BRB's Public Records Blog

San Luis Obispo County, CA

Per PRRN Member Judith Smith, the Executive Director of the San Luis Obispo Superior Court - Ms. Susan Matherly - has simply had enough. Ms. Matherly has had it with all the public record search firms hired by employers to check criminal records of local residents that apply for jobs. On March 14th she announced at a local Bar Association luncheon that she was shutting down the public access terminal to background screening firms. And on Monday March 19th she did it. The IT staff removed the public access computer and put it in a locked room to be accessible only by attorneys and their investigators.

To better understand Ms. Matherly's logic, consider the following summarized statements she also made at the March 14th luncheon, as reported by Ms. Smith:
Public access information was never intended for background screeners. Background screening companies just make people not get hired. Employers shouldn't be using background screening companies, but rather should be using the DOJ/LiveScan [the FBI]. There are penal codes stating that the type of research that background screening researchers are doing is illegal. [But she refused to mention what these laws are.] Background screening companies and researchers are not trained to know what they are doing. There is no identifying information in the computer to know if a researcher has indentified the correct person. [Note: The terminal does display a full name and the DOB.]

At present according to Judith Smith, Ms Matherly has instructed the Superior Court Clerks to do the following:
Only attorneys and their investigators now have access to the locked room where the public access computer with access to the public records now resides.
Clerks are not allowed to provide dockets to anyone except to the defendant or their attorney of record.
Record searchers may only provide clerks with 10 names a day.
Clerks may only provide very limited information (for free) if there is only one recent case. Only data provided are the case #, violation and disposition date, the charge and disposition for convictions. If a charge was dismissed the clerk will not inform the requester. Also, no information is provided on sentencing or parole violations. However, the researcher can obtain this information for a $15.00 fee.
If a subject name has more than one case, the clerks will only provide the case numbers. The researchers then must order each file to review for a $15.00 fee per case.

For those interested:

Judith Smith can be reached at Judie@jhsmithconsulting.com.

The presiding judge and Ms. Matherly's supervisor is Judge Barry LaBarbera.

Ms. Matherly can be reached at:

Ms. Susan Matherly
Executive Director, Superior Court
1050 Monterey Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
susan.matherly@slo.courts.ca.gov
805-781-5421

Manatee County District Court, Florida

The 12th Judicial Circuit (Desoto, Manatee, and Sarasota counties) recently unveiled a new paperless, electronic case management system in Manatee County. The "Manatee Model" was designed for judges, attorneys and county officials to better manage case files through the judicial process. This has lead to a new online search site for public records that now includes images of case files. The site at www.manateeclerk.org/Home/tabid/57/Default.aspx provides a name search with an initial index that shows a DOB as an identifier. From the index one can choose to view any number of documents. Images for felony cases go back to June 2, 2001, for misdemeanor to January 2003, for civil to July 18, 2012. Criminal traffic and traffic infractions are also shown.

This new system will set a baseline standard for other counties in FL as they upgrade their case management systems and provide document images online. Sarasota County is planning to soon place its court record images online to the public while adopting the Manatee Model. For more information about the Manatee Model visit www.manateeclerk.com/Home/ManateeMethod.aspx.

The access system in place now for approved high volume requesters and vendors is the Advantis System. The fee is $11.00 per record, billing is monthly. Search is by license number only (not by name). Requesters must sign a User Agreement and be approved by the Driver Services Branch.

South Dakota Court Records

The South Dakota Legislation is considering a request by the Chief Justice to increase the fee of a court record search from $15.00 to $25.00. HB1058 was passed by the South Dakota House of Representatives and is now being considered by the Senate.

Most South Dakota courts do not allow the public to perform a name search in person. Searches must be performed by the clerk. The Office of the State Court Administrator asks all mail requests be directed to the processing center at: Union County Clerk of Court, 209 East Main, Ste 230, Elk Point, SD 57025. 605-356-2132, fax 605-356-3687. However, know that the state will periodically change the designated county for the processing center.

The State Court Administrator's Office provides a service for ongoing requesters who have multiple searches for criminal, civil and probate records. To set up a commercial account, contact Jill Gusso, Director, Public Information, State Court Administrator's Office, 500 East Capitol Ave, Pierre, SD 57501, 605-773-4874, fax is 605-773-8437. Her email is jill.gusso@ujs.state.sd.us. Neither processing system above contains information from the Tribal Courts.

A copy of HB1058 is viewable at http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2012/QuickFind.aspx.

SSN Randomization Issuance Begins

June 24th, 2011 was the last day the Social Security Administration (SSA) assigned a Social Security Number (SSN) based on the numeric order within a state's allocation of the first 5 digits. All unassigned numbers within the numeric sequence have now been placed in a random pool. Effective June 27, the assignment of a new SSN is much like a lottery; a random number is drawn from the unassigned pool of 420 million numbers  available for assignment.
 
For example, the Series of 048-15-xxxx was assigned to CT and was used to issue new SSNs. Effective June 27, all of the possible unassigned numbers within that Series have been assigned to the random pool. Therefore someone in any state or an immigrant coming into the country could be assigned an SSN in the 048-15 series this year or any year in the future. There are 755 Series groups that were in the process of being assigned as of June 2011. There are over 75,000 groups have had all possible numbers within the group previously assigned. 

