court organization and operation courts and camps are the only place to learn the world in. — earl...

Court Organization and Operation

Courts and camps are the only place to learn the world in.

—EARL OF CHESTERFIELD

CHAPTER SEVEN

Justice Administration: Police, Courts, and Corrections Management, 6/eKenneth J. Peak

© 2010 Pearson Higher Education,Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. • All Rights Reserved.2

LEARNING OBJECTIVES At the conclusion of this chapter, the student will:

be familiar with the ramifications of the adversarial system

know the importance of citizen groups in the courtroom

understand the organization and administrationof our dual (federal and state) court systems

comprehend the roles and functions of theJudicial Conference of the United States andthe Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts

be able to explain the kinds of jurisdiction that courts possess




be familiar with state courts and trial courts of general and limited jurisdictions

know the four components of court unification, how a unified court is organized, and the functional and financial advantages of court unification

understand the importance of court decor and decorum

understand why the courts' caseloads have increased

understand the influence of courts on policymaking

(cont.)



Inside the CourtsDecor, Decorum, Citizens - Hallowed Places

Practically everything one sees & hears in an American courtroom is intended to convey thatthe courtroom is a hallowed place in our society.

Scarcely any political question arises in the USnot resolved, sooner or later, into a judicial question.

The physical décor one finds in the courts convey this sense of importance.

Courtroom design also provides a safe, functional space conducive to efficient/effective proceedings. the arrangement reflects society’s view of appropriate

relationships between defendant & judicial authority



Inside the CourtsDecor, Decorum, Citizens - Hallowed Places

A formal level of decorum is accorded this institution. all people must rise when the judge enters permission must be granted to approach the bench a general attitude of deference is granted the judge

A vitriolic utterance that could lawfully be directedto the president of the United States could resultin an individual being jailed for contempt of court. when directed to a judge



Inside the CourtsJustice in the Eye of the Beholder

Whether or not justice is obtained in the courtrooms depends on the interests or viewpoints of the affected or interested parties. a victim may not agree with a jury’s verdict; a civil case winnner may not believe that he/she

received an adequate sum for suffering or damages Because the definition of justice is not always agreed

on, the courts must appear to provide justice. Many people today are put off by accounts of what

they perceive as coddling of offenders and ravages of the “law’s delay”.



Inside the CourtsSeeking Truth in an Adversarial Atmosphere

Emerson stated “every violation of truth . . . is a stab at the health of human society.”

Most people would agree the traditional, primary purpose of the courts is to provide a forum for seeking and obtaining the truth. US Supreme Court declared in 1966 in that “the

basic purpose of a trial is the determination of truth” Many Americans have the impression that truth is

being compromised and even violated with regularity in apparatus of our justice system. and an impediment is the adversarial system itself



Inside the CourtsA Dual Court System

It is important to know that this country has a dual court system.

One national federal court system. 50 state courts system.

plus the system of the District of Columbia



Federal Court Organization/AdministrationThe Supreme Court: Jurists, Traditions, & Work

Judges And Advocacy - the US Supreme Court is the highest & one of the oldest courts in the nation. nine justices: 1 chief justice & 8 associate justices

All who wish to advocate must first secure admission to the Supreme Court bar.

Applicants must have been admitted to practice in the highest court of their state for 3 years and file a certificate attesting the applicant is in good standing.

Applicants must swear or affirm to act “uprightly and according to law, and . . . support the Constitution of the US.”




Inside The Court: Revered Traditions And Practices - on the architrave above the portico of the Supreme Court Building are inscribed the words “Equal Justice Under Law.”

Justice Robert Jackson once described the Court’s uniqueness: “We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible because we are final.”

In many respects, the Court is the same institution that first met in 1790.




Caseload & Conferences - the Court does not meet continuously in formal sessions during its term. sessions are divided into 4 separate, related activities

Time is allocated to reading through the petitions for review of cases that come annually to the Court.

Second, the Court allocates time for oral arguments The third allotment is for private discussions of how

each justice will vote on cases they have just heard. A fourth block of time is for work on writing opinions.




