Low Cost/No Cost Training: The Evidence road show is coming up in February and March, 2004. The agency has also been offering Truth in Sentencing and Juvenile/TPR video replays for free. We will also be offering a discount at the Trial Skills training in May.

SPD Listserv/Forums: The Committee previously indicated that it would prefer a listserv for SPD certified attorneys. The survey conducted at the conference showed no clear preference by the private bar between a listserv and a forum. Deb has been trying to negotiate with WACDL to allow access to their new listserv. So far they have said no. Several committee members said they would bring the issue up at the March 2004 WACDL Board meeting and report back to the committee on the results.

Expert Database: Several SPD staff (Mary Gold, IT, fiscal and DeeDee Watson) have been on the committee to get this project up and running. The private bar/staff will be able to search for experts by county and expert type and/or specialty. Contact information will have the last 3 attorneys who have used the expert. The expert list will include various expert types such as investigators, interpreters, psychologist, etc. It will be updated and new experts will be added as they are used. We hope to have this database in use by mid-April.

Improving process for obtaining experts - Most expert requests are approved. The primary concern of the committee was that there are not enough defense experts around. It is hoped that when the expert database is up an running that attorneys will have access to a wider range of experts and have easy access to more names. Some experts are asking for money up front. Deb will check with the fiscal unit, but she believes that the State will not pay in advance. ACD will be happy to provide a letter to an attorney of a promise to pay when the expert request is approved. ACD will also allow interim bills to make sure experts get paid more promptly. Deb suggested the SPD could do an article in the ACD newsletter on tips to managing negotiating and managing your experts.

Postconviction/post case closing representation - There are situations where the private bar is uncertain about whether they should be appearing for "reviews" after the sentencing hearing. For example, in Milwaukee County domestic violence judges impose and stay jail time as a condition of probation and then set review hearings 4-5 months down the road. If the client is not performing well on probation the jail time is imposed. If they client is doing well, the jail time is permanently stayed. Is counsel required to hold the case open, and then appear at the review hearing? Some attorneys advise clients that they will not appear at the review and that the client should ask for a lawyer if they are asking for jail. The SPD has appointed counsel for some of these hearings as a new case. There should be uniformity of client representation by both the private bar/staff. Currently, not all the private bar/staff are attending these hearings.

Deb will discuss this issue with Mike Tobin, the Trial Division Director. SPD will check to see if this issue has surfaced in other counties. Deb will get back to the committee with a draft policy that will cover both private bar and staff. The review hearings in DV cases may be a consideration in the next round of contracting.

There are policies on other post-sentencing work. Trial counsel is responsible for sentence credit and restitution hearings. If a client comes back after some time for an expungment motion, s/he must reapply with the SPD, qualify, and pay a fee.

2080 Hour Rule/Compliance - The 2080 rule was put into the Administrative Code in response to a couple of high profile billing fraud cases. The rule limits the number of hours worked in a calendar year that can be compensated. This makes it very hard to monitor. In 2003 the SPD began projecting compliance with the 2080 hour rule by using the cases appointed YTD and the average hours for the specific case types appointed. The committee members largely agreed that 2080 billable hours in a year was a lot. They also agreed that there is a limit to how many cases a private attorney can reasonably handle.

Some alternative ways of preventing fraud and not appoint excessive numbers of cases to private attorneys were discussed. The SPD might use NLADA standards to set a limit on the number of cases assigned to an attorney per year. The SPD might adopt an alternative rule which does not allow for payment of more than 15 hours in a day without special approval. Committee members agreed that it would be extremely unlikely that an attorney would need to bill more than 15 hours in a day.

Online Issues - Questions arose concerning judges ID #'s when closing cases online. Some judges (reserve) are not listed with an ID#. Deb will check with the IT Dept regarding this matter. Deb reported that some attorneys are not marking in court/out court time properly when submitting online invoices. Also, attorneys need to indicate where they are traveling from and to in the time slip narrative. Deb will send an email reminder out to the private bar online billers with a list of "reminders" for online billing.

OLR Training - No new dates for the OLR training have been confirmed yet. The SPD Training Division is still working on dates.

Potential Topics for Milwaukee Litigation Lunch Programs - It was reported that there were two lunches held last year. The committee decided that the best times for luncheon programs were during the middle of the week and held during the noon hour. Several possible topics for the programs include TIS training and general brainstorming on cases and treatment options.

Other - A national drug treatment court conference is scheduled in Milwaukee for June 2-5, 2004 by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals. It will cover such topics as brain science and adolescent drug issues. Deb will get an email out to the private bar with the details for the conference.

Next meeting is scheduled for May 2004, with a date and location to be determined. Meeting concluded at 1:20 p.m.