Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118564942
label
[Criminal Justice] - System Development Plan for the Improvement of Courts, Prosecution and Law Reform, Reprinted November 1972
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118564942
contentType
document
title
[Criminal Justice] - System Development Plan for the Improvement of Courts, Prosecution and Law Reform, Reprinted November 1972
citationUrl
identifierLocal
840
collections
Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit
Reports
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118564942
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-12-31
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1967-01-01
year
1967
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
09c4bd4e361e686b
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers,
1966-74: Press Unit
Folder Title: [Criminal Justice] - System Development Plan
for the Improvement of Courts, Prosecution
and Law Reform, Reprinted November 1972
Box: P34
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
PRESS
EL
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENTPLAN
FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF COURTS, PROSECUTION
if
AND LAW REFORM
ATTA
Prepared By
The Courts Task Force Of The
California Council on Criminal Justice
September 22, 1972
(Reprinted November 1972)
THE CALIFORNIA COURT SYSTEM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ROSTER
ii
INTRODUCTION
1
THE CALIFORNIA COURT SYSTEM
3
OVERVIEW OF PROBLEMS
9
SYSTEM PLANNING FOR THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS
11
RANK ORDER OF PROBLEMS
15a
PROBLEM LISTING AND DESCRIPTION
16
GENERAL POLICIES, CONSTRAINTS AND OBJECTIVES
FOR SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
58
RANKING AND CLASSIFICATION OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
60
PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF FUNDS BY PROBLEM AREA
70
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
75
EVALUATION
101
APPENDIX
103
COURTS TASK FORCE PROGRAM STATEMENT
COURTS TASK FORCE PROJECTS
i
CALIFORNIA COUNCIL ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE
HON. EVELLE J. YOUNGER, Chairman
DR. C. ROBERT GUTHRIE, Vice Chairman
Attorney General
Professor of Criminology
State of California
State College of Calif., Long Beach
HON. ARTHUR ALARCON, Judge
HON. HARVEY JOHNSON
Los Angeles County Superior Court
Assemblyman, 58th District
WAYNE H. BORNHOFT
HON. JOAN DEMPSEY KLEIN, Judge
Chief of Police
Municipal Court, Los Angeles
Fullerton, California
RALPH N. KLEPS, Director
ALLEN F. BREED, Director
Administrative Office of the Courts
Department of Youth Authority
Judicial Council of California
EARL BRIAN, M.D. Secretary
PATRICK G. LAPOINTE
Health and Welfare Agency
Board of Supervisors
Shasta County
PAUL CARUSO, Attorney
DAVID LUCE, District Attorney
BERNARD J. CLARK, Sheriff
Lakeport, California
Riverside County
JACK MERELMAN
JOHN T. CONLAN
General Counsel and Manager
Board of Supervisors
County Supervisors Association
Ventura County
GENE S. MUEHLEISEN, Executive Off.
HON. GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN
Commission on Peace Officer
Senator, 37th District
Standards and Training
DOUGLAS F. DOLLARHIDE
CECIL POOLE, Attorney
Mayor, City of Compton
RAYMOND K. PROCUNIER, Director
ROBERT G. ECKHOFF, Public Defender
Department of Corrections
Santa Barbara County
WALTER PUDINSKI, Commissioner
HERBERT E. ELLINGWOOD
California Highway Patrol
Legal Affairs Secretary
Governor's Office
HON. ALAN SIEROTY
Assemblyman, 59th District
KENNETH F. FARE
Chief Probation Officer
HON. CHARLES WARREN
San Diego County
Assemblyman, 56th District
HOWARD GARDNER,
Asso. Director, Emeritus
League of California Cities
HON. ARLEN GREGORIO
ROBERT LAWSON
Senator, 12th District
Executive Director
ii
IMPROVEMENT OF PROSECUTION, COURTS AND LAW REFORM
TASK FORCE
HERBERT E. ELLINGWOOD, Chairman
Legal Affairs Secretary
Governor's Office
HON. HERBERT L. ASHBY
ROBERT GYEMANT
Associate Justice
Attorney
Court of Appeal
BYRON KANE
LOREN BECKLEY
Executive Officer and Clerk
Chief Probation Officer
Ventura County Municipal Court
San Mateo County
FLORENCE LINN, Head
HAROLD BRADFORD
Research and Training Division
Legislative Representative
L.A. County District Attorney's
State Bar of California
Office
HON. TOM CALDECOTT
VIRGIL MEIBERT
Associate Justice
Chief Editorial Writer
Court of Appeal
Oakland Tribune
HON. GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN
DAVID PEREZ
Senator, 37th District
Senior Assistant City Attorney
Los Angeles
ROBERT ECKHOFF
Public Defender
JON D. SMOCK, Assistant Director
Santa Barbara County
Judicial Council of California
AUSTIN B. EWELL
HON. GEORGE W. TRAMMEL
Attorney
Judge of the Los Angeles Municipal
Court District
VERNON L. GROSE, Vice President
Tustin Institute of Technology
SYSTEMS PLANNING SUBCOMMITTEE
CCCJ COURTS SECTION
HERBERT E. ELLINGWOOD, Chairman
DOUGLAS M. PHILLIPS, Chief
HON. HERBERT L. ASHBY
LARRY A. ALAMAO, Editor
ROBERT ECKHOFF
PHILIP A. STEINER
VERNON L. GROSE
LARRY KREIG
FLORENCE LINN
SHERYL CARTER
JON D. SMOCK
DIANA L. MARTIN
HON. GEORGE W. TRAMMEL
iii
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Increased concern over crime in America has resulted in a searching and
critical examination of the criminal justice system. Recently, that
examination has focused upon the judicial process. The courts are fre-
quently criticized for their performance in criminal justice. Much of
the concern with the courts stems from a lack of understanding of the
American judicial system and a failure to appreciate the tremendous work-
loads and pressures facing our courts. Regardless of the reasons for this
public disenchantment, the court system is receiving a mandate from the
public to improve its operation.
The judicial process possesses a unique characteristic not generally found
in other elements of the criminal justice system: The adversary process.
The philosophy behind the adversary process is based on the assumption that
truth can best be ascertained through the efforts of two opposing sides
engaged in a form of combat before an impartial observer. This philosophy
is the result of experience dating back to the days of trial by combat.
The adversary process, when properly used, continues to be the best means
of determining truth and securing justice. However, it is important that
the participants in the adjudication process recognize that, while interests
and processes may be adverse, the goals of all involved are common. This
recognition is vitally necessary to the continued operation of the judicial
process. This recognition is also a prerequisite to any measures designed
to improve the system.