The Court has complete discretion to control the nature and number of the cases it reviews. by means of the writ (order) of certiorari

The Court hears only a tiny fraction of the thousands of cases it is petitioned to consider. when it declines to hear a case, the decision of the

lower court stands as the final word on the case Adding to the Court’s workload is a steady growth in

legislation requiring judicial interpretation. and an increasing number of constitutional & other

issues that can be reviewed in the federal courts



Federal Court Organization/AdministrationUS Courts of Appeals

The courts of appeals are the intermediate courtsof appeals for the federal court system.

A court of appeals hears appeals from the district courts located within its circuit, as well as appeals from decisions of federal administrative agencies.

The courts are staffed by 179 judges nominatedby the president and confirmed by the Senate.

As with the Supreme Court, the caseload of the courts of appeals has grown as well; in 2001 there were 57,464 cases filed; by 2006 that number had risen to 70,375—a 23 percent increase.



Federal Court Organization/AdministrationUS District Courts

Congress created 94 US district courts, of which 89 are located within the 50 states. at least one district court in each state; some states

have more, such as California, New York, & Texas As with the other federal courts, the president

nominates district judges, who must be confirmed. they serve for life unless removed for cause

US district courts are courts of original jurisdiction for all major violations of federal criminal law.

District Criminal cases filed increased from 62,957in 2002 to 68,090 in 2006, or about 8 percent.



Figure 7.1 Geographic boundaries of US Courts of Appeals and US District Courts. Source: US Courts of Appeals and US District Courtswww.uscourts. gov/images/circuitmap.pdf.

Federal Court Organization/AdministrationUS Courts of Appeal & US District Court Circuits



Federal Court Organization/AdministrationJudicial Conference of the US

The administrative policymaking organization of the federal judicial system.

Membership consists of the chief justice, the chief judges of each of the courts of appeals, one district judge from each circuit, and the chief judge of the Court of International Trade.

Meets semiannually for 2-day sessions. most of the work is done by about 25 committees

The Judicial Conference directs the Administrative Office of the US Courts and plays a major role in impeachment of federal judges.



Federal Court Organization/AdministrationAdministrative Office of the US Courts

Since 1939, the day-to-day administrative tasks of the federal courts have been handled by the Administrative Office of the US Courts (AO), a judicial agency.

The director of the AO is appointed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court and reports to the Judicial Conference.

The AO is also the housekeeping agency of the judiciary, responsible for allotting authorized funds and supervising expenditures.



State CourtsLast Resort

Courts of last resort are usually referred to asstate supreme courts. specific names differ from state to state, as do the

number of judges from five to as many as nine These courts do not use panels in making decisions.

the entire court sits to decide each case All have a limited amount of original jurisdiction in

such matters as disciplining lawyers and judges. In those 11 states without an intermediate court of

appeals, the state supreme court has no power to choose which cases will be placed on its docket.



State CourtsLast Resort

The ability of most state supreme courts to choose cases makes them important policymaking bodies. state supreme courts handle 100 or so cases that

present the most challenging legal issues in the state Nowhere is the policymaking role more apparent

than in deciding death penalty cases. which in most states are automatically appealed to

the state’s highest court, bypassing the intermediate courts of appeals

State supreme courts are the ultimate review board for matters involving interpretation of state law.



State CourtsAppellate

Like federal counterparts, state courts have experienced growth in appellate cases that threatens to overwhelm the state supreme court.

To alleviate caseload burden, officials in 39 statescreated intermediate courts of appeals (ICAs). ICAs must hear all properly filed appeals

ICAs represent the final stage of the process for most litigants. very few cases make it to appellate court, and of

those cases, only a small portion will be heard bythe state’s court of last resort



State CourtsUnified Court Systems

Historically, state court reform has centered on implementing court unification. since the 1900s, organization of US courts has

been a primary concern of reformers who believethe multiplicity of courts is inefficient

A unified court system would shift judicial controlto centralized management. the loose network of independent judges & courts

would be replaced by a hierarchy with authority concentrated in the state capital



State CourtsUnified Court Systems - Perceived Benefits

Simplified court structure - variations among counties would be eliminated.

