Some Arizona defendants are being charged hundreds a month for their own GPS monitoring

Before being convicted of crimes in Mohave County, some individuals are being forced to either fork over hundreds of dollars a month for their own GPS monitoring or wait for their day in court from a jail cell. 

When Robert Hiskett told a judge that he couldn't afford the private company supplying the GPS monitoring, the judge set his bond at $100,000 and sent him to jail. 

The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona is challenging the state law that allows the practice, arguing it's unfair to poor defendants and unconstitutional. 

The case went before the Arizona Court of Appeals on Thursday. The court issued an order Friday that no longer requires Hiskett to pay for the monitoring services, but the judge is still considering the broader arguments about the overall practice.

Paying for pretrial GPS monitoring

Hiskett was charged with sexual conduct with a minor but was released on his own recognizance. He was ordered to be under GPS monitoring. 

Hiskett and his attorney Michael Wozniak brought up their concerns about the $400 a month cost for pretrial monitoring at a hearing in May. Hiskett said the fee was too expensive because he was supporting his daughter while also living in a different household. 

Wozniak said they asked that public funds be used to cover the monitoring costs. Instead, Mohave County Judge Rick Lambert sent Hiskett to jail on a $100,000 bond.

“I didn’t think me ending in jail was a possibility that day,” Hiskett said. 

Lambert said during the hearing that it was a community safety issue. 

“When you take the EM (electronic monitoring) away, the court has no confidence in the safety of the community because I don’t know where Mr. Hiskett is,” the judge said during the hearing. “And with these charges, I’m not willing to expose any elements of the community, where there are children or otherwise, to the defendant in this situation.” 

The ACLU stepped in with an emergency appeal, arguing that state law doesn't allow the Mohave County Probation Department to threaten jail just because someone can't afford to pay a private company for pretrial electronic monitoring. 

“The $100,000 secured bond also directly violates the Arizona and federal constitutional prohibitions against excessive bail because it is not reasonably calculated to protect the community or to secure his appearance in court,” the ACLU argued. 

The Arizona Court of Appeals agreed, releasing Hiskett.

It will consider the underlying legal arguments Thursday. 

Challenging state law in court

On Thursday, the Court of Appeals considered:

• Whether electronic monitoring should be used when someone is released on their own recognizance.
• Whether the court can make someone pay in advance or pay some sort of fee for a monitoring service.
• Whether any such fee could be capped or waived based on the defendant's financial situation. 
• Whether the court can require bond if the person is eligible to be released with electronic monitoring but can't afford the cost.
• Whether the pre-trial detention order violated the defendant's right to due process. 

Jared Keenan, a lawyer for the ACLU, said the Mohave County judge required GPS monitoring for Hiskett because of the state statute and not out of any concern that Hiskett may not show up for his court dates.

“There is no evidence that he will not return to court,” Keenan said. 

The Arizona Attorney General's Office has weighed in on the matter, saying state law does not give courts the power to force defendants to pay for mandatory pretrial GPS monitoring. 

However, the office did say Hiskett should be under GPS monitoring due to the charges against him. 

GPS monitoring in Mohave County 

Mohave County contracts with a private company called SCRAM for its pretrial GPS monitoring.

During a November email exchange with Mohave Probation Department Officer Alan Palomino, Hiskett's attorney asked about the company's fees. 

“The problem with the Pre-Trial defendants is that when they don’t pay for their GPS, the probation department gets stuck with the bill,” Palomino stated in the email. “We don’t have the funding for GPS monitoring for probationers, let alone Pre-Trial defendants, and regardless of a defendant’s innocence or guilt, it is not the probation department’s responsibility to pay for GPS monitoring while their case is pending.” 

According to the ACLU, SCRAM charged different fees to different defendants. 

“We can’t figure out why that was,” Keenan said.

SCRAM's daily fees can be based on different factors, including who is paying and how long the person will be monitored. According to the company, people who are monitored during pre-trial may qualify for lower fees through a financial needs assessment.  

"If a court or agency is unhappy with what is being charged or how payment plans are implemented, they simply won’t refer clients for monitoring," said Jed Rosenberg, senior digital marketing manager at SCRAM Systems. "Thus, in general, the base daily monitoring fee is something agreed to by the supervising court or agency."

Have thoughts about Arizona’s legal system? Reach criminal justice reporter Lauren Castle at Lauren.Castle@gannett.com. Follow her on Twitter: @Lauren_Castle.

Support local journalism. Subscribe to azcentral.com today.