A January switch to a new computer program for Hamilton County Criminal Court may have caused some electronic records to transfer incorrectly, leaving a few parts of the electronic database with wrong or repeated information, officials said.

One error was brought to the court’s attention this week when a man approached an employee in the county clerk’s office about a felony charge on his record. Accie Carter Gross said he was made aware that a record contained information about a reckless endangerment felony charge, actually a misdemeanor.

An employee in the office pulled up some of Mr. Gross’ records, which showed that the charge was a misdemeanor. But after consulting with other employees, she discovered the charge was listed incorrectly in an electronic database, Mr. Gross said.

“They found out they had made an error and it had been reported as a felony, but it was a Class A misdemeanor,” he said. “They changed everything in the computer to make everything right.”

The court has requested a computer report of records to see if anyone else’s information, charges or sentences are listed incorrectly, said Gwen Tidwell, Hamilton County Criminal Court clerk.

She said she did not know the number of records changed electronically or how many might be incorrect. Employees are alerted to errors when someone brings them to their attention or when they stumble upon them, she said Thursday.

Mr. Gross was the first person to approach the office about such an error, though employees had made changes when they found errors themselves, she said Thursday.

On Friday, Ms. Tidwell said she was unaware that any other inconsistency had been found and that the conversion errors that occurred merely repeated a charge, sentence or judgment instead of listing it incorrectly. She said Friday that she was not sure how Mr. Gross’ charge was listed incorrectly because her computer data did not show any changes from a felony to a misdemeanor charge, only the addition of a Class A misdemeanor charge. She could not attribute the error — if it occurred — specifically to the system conversion, she said Friday.

Though the electronic records may contain a few, if any, inconsistencies, the print documents serve as the official records, Ms. Tidwell said.

“The official records are the indictment or the judgement that is signed by the court or a probation order that is signed by the court,” she said. “The computer entries are convenient and that’s really all they are.”

General Sessions Court Judge Bob Moon said he was not aware of the most recent error, but said from time to time, glitches do occur. The clerk’s office clears up those incidents as quickly as it can, he said.

“That’s so very important because so much is riding on a person’s record to get a job and keep a job,” he said.

To remove as much human error from the process as possible, the bench clerks enter a judgment into the computer and district attorneys fill out a formal plea bargain form so multiple hard copies of records exist, he said.

Comments