Public concern over the performance of the judicial system should be regarded
by all members of that system as a call to action. The public is demanding
that its system of justice perform its function. That demand underlines the
necessity of each person engaged in the judicial process performing his res-
ponsibilities conscientiously and efficiently.
The courts are a pivotal point in the criminal justice system, serving as the
link between apprehension and correction. The court system is also much more.
There are no less than three major, critical decisions which may be made while
a case comes under the jurisdiction of the courts system: 1) The prosecutor's
decision to charge, which charges to file, how many counts to allege and the
degree of the charges, 2) the determination of guilt or innocence or the
decision to accept or reject a plea, and 3) the determination of what sentence
will be imposed following conviction. The implications of all these decisions
upon the accused are evident. These decisions also affect the criminal justice
system itself.
The workloads of the correctional system are determined by conviction and
sentence. Workloads of law enforcement are, in part, determined by the temporary
removal or the failure to remove offenders from society.
The court system, including prosecutors and defenders, can be an impor-
tant element in the deterrance of criminal behavior. Length of sentence
and type of sentence are effective as deterrents to criminal activities
only when there is a certainty that once apprehended, an offender will
be tried quickly and fairly. Further, the public and potential offenders
can easily lose faith and respect for a criminal justice system which
allows delays of sometimes up to two years from apprehension to trial.
Attempts to ameliorate the situation through negotiated pleas lose their
effectiveness when, because of backlogs and large caseloads, the nature of
dispositions is dictated by the size of the court calendar rather than the
merits of the case. Both the public and the accused have a right to a
speedy trial and a just disposition. The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act program has, with some exceptions, failed to provide any sig-
nificant assistance to the court system. By concentrating its efforts on
other elements of the system, the Safe Streets Program has frequently
caused additional problems for the courts, especially where grant project
activities have resulted in increased arrests. Improved treatment programs
are of little value if harried judges, prosecutors and defenders are either
unaware or unable to take advantage of them.
The CCCJ System Development Funds were allocated to improvement of the courts
system partly in recognition of previous neglect, partly in recognition of
the importance of the judicial system and partly in recognition of the potential
impact such funds will have upon that system. There has never been a better
time for assisting in the improvement of the court system. Both the public
and many members of the judicial system itself are committed to such improvement.
So much has been done in identifying deficiencies and possible improvement
programs that the judicial system is now ready to undertake ambitious steps to
improve its role in the administration of criminal justice.
The following material is the result of the efforts of a variety of representatives
of the judicial system to devise a plan for expenditure of system development funds.
The plan consists of a brief description of the courts system, a listing of judicial
system problems and a list of proposed solutions. While the authors of the plan
believe it to be a comprehensive document, they make no claim that the plan has
exhausted all of the available possibilities. Further, this document is, by
necessity, only an outline. To adequately discuss the judicial process would
require many volumes. It is important to recognize that meaningful change will
require more than a commitment of funds, federal or otherwise. Lasting reform
will occur only when judges, attorneys, legislaturs and the public become com-
mitted to the improvement of the judicial process.
The following document was prepared primarily to assist the California Council
on Criminal Justice in providing funds for the improvement of courts, prosecutors
and defenders.
- 2 -
THE CALIFORNIA COURT SYSTEM
The Constitution of the State of California provides that the judicial power
of the State is vested in a Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal, Superior Courts,
Municipal Courts, and Justice Courts (Art. VI, Sec. 1). Provision is also
made for a Judicial Council (Art. VI, Sec. 6), a Commission on Judicial
Appointments (Art. VI, Sec. 7), and a Commission on Judicial Qualifications
(Art. VI, Sec. 8).
The California State Judicial System has the distinction of being the largest
in the United States. In 1971, it had a total of 372 courts and 1,087 auth-
orized judgeships. Criminal and civil filing exceeded 13.4 million, with
matters disposed of by the court totaling 12 million. The total annual cost
for these courts runs approximately $250 million.
CALIFORNIA'S APPELLATE COURT SYSTEM
SUPREME COURT
The Supreme Court is California's highest court. It serves as the state's
court of final appeal and consists of a Chief Justice and six Associate Jus-
tices. All seven of the Justices hear each case, with each case decided by a
majority vote. The members of the court are appointed or nominated by the
Governor; they must be confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments.
Supreme court justices run on their own record, unopposed, with a majority of
"yes" votes required for reelection. The term of office is 12 years. Any
vacancies are filled by the Governor.
The court has original jurisdiction in habeas corpus proceedings and in cases
involving extraordinary writs, such as mandamus and prohibition. The court
may transfer to itself cases which involve major issues of law and cases on
which lower courts differ, thereby providing uniformity of decision.
Since the Supreme Court is the final decisionmaker for uniform application of
law, the burden of the ever-increasing number of appeals cannot be reduced by
increasing judges at this level. Rather, the court must select the cases it
will hear on discriminating basis. Thus, approximately 90 per cent of all
petitions for hearing from the intermediate appellate courts are denied.
The Supreme Court holds regular sessions in San Francisco, Los Angeles and
Sacramento. The Supreme Court has 3,179 new filings for the new year, 1970-71,
of which 2,198 were petitions for hearing in cases decided by the Courts of
Appeal.
- 3 -
COURTS OF APPEAL
The Courts of Appeal are California's intermediate appellate courts. The
Constitution provides that they have appellate jurisdiction in all cases
where the Superior Courts have original jurisdiction.
There are five Court of Appeal districts (San Francisco, Los Angeles, Sacra-
mento, San Diego/San Bernardino, and Fresno), each serving a separate geo-
graphical area. Each district is divided into one or more divisions, with
each division operating as a separate deliberative unit with its own presid-
ing justice.
The Justices of the Court of Appeal are appointed or nominated by the Gover-
nor; they must be confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments.
The Justices of the Court of Appeal run on their own record, unopposed, with
a majority of "yes" votes required for reelection. The term of office is 12
years. Any vacancies are filled by the Governor.
The 8,684 Court of Appeal filings in 1970-71 was an increase of 8 per cent
over the previous year.
