to judges giving stiffer sentences.

"No. I made my position (on sentencing) clear. (But) I didn't say you're not getting a raise if you don't do this," Goodman said.

Attorney Robert Langford, who has a city contract to defend the trespassers and jaywalkers who are now receiving longer sentences, said the new tactic is "a horrible waste of tax dollars ... that should make the people of Las Vegas outraged."

"I don't know what kind of deal with the devil the city attorney made to come up with this, but it's asinine to think you're fighting these repeat offenders by giving them a longer time in jail," Langford said.

Advocates say the money it costs to keep an inmate in jail -- at least $50 a day -- could be better spent on much-needed services for the chronically homeless, many of whom suffer from mental illness, drug addictions or alcoholism -- or a combination thereof.

But City Attorney Brad Jerbic said critics of his new approach are "people ... (who have) a political agenda. We're not doing our job if we have chronic criminals on the streets."

Jerbic said his deputy attorneys are pushing for the longer sentences because letting repeat offenders go after several days or weeks wasn't working.

He said the longer sentences are sought "only after there have been substantial arrests without a change in behavior."

Allen Lichtenstein, general counsel with the ACLU of Nevada, said the policy is unfair and ineffective.

"It seems pretty clear that there is disparate treatment -- if somebody in a business suit is jaywalking, they're going to be treated differently," he said.

Lichtenstein also called attention to the resources that go into the arrests. "With Sheriff Bill Young saying there's a shortage of police officers ...is it really the best use of our tax dollars to be arresting people who are jaywalking?" he said.

But Jerbic denied that the city was targeting the homeless with the policy.

"You don't get to play by your own rules just because you're homeless," he said.

As for public dollars, he said, "We're spending more money by the crimes they're committing.

"Every time Joe Blow scares someone away from going to a store or renting a room, it's costing money," he said. As well, handing down longer sentences means the same people have to be arrested less often, making for less money spent on police, he said.

Ernst, dressed in prison orange Wednesday, said through his white beard that he felt targeted by the police officer who arrested him June 9 for trespassing when the officer found him sitting in a parking lot near Fremont Street and Charleston Boulevard.

The officer -- whose name Ernst said he doesn't know -- had told him months before, "I'm gonna make a pet project outta you," Ernst said.

So Ernst was arrested for the 20th time in the last two years. Most of those arrests have been for trespassing, and the rest were assorted misdemeanor charges, according to Jerbic's search of his records. At least seven of those arrests were thrown out and others resulted in less than a week in jail, Jerbic said.

"He just wasn't getting the message," the city attorney said.

So prosecutors sought a longer sentence June 30 and Ernst was sentenced to 90 days in jail.

Meanwhile, his June 14 appointment with the Social Security Administration came and went. Lacking proof of his medical conditions, the agency denied him the benefits June 25. If Ernst doesn't appeal the denial within two months he'll have to start all over again, said Rita Meier, spokeswoman for the agency.

The chain of events was a repetition of sorts, since Lera-Randle El, who directs a nonprofit organization called Straight from the Streets, had tried to get him another appointment March 16, only to find that Ernst had been arrested for trespassing and couldn't make it.

"It can be a vicious circle," Meier said.

Ernst said he saw the stiffer sentence, and its effect on his efforts to get some help, as "a lotta bull."

"If I had a home to go to, I wouldn't be sitting there," he said of his repeated arrests for trespassing.

"All they're doing is giving you a place to stay for a few months and then you're out on the street the same as before," he said.

Attorney Sean Hoeffgen, one of Langford's colleagues, said the judicial system is failing people like Ernst.

"If it's a nonviolent, non-drug-related offense, there has to be some sort of rehabilitation," said Hoeffgen, who added that he sees several of these cases every day.

"I don't think jail time is the answer. It gets expensive and obviously nothing has changed. But there are limited resources to help these people change their lives," he said.

Kathryn Landreth, legal counsel for Metro Police and chairwoman of the Southern Nevada Adult Mental Health Coalition, said "putting money into mental health and substance abuse systems to avoid having to invest in criminal justice systems is a wise expenditure."

Defense attorney Noreen Nyikos said the new policy meant that people with repeat arrests for the misdemeanors in question are getting stiffer sentences than people with offenses that should be considered more serious.

"It's my assumption that homeless offenses are being treated as more serious than, say, domestic battery ... 90 percent of which receive suspended sentences," she said.

But city officials said they are focused on the need to crack down on crime -- from misdemeanors on up.

During a break at Wednesday's city council meeting, Jerbic said, "Public safety is the number one reason government exists," and he challenged much of the criticism directed at his get-tough stance.

To those who would say it's a waste of taxpayers' money, he said, "We have the jail built and it costs the same if we have the beds full or not."

As for the need for social services, he said, many of the homeless people being arrested for trespassing and other offenses are "resistant to services.

"We have beds for those who are social service-resistant," Jerbic said.

"It's in jail."

Also, he said, "a guy doesn't get to choose my own private doorstep to sleep on just because there's not enough shelter."