For years employers, investigators and background screening firms have used software with the assigned SSN groups and corresponding state/date range to validate the state and year of issuance an SSN. The fact that the SSA will no longer provide the ability to validate newly issued numbers has upset quite a few businesses and employers. However, these validations will still be useful, although they will diminish in value over time. Most people entering the workforce were assigned an SSN well before June 27, 2011. The primary people entering the workforce with a new randomly assigned SSN will be immigrants.
 
The Social Security Administration will continue to provide opportunities for direct name based SSN verification. Internet based verification services include:
The Social Security Number Verification Service (SSNVS)  which is free to use for wage reporting purposes
eVerify
Consent-Based SSN Verification Service (SBSV)
There are stipulations. For example, the cost for SBSV is $5,000 to sign-up and $5.00 per verification.

For questions about the randomization process, email ssn.randomization@ssa.gov or visit www.ssa.gov/employer/randomization.html.

More States Step Up Fight Against Diploma Mills

On March 24, 2011, Idaho's "Anti-Diploma Mill" bill was unanimously passed by the Idaho State Senate. To read a recent article about this and efforts by other states, visit the Accredibase Reports web page at www.accredibase.com/report.

Changes on Hold to Electronic Access of NC Criminal Court Records

Pending a court ruling in Wake County, NC, the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (NCAOC) voluntarily postponed their planned March 1 mandate which would have altered the way millions of criminal records are accessed in North Carolina.  The docket number is 11cv001548.

The reason for the ruling is that several consumer reporting agencies filed a restraining order against the NCAOC to stop their mandate. A hearing was held late last week on a preliminary injunction to halt the NCAOC from modifying the manner in which criminal record data is released. The judge's decision on the motion is expected within the week. The docket number is 11cv001548.

As previously reported in this newsletter, if the NCAOC changes take place, licensees to the ACIS Daily Criminal Extract would no longer have access to criminal court case details in these daily ACIS extract feeds. Licensees would be forced to use an old technology system - known as the Green Screen - that would greatly increase the turnaround time and fees.

The Director of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts, Judge John W. Smith can be reached at John.W.Smith@aoc.nccourts.org. For more information on the Green Screen, contact the NCAOC Remote Public Access group at 919-890-2220 or rpa@aoc.nccourts.org.

A list of licensees who receive the daily bulk fee is found at:

www.nccourts.org/Citizens/GoToCourt/Documents/cbccompanies.pdf

Accredibase Report for 2011 Reveals 48% Increase in Fake Universities

The 2011 Annual Accredibase Report of diploma and accreditation mill activity has revealed an astounding 48% increase worldwide in the number of known diploma and accreditation mills in the past year alone.  As the Internet is the primary home for these bogus education and accreditation providers, little action is taken to stop them from helping unscrupulous candidates deceive unsuspecting employers. The Accredibase Report examines the current status of the diploma mill situation and considers what can be done to protect the public and businesses.

U.S - The King of Diploma Mills
According to the 2011 report, the U.S. remains the world's fake college capital. This year has seen a 20% increase in known diploma mills in the US, with the number rising from 810 to 1,008. While more than 40% percent of the diploma mills operate in California, Hawaii, Washington and Florida, the Report reveals that District of Columbia has seen the sharpest increase among US states with 74%, rising from 19 to 33 mills over the past year. High school diploma mills are of particular concern in the United States and appear to be a growing segment in this unscrupulous market as well.

To view or download the Report, visit  www.accredibase.com/report.

PRRN Releases Model Public Record Researcher Agreement

On Monday April 26th, the Public Record Retriever Network (PRRN, www.prrn.us) announced the release of a model template of a Public Record Researcher Agreement to be used by public record researchers and Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs). The Agreement represents a best efforts work to provide a starting point for a written agreement that is fair to both parties and not one-sided in nature. 

Designing the Agreement as a flexible template gives both parties the ability to modify text to properly reflect their business practices and services, as well as recognize the fact that different jurisdictions can place different demands on public record research.

Some of the issues addressed in the Agreement include: defining default search criteria; defining the centralized court index and the predominantly used index; which party provides E & O insurance coverage; disclosure of working with sub-contractors; disclosure of pre-screened searches; and charges or non-charges for searching AKA's aliases and hyphenated names.

In addition, the Agreement is designed to comply with Clauses 4.1 and 4.3 of the NAPBS Accreditation Rules Document. 

This Model Agreement is the property of PRRN and is provided to PRRN members to use as a member benefit.  It will hopefully find its way into circulation.
 

About State Registries of Sex Offenders

Public Record Search Tip...
According to a recent U.S. Department of Justice report:
47 participating states reported a total number of 647,700 registered sex offenders. However in the same states, only 472,000 (73%) of these registered sex offenders were on publicly available state registries.

Taken from BRB's Public Record Research System

Hamilton County Courts, Indiana

In late September, 2009, the Circuit & Superior Courts of Hamilton County Indiana switched their case file management to the Odyssey case management system provided by the Indiana Supreme Court. As a result, online access to the court record index is now available at http://mycase.in.gov/default.aspx.

Previously, courts place the record index with https://www.doxpop.com. While Hamilton County records may still be accessed from Doxpop's subscription system, the range of records date from 01/1987 to 9/21//2009. Thus, since the switchover, new cases and updates to existing cases for Hamilton County are no longer updated on Doxpop.