University of Maryland Department of Communication COMM386: Experiential Learning Fall, 2013

Rebecca Wells November 8, 2013

POINT PAPER SPECIAL LITIGATION DIVISION (SLD)

Subject. The Public Defender Service for DC strives to improve the criminal justice system on all fronts, stemming from proper representation of indigent defendants to reform in real world legal practices. Background. As explained on the PDS webpage, the Special Litigation Division (SLD) of the Public Defender Service handles a wide variety of litigation that vindicates the constitutional rights of PDS clients, ensuring equal justice to all in the DC courts, and reforming unfair systemic criminal justice practices. Discussion. My partner and I had the privilege of being assigned to work on one of the current SLD projects at PDS. This particular project focuses on the way search warrants have been executed by the metropolitan police department in DC. By law, there are certain procedures and regulations that must be adhered to during the execution of a search warrant to ensure the constitutional rights of citizens are upheld. These regulations include certain hours that search warrants are to be executed during and proper treatment from MPD officers. Through discussions with countless clients, it has been said that many officers are violating the regulations in place and have been abusing their power while implementing the search warrants. We have heard that officers are showing up after hours, in large numbers, yielding weapons, and destroying property with a complete lack of regard for the homeowner. Our task was to sort through search warrants that had been executed this past year and try and get in contact with the people residing at the addresses being searched. My partner and I were given a list of questions to ask the residents as well as a copy of the warrant and the affidavit in support of a warrant (must be filled out prior to gaining approval from a judge to file a warrant). The most important parts of the warrant to our work were the address in question, the person the warrant was left with, and what specifically was taken from the home by MPD. My partner and I drove to each persons home and explained the project we were working on and their involvement. After gaining approval to proceed, we began asking questions regarding what time the warrant was executed, how many officers were present, what specifically was taken, and the officers general demeanor while the search was being conducted. I was shocked at most of the responses we received. In most cases, the police officers showed up after the allotted hours for executing warrants and destroyed many artifacts in the homes. I took pictures of 4 different doors that were damaged due to the MPD battering ram and were now unable to be locked. Some homeowners were never even provided a copy of the search warrant and were handcuffed along with other family members and children immediately upon the MPD officers entry.

After the interview, my partner and I wrote up memos detailing the search warrant procedures and included any photos that were taken. These memos were then sent to the attorney heading this particular SLD project to be added to the other completed memos. Recommendations. A problem I faced with this SLD project was what to do after the interview had taken place. I quickly learned after my first interview that the people we were speaking to wanted justice. They wanted MPD to pay for the damage to their homes and wanted to know how we planned to help. I had to clarify that unfortunately we could not help them in this way, and explained that instead, we were compiling information on the improper execution of past search warrants in an attempt to hold MPD officers accountable for their actions in the future. The only recommendation I would have, which I adopted after my first interview, was to state upfront that while we were looking into these faults, we were doing so for research purposes and to make future changes in the system, not to change or rectify what had happened in the past.