Centralized administration - the state supreme court working with state/county court administrators.

Centralized rule making - the state supreme court should have the power to adopt uniform rules that would be followed by all courts in the state.

Centralized budgeting - a single budget would be prepared for the state judiciary & sent to legislature.



Figure 7.4 Illinois and New Yorkcourt structures. Source: Bureauof Justice Statistics, State Court Organization, October 2007, p.5

Two systems—one unified on a statewide basis & one not—demonstrate unification in action. the states of Illinois and New York



Trial CourtsGeneral Jurisdiction: Major Trial Courts

There are an estimated 2,000 major trial courts in the 50 states and DC, staffed by over 11,000 judges.

General jurisdiction means these courts have the legal authority to decide all matters not specifically delegated to lower courts. common names are district, circuit & superior courts

The great majority of the nation’s judicial business occurs at the state, not the federal, level.

As most criminal cases do not go to trial, the dominant issue in courts of general jurisdiction is what penalty to apply to the guilty.



Figure 7.5 Organizational structure of a district court serving a population of300,000 (MIS = Management Information Systems).

Trial CourtsGeneral Jurisdiction: Major Trial Courts

Note the variety of functions and programs that exist in addition to the basic court role of hearing trials and rendering dispositions.



Trial CourtsLimited Jurisdiction: Lower Courts

At the lowest level trial courts of limited jurisdiction, also known as inferior courts or lower courts, which decide a restricted range of cases. district, justice, justice of the peace, city, magistrate,

or municipal courts 85 percent of all judicial bodies in the US created/maintained by city/county governments not part of the state judiciary.

The caseload can be divided into felony criminal cases, nonfelony criminal cases, and civil cases.



The Influence of Courts in Policymaking

The judicial branch has the responsibility to determine legislative intent of the law and provide public forums—the courts—for resolving disputes.

Determining what the law says and providing a public forum involve the courts in policymaking.

Policymaking can be defined as choosing among alternative choices of action, particularly in the allocation of limited resources “where the chosen action affects the behavior and well-being of others who are subject to the policymaker’s authority.”

The policy decisions of the courts affect virtuallyall of us in our daily lives.



The Influence of Courts in Policymaking

Because many of the Constitution’s limitations on government are couched in vague language, the judicial branch must eventually deal with potentially volatile social issues.

It may appear that the courts are too broad in their review of issues. it should be remembered judges “cannot impose their

views… until someone brings a case to court” Decisions of the courts can be overturned by

legislative action. the judicial branch depends on a perception of

legitimacy surrounding its decisions



SUMMARY

This chapter reviewed the distinctive nature of the courts and their organization and some oftheir administration.

Several areas were highlighted, including the nature of the courts in terms of the status theyare accorded and their use of the adversarial system in trying to arrive at the truth

The dual system of courts in our country–courtsof last resort, appeals courts, and trial courts atthe federal and state levels; how federal courts are administered & movement toward court unification.

Also discussed is the role of courts in policymaking.



SUMMARY

A need and an issue indicated in this chapter isthat of court reform due to the often confusingway in which courts and judges are organizedand utilized.

Another issue raised is the burgeoning caseloadsof the courts.

(cont.)

Court Issues and Practices

Justice is such a fine thing that we cannot pay too dearly for it.

—EARL ALAIN RENE LESAGE

CHAPTER NINE




understand the differences between the due process and crime control models

have a firm grasp of the growing trend toward problem-solving courts

be knowledgeable about courthouse violence, both actual and potential, and what must be done to assess and deal with threats to court actors

be familiar with the problems and consequences of, and solutions for, trial delays

understand the two systems used in scheduling cases




be able to explain the courts' role in media relations know the importance of alternative dispute

resolution (ADR) and why it is considered the wave of the future

be familiar with a recent major U.S. Supreme Court decision concerning federal sentencing guidelines

be conversant with such issues as gender bias, juveniles being tried as adults and shackled in courtrooms, the exclusionary rule, the use of cameras in the courtroom, and plea bargaining

understand some issues facing courts in the future

(cont.)