TRIAL COURTS
There are three types of trial courts presently operating in California: the
superior, the municipal, and the justice courts. Each differs from the other
in jurisdiction, organization, staffing, financing, and operation. They are--
in a very real sense--the keystone of the state's system of criminal and civil
justice. The present major categories of cases handled by these three trial
courts are summarized as follows:
Superior Court
Municipal Court
Justice Court
Felonies
Misdemeanors (A11)
Misdemeanors (Most)
Juvenile matters
Small claims
Small claims
Marriage dissolution
Traffic
Traffic
and annulment pro-
Felony preliminary
Felony preliminary
ceedings
hearings
hearings
Probate
Civil cases when the
Civil cases when the
Civil cases when the
amount in contro-
amount in contro-
amount in contro-
versy is $5,000 or
versy is $1,000 or
versy exceeds
less
less
$5,000 (or $1,000
in counties without
municipal courts)
Equity actions
Habeas corpus
Extraordinary Writs
Appeals from lower
courts
- 4 -
SUPERIOR COURTS
The Superior Court is a trial court of general jurisdiction in all causes ex-
cept those given by statute to other courts, and it hears appeals from deci-
sions of municipal and justice courts. Counties having municipal courts are
required to maintain a three-judge appellate division in their superior court;
there are 24 appellate divisions now operating. In other counties, a single
Superior Court Judge hears appeals from justice courts.
There is one superior court and at least one judge in each of the 58 counties.
The total filings for 1970-71 for all superior courts were 527,528, with a
total of 443 judgeships for all courts.
The operational cost of the superior courts is the responsibility of the
county--with the exception of a certain portion of the judges' salaries.
The court may have an executive officer who functions as an administrative
officer under the direction of the presiding judge. A presiding judge is the
judge selected by the other members of the court who presides for one year,
and among other duties, represents the court in many capacities, as well as
assigns judges of his court to various departments, divisions and branches.
Superior Court judges serve six-year terms and are elected on a nonpartisan
ballot by voters of the county, and vacancies are filled by the Governor.
Superior Court judges are required to be attorneys admitted to the practice
of law in California for at least 10 years immediately preceding election or
appointment (Art. VI, Sec. 15). Salaries are paid partly by the State and
partly by the county according to a statutory formula based on county popu-
lation.
MUNICIPAL AND JUSTICE COURTS
California has a system of lower courts which is comprised of municipal and
justice courts. Each county is divided into judicial districts, with each
district having either a municipal or a justice court.
In September, 1971, there were 308 judicial districts, 77 municipal courts,
and 231 justice courts. Of the 58 counties in California, 53 have justice
courts and 25 have municipal courts. These courts are located in a total of
380 different court facilities.
The lower courts are the major point of contact for most citizens who become
involved with the judicial process. For 1969-70, nearly 6.7 million non-
parking cases were filed in superior, municipal and justice courts. Of these,
approximately 92 per cent were filed in the municipal and justice courts, with
about 83 per cent going to the municipal court. In addition, the lower courts
handled approximately 6.5 million parking filings.
- 5 -
These courts are also substantial sources of revenue. Over $122 million was
generated through fees, fines and assessments in these courts; and was dis-
tributed so that approximately $52 million went to the counties, $51 million
to the cities, $19 million to the state's special funds (e.g., Driver Educa-
tion and Peace Officer Training Funds).
The lower court system consists of 308 judicial districts served by 587 judge-
ships. These courts are distributed SO that 250 of the 308 judicial districts
are one-man courts, and most justice courts are part-time courts.
Judges from municipal courts are elected for six-year terms on a nonpartisan
ballot by voters of the judicial districts in which their court is located.
Vacancies in judgeships are filled by the Governor. Municipal court judges
are required to be attorneys admitted to practice in California for at least
five years immediately preceding election or appointment. All staffing and
compensation for municipal courts is provided for by state statute. The salary
for judges is paid by the county.
Justice court judges are elected for six-year terms, and the vacancies are
filled by the Board of Supervisors. With the exception of incumbents of pre-
viously existing courts who were blanketed into positions at the time of the
lower court reorganization, judges of Justice Courts either must have been
admitted to practice law in California or have passed a qualifying examination
given by the Judicial Council. Their salaries are fixed by the supervisors.
JUDICIAL COUNCIL
The California State Constitution also establishes a Judicial Council composed
of 21 members under the chairmanship of the Chief Justice of California. The
policies and activities of the Judicial Council are conducted through the
Administrative Office of the California Courts which is the staff agency for
the Council. This staff includes a legal staff for preparation of the legal
research necessary to recommend improved procedural rules and constitutional
and statutory amendments, and a statistical research staff to collect, analyze
and report judicial statistics. This staff also engages in the development of
programs for assistance in the solution of administrative problems and manage-
ment of the courts on a statewide basis through the adaptation to court use of
proven business and public management techniques.
COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS
The Commission on Judicial Appointments, established by the State Con-
stitution, consists of the Chief Justice, the Attorney General and a
presiding justice of the Court of Appeal. Nominations or appointments
by the Governor to vacancies on the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal
- 6 -
are reviewed by the Commission and become effective only after confirmation
by the Commission.
COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS
The Commission on Judicial Qualifications, a constitutional agency, has the
authority to investigate and conduct proceedings against any California judge
when there may be wilful misconduct in office, wilful and persistent failure
to perform his duties, habitual intemperance, conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute, or
a disability of a permanent character that seriously interferes with the per-
formance of his duties.
The Commission also gives consideration to complaints on the conduct and fit-
ness of court judges. The Commission may investigate, hold hearings and then
recommend to the Supreme Court, which has the final decision, that a judge be
removed or retired from office or be censured.
PROSECUTION AND DEFENSE
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
For many reasons, the District Attorney is, unquestionably, the most powerful
person in the criminal justice process. His decisions control the volume of
business reaching the trial court's criminal department. He has, for all
practical purposes, absolute power not to prosecute a case.
The decision to prosecute by the district attorney has a number of important
consequences. Examples include: imprisonment while awaiting court hearing;
the cost of a bail premium; cost of defense counsel--should the defendant not
qualify for the services of a public defender or other counsel at public ex-
pense; a permanent police record which may both affect future employment as
well as being considered by a judge at a later time should he be sentenced for
the commission of another crime.
Each of the 58 counties elects a district attorney to institute investigations
and prosecute public offenses. In nine northern counties, this function is
carried out on a part-time basis. Statewide, as of December, 1969, there were
1,074 full-time and 32 part-time attorneys in district attorneys' offices;
514 full-time and eight part-time investigators; and 1,166 full-time and 76
part-time clerical staff. Their total operating budget is over $35.6 million.
CITY ATTORNEY
The primary duty of the City Attorney is to be attorney and legal advisor to
the city and prosecute violations of city ordinances. Otherwise, city ordi-
- 7
nance violations are prosecuted by the District Attorney under contract with
the city. Some city charters also provide that the city attorney may, if
otherwise permitted by law, prosecute misdemeanor violations of state law.
