Cases Won – Electronic Monitoring Bracelet Violation (EGr)

RESULTS:  Revocation Beat!  DOC Failed to Prove Violations – Client Released!   The judge found Client’s electronic monitoring bracelet malfunctioned and falsely reported that Client failed to return to residence by curfew.

Violations: Failure to Stay Within Range of Electronic Monitoring Bracelet.  Client was on sex offender extended supervision and was placed on an electronic monitoring bracelet by the Department of Community Corrections (DCC).  Electronic Monitoring Activity Reports showed Client was out of range from his electronic monitoring bracelet (EM), failing to return to his approved residence as scheduled by his curfew time and making his whereabouts and activities unknown for about 20 hours.

Client testified that he was in his residence at times that the bracelet’s monitoring log showed he was not. Attorney Sydne French presented testimony from Client’s girlfriend who corroborated Client’s testimony.

Client’s agent presented testimony from a product engineer with EM, the manufacturer of the electronic monitoring bracelet that Client wore. The EM engineer testified it was highly unlikely the bracelet malfunctioned in a way that would show Client was not in his residence if he actually was.

Sydne delivered a blistering cross examination of the EM product engineer.   She was able to bring out that the bracelet her Client wore was not regularly or properly serviced by EM.  She also got the EM engineer to admit that, although it would be extremely rare, the electronic monitoring bracelet does sometimes fail in a way that falsely reports someone is out of range when they are actually in range.

The administrative law judge was satisfied that the alleged violation involved a rare malfunction of the electronic monitoring equipment. Extended supervision ordered NOT revoked.