Justice from the Due Process& Crime Control Perspectives

The due process model holds that defendants should be presumed innocent, the courts’ first priority is to protect suspects’ rights, and granting too much freedom to law enforcement will result in the loss of freedom & civil liberties for all Americans.

Standing in contrast is the crime control model, which views crime as a breakdown of individual responsibility and places the highest importance on repressing criminal conduct, thus protecting society.



Courthouse Violence

Judges deal with “a segment of society that most people don’t have to deal with—people who are violent, might be mentally unstable, are desperate because they don’t have much more to lose.”

Increasingly true when one considers some of the recent violent acts committed against the judiciary.

These have been many incidents of courthouse violence across the nation in recent years. mirroring the society, our courts have become

dangerous venues Threats against federal judicial officials alone now

averaging about 700 annually.



Courthouse ViolenceTypes of Courthouse Violence

Nontargeted courthouse violence - an individual with no specific intention of engaging in violence. but during, at the conclusion of, or shortly after the

court proceeding, becomes incensed & defiant at some procedure or outcome and acts out

Targeted courthouse violence - an individual who expressly intends to engage in courthouse violence. deliberately focus on specific individuals or judiciary

Of the two groups, the nontargeting group has been responsible for most of the violent incidents in our nation’s courthouses.



Courthouse ViolenceMaking a Threat Assessment

Targeted violence is the end result of understandable and often discernible processes of thinking & acting. neither impulsive nor spontaneous

One must distinguish between expressing a threat and posing a threat. many who make threats do not pose a serious risk & many who serious risk will not issue direct threats

Violence is the product of an interaction among the attacker, his/her situation, the target, and the setting.

At minimum, all courts should employ security procedures.



Problem-Solving Courts“Therapeutic Justice”

The 90s saw a wave of court reform across the US as judges and other court actors experimented with new ways to deliver justice.

Problem-solving courts are still very much a work in progress, but they share some common elements. they use their authority to forge new responses to

chronic social, human, and legal problems The results have been impressive.

studies have found that these first-generation courts reduced probation violation & dismissal rates, improved public safety and are worth pursuing



Problem-Solving CourtsSocial & Historical Forces that Set the Stage

Breakdown & loss of respect for social/community institutions, such as families and organized religion.

A surge in the nation’s incarcerated population. Emphasizing accountability of public institutions. Advances in quality/availability of therapeutic

interventions, particularly drug treatment programs. Shifts in public policies & priorities.

the “broken windows” theory Rising caseloads and increasing frustration with the

standard approach to case processing.



Problem-Solving Courts Not “McJustice”

Declining public confidence, judges moaning their courts are places of “McJustice” & “plea-bargaining mills,” attorneys looking at their roles, & outcomes have led to calls for “therapeutic jurisprudence.”

Critics worry defendants may be coerced into participating in these courts.



In the SpotlightDrug Courts

By the end of 2004, there were 1,212 drug courts operating, another 476 were being planned.

Successful completion of the program results in dismissal of charges, reduced or set-aside sentences, lesser penalties, or a combination.

The drug court model includes the following: incorporating drug testing into case processing nonadversarial relationship between defendant & court referring defendants in need of treatment access to treatment and rehabilitation services



In the SpotlightMental Health Courts

In the past, courts generally treated the mentally ill in the same manner as any other defendant, and the results were devastating. because of high levels of recidivism, this situation is

slowly changing The premise is that defendants are better served if

they are diverted to treatment programs and remain under regular supervision for a fixed period of time.

In exchange for guilty pleas, defendants are puton probation and given a treatment plan. sex offenders & violent criminals are barred



The Dilemma of Delay“Justice Delayed…”

There is no consensus on how long is too long to bring a criminal case to trial, no agreed-on definition of unnecessary delay. the concern is unnecessary delay, and the test

centers on prosecutor & defense attorney conduct The crime control model requires swift justice to

protect society by incarcerating offenders. due process, a more thoughtful, careful approach.