In 12 cities, mainly in southern California, the city attorney also prosecutes
misdemeanor violations of state law.
PUBLIC DEFENDERS
The United States Supreme Court has required that indigent persons charged with
an imprisonable offense be provided with legal counsel. In 1969-70, 31 of the
counties in the state met this requirement by establishing an Office of the
Public Defender. In 19 other counties, the court assigned private attorneys
to defend indigents and paid them by the court. In the other eight counties,
the private attorneys, law offices or law organizations performed the services
under contract. As of December, 1969, there were some 604 full-time and 178
part-time attorneys involved in public defense activities; 103 full-time and
10 part-time investigators; and 193 full-time and 33 part-time clerical person-
nel. Operating budgets for public defenders totaled about $13.7 million for
1969-70, while the budget for court-assigned counsel was $4.8 million.
RECENT INNOVATIONS
Over the past 20 years, California has undertaken a number of steps to in-
crease the efficiency and effectiveness of the court system. Many experimental
and innovative programs have been initiated with experimentation being initia-
ted in such areas as: expanded use--or studies of use--of electronic data
processing in calendar management; passage of infraction legislation which
eliminates the right to counsel and jury trial in the parking and other minor
traffic violations; gradual expansion of the use of the subordinate judicial
officers to handle lesser judicial duties; greater use of trial-setting and
settlement conferences in the pretrial disposition of civil cases; experimental
use of less than 12-men juries.
National attention has been given to a number of California's court administra-
tors and judges for their successes in the area of general court improvement.
But although successes have been achieved, the caseload backlog in some areas
continues to increase, operational problems continue to exist, and expressions
of concern over inefficiencies in the court system continue to be generated
from both within and outside the judicial structure.
- 8 -
OVERVIEW OF PROBLEMS
OVERVIEW OF PROBLEMS
The most important problem facing the American judicial system is delay.
In some jurisdictions of the United States, delays of up to one year are
not uncommon. Delay of that magnitude is manifestly unjust to the defendant
who is in custody. Society suffers when potentially serious offenders are
free on bail for over two years while awaiting trial. The system suffers
because of the pressures involved and because the public loses respect for
the judicial system. Many of the problems of judicial agencies have been
caused by an increase in workloads without a corresponding increase in man-
power.
Another almost universal problem is the failure of the courts system to in-
corporate modern management practices and techniques. The Chief Justice
of the United States declared at the National Conference on the Judiciary:
"That with reference to methods and procedure we may be carrying
continuity and tradition too far when we see that John Adams,
Hamilton or Burr, Jefferson or Marshall, reincarnated, could step
into any court today and after a minimal briefing on procedure
and up-dating in certain areas of law, try a case with the best of
today's lawyers. Those great eighteenth century lawyers would
need no more than a hurried briefing and a Brooks' Bros. suit.
They would not even need a hair cut, given the styles of our day.
The judicial process has also lagged behind in personnel practices. Training
of professional and support personnel is often negligible or nonexistent.
There are seldom any standards for hiring, promotion or discipline. Compensation
of personnel varies extensively, as does the number of subsidiary functions those
personnel must perform. Responsibility for management of courts and offices is
most often assigned on the basis of seniority or other factors, and not according
to administrative ability. Finally, judicial agencies are frequently overworked,
understaffed and victimized by high turnover rates.
California judicial agencies must contend with many of the problems listed above.
While the California judicial system is generally recognized as one of the best,
California also has its share of problems. The major problems of the California
judicial system have been placed in ten general groupings. In so doing, it must
be recognized that such a grouping is for purposes of analysis and that many
problem areas may be inter-related; many fall within more than one group. The
major problem areas identified are:
1. Calendar management and office management
2. Training
3. Diversion
4. Uniformity of rules, forms and procedures
5. Appellate problems
6. Jury selection and utilization
7. Plea bargining/sentencing
8. Research
9. Facilities and equipment
10. Public information and education
*
"Justice in the States - Addresses and papers of the National Conference
on the Judiciary", West, 1971, p. 13
- 9 -
Generally speaking, the problems mentioned in this report interfere with the
timely and efficient operation of the court system, thus, in many instances,
bringing the criminal justice system to a standstill. A major problem which
affects all of the above is the lack of flexibility to experiement with
alternative methods. The operation of the judicial system is subject to
pervasive control by statute, case law or constitutional law. Thus, it may
be impossible to examine the effects of certain innovations such as less than
unanimous jury verdicts. However, there is much that can be done without ever
encountering these obstacles. The judicial system is in need of much improve-
ment in areas that are generally taken for granted in other disciplines.
Effective calendar and office management, training and diversion are subjects
that could easily occupy our attention exclusively for a number of years. This
document is an effort to rationally allocate a limited amount of resources
toward the solution of the major problems of the judicial system.
-10-
SYSTEM PLANNING FOR THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS
SYSTEM PLANNING FOR THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS
The systems approach has been used with great success in a number of disciplines.
Application of systems methodology to criminal justice has progressed slowly for
a number of reasons. Criminal justice decision makers haven't received the train-
ing and guidance necessary to adopt systems methodology, the criminal justice
system contains a large number of variables (chiefly human and social factors)
which do not lend themselves readily to the systems approach and, the criminal
justice system is a large and extremely complex entity.
Keeping these limitations in mind, the Courts Task Force of the CCCJ undertook
the development of a systems approach to planning for the adjudication process
in September of 1971. The Task Force was fortunate in counting among its members
an experienced systems engineer. Under his patient and able tutelage, the Task
Force has developed a systems approach within the last year.
The Task Force embarked upon the systems approach because of a widely-held dis-
satisfaction with merely responding to requests for funding. While many of the
requests were worthwhile, they appeared to respond to problems of relatively minor
importance. The Courts Task Force views the relatively limited amount of federal
funds available under the LEAA program as an opportunity to make significant
improvements in the quality of criminal justice. In order to take optimum ad-
vantage of that opportunity, it became necessary to determine where those funds
should be spent to best advantage. This document is a partial result of the Task
Force's efforts. Another result is the change in attitude and outlook of the
Task Force in fulfilling its responsibilities.
A systems planning subcommittee, consisting of an appellate court justice, a trial
court judge, a prosecutor, a public defender, a representative of the Judicial
Council and a representative of the Executive Branch, was appointed from the member-
ship of the Courts Task Force. That subcommittee met regularly on the average of
twice a month since September, 1971, to work on the systems approach. In addition,
large portions of regular Task Force meetings were devoted to the systems approach.
The first step taken was the identification of decision points in the adjudica-
tion process. The functional flow block diagram on Page 13 and 14 is the result
of those efforts. Judicial system problems were identified by the subcommittee,
through regional plans and by searching through available literature on the
subject. Those problems were matched with appropriate blocks in the flow dia-
gram and listed preparatory to ranking them. An example of the worksheet used
in that process appears on Page 15. Over 300 problems were identifed and ranked
according to severity of the problem, frequency of occurrence and cost of solu-
tion. The ranking process was accomplished over a two-month period and resulted
in a listing of major problems affecting the judicial process. That ranked
listing of major problems is on Page 15a.
Two additional months were devoted to identifying and assigning priorities to
possible solutions to the problems thus listed. The list of possible solutions
in priority order comprises the action portion of this System Development Plan.
-11-
The systems approach normally leaves the selection of the solution to a problem
to those interested in submitting bids. The Courts Task Force has taken upon
itself the additional burden of identifying possible solutions in the hope of
encouraging positive responses to the problems identified. The amounts allocated
represent estimates of the CCCJ funds required to conduct projects aimed at the
solution of judicial process problems.
In the considered judgment of the Courts Task Force, this listing represents a
blueprint for improving the California court system. It also represents a great
deal more: it is the first step toward insuring that funds allocated for the
improvement of the courts system will, in fact, be spent on programs that address
the major problems of the courts.
Upon adoption of this plan by the CCCJ, the Courts Task Force will issue Request
for Proposals on most of the solutions listed within the priorities. In some
instances, a specific project may require initiation by the CCCJ. The effect in
both cases is the same: the CCCJ and its Courts Task Force will have taken a
positive step toward insuring that funding programs will address major problems
identified by the CCCJ. The new role will allow for a coordinated and comprehen-
sive attack upon the problems facing the court system. The Courts Task Force has
identified programs which will consume almost five times the amount set aside
under the Systems Development Program. Therefore, this plan will serve as a model
for future court improvement programs. It can also serve as a guide to the CCCJ
Regions in planning for the courts system on a local basis.
For purposes of discussion, the problems identified are grouped by subject matter.
That grouping should not be regarded as a priority ranking of problems. A list-
ing of major problems in priority order appears on Page 15a.
-12-
INDICTED
7.101
ICTMENT
RELEASED
8
7.103
NOT INDICTED
(40 THE BILL)
7.102
HELD FOR
COMPLAINT
MOTICH/
7.104
DECURRER
DEMURRER
APPELLATE
PROCESS
7.301
DENIED 7.30
7.305
HOLD COSITER-
DERE/ 7.205
MOTION TO
SUSTAINED
7.306
DISMISS 7352
DENURRER/
DETERMINT
GUILTY PLEA
995 POTIENT
FELDY 7.403
RELEASED
P. C. 995
GRANTED 7.329
(FELORY OHLY)
WAIVER OF
PROLUMMARY
HEARTH67.206
GUILTY/
REDUCED
7404
HOLD CARTER-
FELOW
PLANT
CESS
HELD TO
INFORMATION
ARRAIGHMENT
DERE 7.30B
(FELGIY ONLY)
00
AUSWER
SUPERIOR
INTIONS
FILED
FELGIY
ARRAIGMENT
7.209
7.220
COURT 7.300
PRETRIAL
GRATTED
NOTIONS
7.330
7.331
SUILTY PLEN
NOT
APPELLATE
PLEA
7405
COMPLAINT
(MIGISTRATE)
SUILTY
P. C. 1533.5
PROCESS
NEGOTIATION
WOLD CONTEIN-
MISSON ARDR
7.202
7.204
7.309
DISCOVERY
PRELIMINARY
7.333
7.334
INFORMATION
PLEA
2% 7.401
HEARING 207
DISIUSSED
MOTIONS
NOT FILED
(MAGISTRATE)
7.210
7.307
7.22
NOT GUILTY/
DENIED
7.332
NOT GUILTY BT
TRIAL
COURT
REASON of
INSAMITY7310
PSYCHIATRIST
7.400
7.406
DISMISSED
DECLARED
APPOINTED
HISDEMEATOR
MISPLACATOR
NOT GUILTY
7.312
7.208
7.222
7.402
7.211
BY REASON OF
DISCUSSED
JURY
INSAM1117311
7.407
SUBMITTED
W 7.408
TRANSCRIPT
GUILTY/
HOLO CONTER-
DERE 7.322
NOT
GUILTY
7.323
ARRIGUMENT
MISDEMEAR
PUNICIPAL CR
PLEA
PRETRIAL
CORPLAINT
7.203
JUSTICE COURT
7.321
HOT GUILTY/
MOTIONS/
NOT CUILTY BY
DISCOVERY
REASON OF
INSANITY 7 24
PSYCHIATRIST
APPOINTED
NOT GUILTY
7.326
BY REASON OF
INSNITTY7326
NCTIONAL FLOW BLOCK DIAGRAM THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS
PREPARED BY THE PLANEING SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE JUDICAL PROCESS TASK FORCE - DECEMBER 15. 1971
CALIFORNIA
YOUTH 7.504
AUTHORITY
IMPOSITION
OF SENTENCE
AND EXECUTE
1501
FINE
7.505
(TO TRIAL)
STATE 7.505
PRISON OR
INSTITUT ION
.403
(FELONY ONLY)
ONLY)
COUNTY 7.507
EXECUTE 7.600
JAIL OR
SENTENCE
INSTITUTION
GIO APPEAL)
7.404
720
OIILY)
COLLATERAL
NOT GUILTY
FIRE
PENALTY
POST COLIVIC-
BY REASON
IMPOSITION
502
AND 7.508
PROCESS
T100 PROCESS
OF MISAMITY
7.430
7.443
OF SENTENCE
JAIL
PROCESS' 7.420
WITH EXECUTION
LANOR
GRANTED
DISMISSAL
EXECUTE 601
SUSPERDED
SENTENCE
7.441
FINE (FELOWY
7.603
7.800
WITH APPEAL
NEW 7.440
AND ONLY)
AFF IRMED
EXECUTE
STATE PRISON
SENTENCE
GUILTY
TRIAL
7.410
MOTIONS
(FROM "NEW TRIAL
7,509
MOTIOUS")
7.604
MODIFIED
NOT
PROBATION
SENTENCING
GUILTY
DENIED
7.510
7.411
PROCESS
RESULTS
7.442
7.500
STAY SENTENCE
07
7.409
WITH APPEAL
PROBATION
7.602
7.605
MISTRIAL
AND JAIL
REVERSED
TED
7.511
408
7.412
MENTALLY
CRIPT
NARCOTIC
DISTURBED
SEX OFFERDER
ADDICTION
PROBATION
7413
PROCEEDINGS
PROCEEDINGS
DISMISSED
7.450
7.460.