The public often hears of cases languishing on dockets for years. which erodes public confidence in the judicial process



The Dilemma of DelayThe Consequences

Delay can jeopardize values & guarantees inherent in our system & deprive defendant rights to speedy trial. lengthy pretrial incarceration can cause a defendant

to plead guilty Delay can also strengthen a defendant’s bargaining

position; prosecutors are more apt to accept pleasto a lesser charge when dockets are crowded.

A contributor to court delay is lack of incentive to process cases speedily. the Supreme Court has refused to give the rather

vague concept of a “speedy trial” a precise time frame



The Dilemma of DelaySuggested Solutions

The best-known legislation addressing the problem is the Speedy Trial Act of 1974, amended in 1979, and has proven effective over the years. federal prosecutors have a total of 100 days from

time of arrest until trial Laws to speed up trials at state level have had less

success than federal law because most state lawsfail to provide courts with adequate, effective enforcement mechanisms. time limits specified by speedy trial laws are seldom

followed in practice



The Dilemma of DelayCase Scheduling: Two Systems

A key part of addressing case delay concerns ability of the court administrator to set a date for trial.

Individual Calendar System - a simpler procedure for scheduling cases. a primary advantage is continuity often affected by major differences in case stacking

Master Calendar System - judges oversee given stages of a case. primary advantage is judges can be assigned to the

job they do best difficult to pinpoint location or responsibility for delay



The Dilemma of DelayTwo Systems - Which System Is Better?

Debate has developed over which is better, though the answer likely depends on the nature of the court. small courts, such as US district courts, use the

individual calendar system more successfully. metropolitan & state courts almost uniformly use

the master calendar system. Research indicates that courts using the master

calendar experience greater difficulty. in courts where the master calendar system was

discontinued, delay was greatly reduced



Decreasing LitigationAlternative Dispute Resolution

Several methods are now being proposed to reduce the number of lawsuits in this country. one limits punitive damages, with only the judge

being allowed to levy them another is to force losers to pay winner’s legal fees

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is appropriate when new law is not being created.

The two most common forms of ADR used todayare arbitration and mediation. arbitration is similar to a trial, though less formal mediation is less formal and more friendly



Recent Supreme Court Decisions on Federal Sentencing - Guidelines

Two recent US Supreme Court decisions concern federal sentencing guidelines & judges’ sentences. first was the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984

creating the US Sentencing Commission toestablish sentencing policies and guidelines

in 2007, the Court explained what it meantby “advisory” and “reasonableness”

The Court found district court judges do not have to justify deviations from federal Guidelines, with broad discretion to impose “reasonable sentences”. even if the Guidelines call for different sentences



Courts’ Media Relations

Good media relations can be very important forthe courts—particularly in high-profile cases. people often wonder why the courts act as they

do with respect to public information The National Center for Courts & Media was

established to foster better communication and understanding between judges & lawyers, and between judges & journalists. the goal is to eliminate unnecessary friction

between courts and the media



Other IssuesGender Bias

As our society has become more diverse, gender bias problems have increased. 36 states have created task forces to investigate

gender bias in the legal system Although it is difficult to estimate the true extent of

gender bias, it is important to recognize and deal with it whenever it occurs.

Perceptions of gender bias are a serious matter because they affect litigants’ view of the fairnessof the justice system.



Other IssuesShould Juveniles Be Tried as Adults?

In the mid-90s, focus on crimes began to shift from drugs to juvenile crime, particularly violent crime.

Numerous states are responding by making it easier to transfer juveniles from juvenile to adult courts thus juveniles tried as adults

The philosophy & treatment of juveniles are quite different in the latter courts. the process is adversarial instead of amicabl punitive rather than treatment-oriented

States are also lowering the age and increasing the list of crimes for which juveniles can be transferred.



Other IssuesShould Juveniles Be Tried as Adults?

Advocates of restorative justice emphasize that juveniles are a prime example of a group where efforts at reconciliation are likely to yield more positive results than punitive measures. should juveniles be prosecuted as adults? under what conditions sentenced & incarcerated? should potential/traditional rehabilitative philosophies

& functions of juvenile court be taken into account? These questions must be addressed in light of the

hardened nature of today’s violent juvenile offenders, & terms of what the future holds for juvenile violence.