AND FINE
7.512
PROBATION,
IMPOSITION
FINE AND
OF SENTENCE
JAIL 7.513
SUSPENDED
(TO PRETRIAL MOTIONS)
TO BEGINNING OF
CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SYSTEM
*TO BE DEVELOPED LATER
SEVERITY (ADJ
SEVERITY
PROBABILITY
COST
7.210 Dismissed
a) Lack of finality - refiling is possible (J. P. Sub.).
b) No appeal possible by people.
c) Judge shopping on refiling.
7.211 - Declared Misdemeanor
a) Necessity of consent by the defendant (J. P. Sub.).
b) Improper use of judicial discretion (J. P. Sub.).
7.220 420 Information Filed
a) Undue delay between HTA and filing.
b) Lack of limitation on what can be filed.
7.221 - Information Not Filed
a) Lack of finality (J.) P. Sub.).
b) Abuse of discretion.
c) Lack of procedure for releasing defendant.
d) Lack of procedure to notify Superior Court none to be filed.
7.222 - Misdemeanor
a) Lack of notice to Superior Court.
b) Lack of information to lower court as to the fact had been an
order holding to answer, etc.
7.300 - Arraignment - Superior Court
a) Lack of uniformity in arraignment procedures, reporting methods a
statistics and other court operating procedures. (#42)
b) Pretrial incarceration. (#68)
c) Inadequate calendaring system.
(#71)
d) Multiple pre-trial appearances before court. Lack
of transcript of Grand Jury. (#103)
e) Inequitable bail policies. (#64)
f) Lack of a uniform bail schedule (J. P. Sub.).
g) Lack of information for 0. R. release (J. P. Sub.).
- 15 -
RANK ORDER OF PROBLEMS
PROBLEM
POSSIBLE
DISCUSSION
SOLUTIONS
1. Lack of Effective Calendar Management
Page
19
Page
75
2. Excessive Number of Continuances
20
75
3. Undue Consumption of Time by and Misuse of
21
76
Preliminary Hearings
4. Lack of Professional Administration of the
22
76
Courts
5.
Unmeritorious Appeals
46
77
6. Lack of Uniformity in Crime Charging
42
77
7. Lack of General Diversion of Cases and
38
77
Offenders More Appropriately Handled
Elsewhere
8. Excessive Number of Multiple Appearances
21
78
and Motions
9. Lack of Standards for Diversion of
40
78
Alcohol Cases
10. Insufficient Information About the Opera-
25
78
tions of Judicial Agencies to Allow Proper
Management--Lack of Workload Measurement
Techniques
11. Difficulty of Assessing Impact of Legisla-
52
78
tive Judicial and Executive Changes Upon
the Adjudication Process
12. Inefficient Use of Witness Time
26
79
13. Appellate Delay
45
79
14. Lack of Effective Settlement Procedures
38
79
15. Traffic Cases
39
79
-15a-
PROBLEM
POSSIBLE
DISCUSSION
SOLUTIONS
16. Lack of Measures for Summary Disposi-
Page
39
Page
80
tion of Traffic Violations
17. Lack of Competent Appellate Counsel
46
80
18. Lack of Arbitration Procedures
38
80
19. Piecemeal Pre-Trial Appellate Review
45
80
20. Case Scheduling Problems
19
80
21. Lack of Alternatives to Civil Trials
38
81
22. Lack of Prior Notice of Motions.
21
81
23. Lack of Procedures to Consolidate
21
81
Motions and Appearances
24. Lack of Training and Standards for
35
81
Court Executives
25. Need for Prosecutor and Defender Office
24
82
Management Assistance--Lack of Procedures
for Exchange of Information and Ideas
26. Lack of Cooperation and Coordination
31
82
Among Agencies
27. Lack of a System of Administrative Dis-
39
82
position of Traffic Matters
28. Problems Resulting from Deadlocked Juries
43
82
29. Unanimous Verdict Requirement
30. Requirement of Oral Opinions in Appellate
46
83
31. Lack of Priority for Meritorious Appeals
45
83
32. Inefficient Calendaring Systems
19
83
33. Alcohol Cases
40
83
34. Insufficient and Inefficient Use of Juror
48
84
Time
35.
Need for Prosecutor and Defender Office
24
84
Management Assistance
36.
Drug Cases
39
84
PROBLEM
POSSIBLE
DISCUSSION
SOLUTIONS
37. Lack of Adequate Methods for Reporting
Page
54
Page
85
in Lower Courts
38. Lack of Uniform Felony Bail Practices
44
85
39. Lack of Finality of Appeals
45
85
40. Lack of Uniform Standards, Practices, and
43
85
Forms for Criminal Law Practices
41. Lack of Uniform Materials for Misdemeanor
43
85
Processing
42. Lack of Coordinated Calendaring of Cases
19
86
43.
Plea Bargaining
50
86
-15c-
PROBLEM LISTING AND
DISCUSSION
CLASSIFICATION OF PROBLEMS
I. CALENDAR MANAGEMENT AND OFFICE MANAGEMENT
A. Lack of Effective Calendar Management.
B. Continuances.
C. Multiple Appearances and Motions.
D. Undue Consumption of Time by and Misuse of Preliminary Hearings.
E. Lack of Professional Administration of the Courts.
F. Need for Prosecutor and Defender Office Management Assistance.
G. Insufficient Information About the Operations of Judicial Agencies
to Allow Proper Management.
H. Lack of Internal Planning and Research Capacity in Courts, Prosecutor
and Defender Offices.
I. Inefficient Use of Witness Time.
J. Duplication of Services and Administration in Superior and
Municipal Courts.
K. Inadequate Staff, Secretarial and Research Assistance.
L. Fragmented Prosecution System.
M. Need for Improved Defender Services in Rural Areas.
N. Lack of Cooperation and Coordination Among Agencies.
II. TRAINING
A. Lack of Training and Standards for Judges.
B. Lack of Training and Standards for Prosecutors and Defenders.
C. Lack of Training and Standards for Court Executives.
D. Lack of Training and Standards for Court, Prosecutor, and Defender
Clerical and Support Personnel.
E. Lack of Training in Juvenile Law and Procedure.
III. DIVERSION
A. General Diversion of Cases and Offenders More Appropriately
Handled Elsewhere.
B. Traffic Cases.
- 16 -
C. Drug Cases.
D. Alcohol Cases.
IV. UNIFORMITY OF RULES, FORMS, AND PROCEDURES
A. Lack of Uniformity in Crime Charging.
B. Lack of Uniform Local Rules of Court.
C. Lack of Uniform Standards, Practices, and Forms for
Criminal Law Practices.
D. Lack of Uniform Felony Bail Practices.
V. APPELLATE PROBLEMS
A. Piecemeal Pre-Trial Appellate Review.
B. Appellate Delay.
C. Unmeritorious Appeals.
D. Lack of Competent Appellate Counsel.
VI. JURY SELECTION AND UTILIZATION
A. Insufficient and Inefficient Use of Juror Time.
B. Problems Resulting from Deadlocked Juries.
C. Inadequate Juror Security.
VII. PLEA BARGAINING AND SENTENCING
A. Plea Bargaining.
B. Lack of Uniformity in Sentencing.
VIII. RESEARCH
A. Difficulty of Assessing Impact of Legislative Judicial and
Executive Changes Upon the Adjudication Process.
B. Lack of Flexibility to Experiment.
C. Need for Restatment of Code Sections Affecting the Judiciary.
D. Inadequate Court Financing.
E. Need for Experimentation with Recommendations Concerning the Courts.
F. Problems Resulting from Piecemeal Revision of Juvenile Law.
IX. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
A. Lack of Adequate Methods for Reporting in Lower Courts.
- 17 -
B. Requirement of Processing Large Amounts of Information.
C. Inadequate Facilities and Equipment of Judicial Agencies.
D. Inadequate Court Security Measures.
X. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND EDUCATION
A. Lack of Public Knowledge and Understanding of the Functions
and Problems of the Judicial System.
- 18 -
DISCUSSION OF PROBLEMS
I. CALENDAR MANAGEMENT AND OFFICE MANAGEMENT
Effective management of court calendars is one of the best methods of
reducing court congestion and delay. Even if there were an abundance
of judicial resources, efficient operation of the courts would continue
to be an important objective. Unfortunately, judicial, prosecutor,
defender and clerical and support resources are at a premium. There-
fore, significant improvements in the California court system will
occur only when that system is operating at maximum efficiency.
A. Lack of Effective Calendar Management
Calendar management is the central core of court administration.
It is the term used to describe the scheduling and hearing of
cases. A number of factors have combined to create problems in
calendar management: (1) Mobility of parties and attorneys,
(2) tactical considerations, (3) antiquated administrative practices,
(4) laxity in enforcing calendar management practices, (5) inadequate
processing of information, and (6) sheer size and complexity of
workloads.
Attorneys and parties in civil cases and defendants in criminal
cases frequently reside in other counties, and attorneys practice
in a number of different counties and in a number of different
courts within a county. Often, branches of the same court have no
way of knowing whether an attorney is scheduled for trial in a
different branch of that court at the same time.
For a number of reasons, delay is a favored tactical weapon used
by one party or the other. Therefore, there is a temptation to
capitalize on inefficient practices and to add to the problems of
calendar control. In many instances, antiquated administrative
practices are the cause of inefficient calendar operations. Where
the court lacks control over its own calendar and critical calendar-
management decisions are being made by clerks or litigants, effi-
cient and timely operation of the courts is in jeopardy. Finally,
the increasing amount of litigation and the growing complexity of
law and procedure (at least 10 appearances are possible in a felony
case) have made effective calendar management a necessity. Ineffective
calendar management results in delay which, in turn, creates problems
for custodians of defendants awaiting trial, prosecutors' offices,
police and civilian witnesses, and which generally prevents a timely
and just disposition of cases. When criminal cases clog the calendar,
pressure is exerted to dispose of them and they are frequently dis-
posed of in a manner which does not promote the ends of justice.
- 19 -
1) Current efforts to improve calendar-management consist of
increasing the number of cases processed by the courts and
concurrently reducing the backlog of cases awaiting trial.
Progress has been made in identifying and cataloging effec-
tive calendar management practices. Further work is needed
in this area and, more importantly, in implementing the
practices thus identified. In addition, experimentation
with computerized case-scheduling techniques, common calendar
systems for multi-court counties and multiple counties, and
the individual calendar system is needed.
2) The objective of the CCCJ is the adoption by all courts of
improved calendar-management. practices. A further objective
is the conduct and reporting of experiments designed to develop
new calendar-management techniques.
B. Continuances
Obtaining a continuance is the procedure most often used for defer-
ring the hearing of a case. At the time cases are scheduled for
trial, it is difficult to insure that witnesses, evidence and counsel
will all be available at trial. To require the conduct of the trial
in the absence of an essential element would be manifestly unjust.
However, continuances result in a multitude of scheduling problems.
Witnesses must be excused subject to recall at a later time, the parties
and the court must readjust their schedules and, finally, the case itself
must be rescheduled for future hearing.
Section 1050 of the California Penal Code provides, inter alia, that
"No continuance of a criminal trial shall be granted except upon
affirmative proof in open court, upon reasonable notice, that the ends
of justice require a continuance." The problem with continuances stems
from an overly generous application of this statute. Cases are continued
in many instances because of inconvenience or lack of preparation of the
parties and for tactical reasons.
The CCCJ believes that another portion of Penal Code Section 1050 should
be given greater emphasis:
"The welfare of the people of the State of California requires
that all proceedings in criminal cases shall be set for trial
and heard and determined at the earliest possible time, and it
shall be the duty of all courts and judicial officers and of
all prosecuting attorneys to expedite such proceedings to the
greatest degree that is consistent with the ends of justice."
The CCCJ believes that once litigants become accustomed to the practice
of being ready for trial on the date originally scheduled, the inconvenience
resulting will be minimal compared to the benefits obtained from speedy
trials and efficiently managed calendars.
- 20 -
1) Possible solutions to the continuance problem include the
creation of a rule which requires reporting of all continu-
ances to the Judicial Council, requiring all requests for
continuances to be heard by the master calendar judge, trail-
ing cases where an attorney is engaged in another trial rather
than granting a continuance (reports would also be made to the
Judicial Council on cases thus trialed), a study to determine
the extent of the continuance problem and the enactment of
existing standards regarding continuances as a Rule of Court.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this section is the elimination
of unnecessary continuances.
C. Multiple Appearances and Motions
There are at least four motions which can be made during the felony
process prior to trial. In most instances, these motions may be
made orally and prior to commencement of the trial at any time. In
many instances, appellate review of actions taken on motions is
possible. Each motion and appearance requires separate scheduling of
a courtroom and a judge. Opposing counsel must also appear. At a
time when the number of case filings is reaching alarming proportions,
multiple appearances for each of those filings creates an intolerable
burden.