Other IssuesShould Juveniles Be Shackled?

At issue is whether children as young as 10 needto be shackled for court security. and if chains on young defendants make them look

& think of themselves that way The US Supreme Court & federal courts have held

shackles on a defendant can unfairly influence a jury. adult defendants may appear in court in shackles,

but not in front of their jury Routine shackling is a better-safe-than-sorry

approach when teenage impulsiveness leads toan escape attempt or attack on a person in court.



Other IssuesShould Juveniles Be Shackled?

Conversely, advocates argue that policies requiring juveniles to be shackled are unnecessary because most juveniles are there for nonviolent offenses.

Overall, it would appear that momentum is building against the use of shackles in juvenile court. at least in terms of a state’s having a broad policy

requiring juveniles to be restrained There seems to be more agreement that need for

shackling should be decided on a case-by-case basis.



Other IssuesShould the Exclusionary Rule Be Banned?

The exclusionary rule became controversial for crime control & due process advocates when adopted in 1961 by the US Supreme Court in Mapp v. Ohio.

For experts inclined toward the due process model, illegal conduct by the police cannot be ignored. they believe that a court that admits tainted evidence

tolerates unconstitutional conduct that produced it and demonstrates an “insufficient commitment to the guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure.



Other IssuesShould Cameras Be Banned?

The widely televised trial of O.J. Simpson clearly caused a reconsideration of this issue. perceptions that Simpson’s lawyers played to the

cameras had an impact in several cases that followed Opponents complain televising trials distorts the

process, encouraging participants to play to cameras. Supporters of the practice maintain televising trials

has educational value, providing the public with a firsthand view of how courts operate. Studies found viewers of a televised trial became

more knowledgeable about the judicial process



Other IssuesDoes Plea Bargaining Belong?

Some people in the court system believe plea bargaining reduces the courthouse to something akin to a Turkish bazaar - justice on the cheap.

Others believe it makes the job of judge, prosecutor, & defense attorney much easier.

Regardless of which side one supports, it is ironic that police & civil libertarians oppose plea bargaining. but for different reasons

A bargained agreement on reduced charges may be the product of initial overcharging and/or of evidence problems that surface later.



Jury Science

Scientific jury selection—hiring a private consulting firm to sample a geographical area and determine what constitutes a jury of one’s peers—has existed for many years. methods used & services provided by many firms

today to assist trial attorneys are relatively new Many private firms provide consultation concerning

jury selection and focus on the thought processesof jurors to also make the jury more predictable.

They also prepare courtroom graphics, animations, and estimates of the probability of damages basedon jury research.



Future ConsiderationsShifts in Philosophy and Practice

Private businesses offering adjudication, arbitration, & mediation will increasingly compete with courts.

Judicial decisions, such as small claims, traffic & status offenses will be made by nonlawyer judges.

Court programs will be increasingly decentralized. Court organizational structures will be less formal,

with less reliance on hierarchical, bureaucratic structures & shared leadership.

Not to be overlooked in the courts’ future are the impacts of high technology & integration of criminal justice information systems.



Future ConsiderationsTrends & Expectations To Shape the Courts

Demand for culturally appropriate court and justice services, including interpreters.

Diverse expectations for the courts’ role in society. Alterations in family composition. More demand for acceptance of alternative lifestyles. Increasing manipulation of public opinion about crime

and the courts using mass media. Rapidly emerging information/networking technology.



SUMMARY

This chapter discussed challenges involving the courts, generated from both internal and external sources, for today and for the future.

It is obvious that contemporary and future court issues and operations carry tremendous challenges for administrators.

Court leaders must be innovative, open to new ideas, accountable, well trained, and educatedfor the challenges that lie ahead.

Legislators and policymakers must be more aware of difficulties confronting courts & be prepared to provide additional resources.

court organization and operation courts and camps are the only place to learn the world in. — earl...

Documents