1) Among the suggested solutions to this problem are: a) Omnibus
pretrial hearings, b) scheduling of multiple motions arising
from the same matter for hearing at the same time, c) requiring
that all motions be in writing, be noticed and contain Points
and Authorities and that written responses to the motions be filed.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is to demonstrate that
substantial savings will result from consolidation of multiple
motions and appearances.
D. Undue Consumption of Time By, and Misuse of, Preliminary Examination
A preliminary examination is conducted, unless waived by the defendant,
prior to trial in each felony case not initiated by an indictment;
125, 446 preliminary examinations were conducted in California municipal
courts in 1970-71. The examination is designed to screen groundless
or unsupported charges of serious offenses, thus relieving the accused
of the burden, expense and taint of an unnecessary criminal trial. The
preliminary examination also serves some other practical purposes:
1) It gives the defendant some idea of the prosecutor's case, 2) it
records testimony of witnesses who may not be present at the time of
trial, and 3) it may result in the case being 2 submitted at trial on the
transcript of the preliminary examination.
1 Judicial Council of California Annual Report, 1972, p. 118.
2 Witkin - California Criminal Procedure, p. 128.
- 21 -
Where prosecutors have established sound and reasonable crime
charging practices, the need for a preliminary examination as
a screening device has been lessened. Preliminary examinations
often consume an excessive amount of time, they increase signifi-
cantly the time required to process a felony case and as a result of
the customary practice of conducting preliminary examinations in
lower courts, they involve two different levels of courts in
processing a felony case.
Finally, utilizing the preliminary examination as a means of discovery
unnecessarily consumes the time of the court and counsel. If current
discovery statutes are inadequate, they should be improved rather
than relying on a process which consumes a substantial amount of
Judicial resources.
1) Suggestions for improvement include alternatives to the pre-
liminary examination and an alternative to conducting prelim-
inary examinations in the lower courts. Among the alternatives
to the preliminary examination are: a Use of a non-adversary
"one-judge grand jury," b) direct filing of felonies in Superior
Court and c) use of an affidavit to certify a case for felony
prosecution. Conducting preliminary examinations in Superior
Court with a Superior Court judge sitting as a magistrate is a
possible solution to the problems caused by the involvement of
two separate levels of courts.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the elimination of
uses of the preliminary examinations for collateral purposes
(i.e., discovery) and a substantial reduction in the amount of
time consumed by preliminary examinations.
In the alternative, the CCCJ will accept a significant reduction
in the amount of time consumed by the preliminary hearing process.
E. Lack of Professional Administration of the Courts
The California court system is, in many respects, one of the most ad-
vanced. Its Judicial Council, Commission on Judicial Qualifications,
Commission on Judicial Appointments and the high caliber of its
judiciary are items of which Californians can be proud. While the
California judicial system enjoys a number of advantages, it also
suffers from many of the problems that are common to courts through-
out the United States.
"In terms of methods, machinery and equipment, the flow of papers--
and we know the business of courts depends on the flow of papers--
most courts have changed very little fundamentally in a hundred
years or more. I know of no comprehensive surveys, but spot checks
have shown that the ancient ledger type of record books, sixteen
or eighteen inches wide, twenty-four or twenty-six inches high,
and four inches thick are still used in a very large number of
courts; and these cumbersome books, hazardous to handle, still call
for longhand entries concerning cases. I mention this only as one
symptom of our tendency to cling to old ways. We know that banks,
factories, department stores, hospitals and many government agencies
have cast off anachronisms of this kind.
3 Burger, Warren E., Address presented at the National Conference on the Judi-
ciary, "Justice in the States," West, 1971, p. 15.
Further, the courts have lagged behind industry and the rest of the
criminal justice system in adopting modern planning and personnel
management techniques. The courts have generally been reluctant to
apply calendar management techniques and to take advantage of modern
technological advances. While the call for improved administration of
the courts was voiced as early as 1906,4 court administration is a rela-
tively recent development. Due in large measure to the efforts of the
Chief Justice of the United States, court administration has become a
major concern. There are now three extensive training programs for pro-
fessional court administrators.⁵ As a result of the efforts of Chief
Justice Burger, many court systems are now employing court administrators.
The increase in the number of filings over the past ten years6 and the
increasing complexity of cases before the courts make it imperative that
an important resource, judicial manpower, not be squandered upon routine
administrative matters best handled by someone with administrative training
and skills. Hospital administration was developed upon that principle some
40 years ago. The non-judicial operations of a court (personnel, budgeting,
liaison with other agencies, facilities planning and management of supplies
and materials) have increased in complexity and in the time required to
manage them. Not only must a judge spend more time on administrative detail,
he must be better prepared and equipped to deal with it.
The hiring of a qualified and well trained court executive to administer
the non-judicial functions of a court is an alternative to the above dilemma.
The court executive is keenly aware of the nature and function of the court
system and consequently he scrupulously avoids interference in the judicial
functions of the court. The California Legislature has recognized the
utility of court administration through the passage of legislation authorizing
the employment of court executives in superior courts with seven or more
judges.7
A number of California Superior Courts could profit from the placement of a
court executive with those courts. Further, few California municipal courts
have court executives.
1) Solutions suggested for this problem include the placement of qualified
court administrators in all municipal and superior courts of five or
more judicial positions, the addition of court administrative personnel
to municipal court staffs, and conducting management training conferences
for California court administrators.
4
Dean Roscoe Pound - The Causes of Popular Dissatisfaction with the Administration
of Justice.
5 The Institute for Court Management, American University and U.S.C.
6 Judicial Council Report 1971, p. 101-127, Superior Court: 329,539 Filings in
1959-60; 508,432 Filings in 1969-70, Municipal Court: 6,595,018 Filings in
1959-60; 11,227,332 Filings in 1969-70.
7 Chapter 617. Statutes of 1971, Government Code Section 6989.8
- 23 -
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this section is the placement of
an additional six court administrators initially and 16 more
in the future as both funding and qualified administrators
become available. A further goal is the upgrading and increased
and improved use of the position of court administrator.
F. Need for Prosecutor and Defender Office Management Assistance
Management of prosecutor and defender offices is as important in the
effort to reduce undesirable court delay as in calendar management.
In fact, management of prosecutor and defender offices is a significant
portion of calendar management.
Improved management of the offices is necessary for a number of reasons.
Increases in staff have not kept pace with increases in workloads. Further,
the size of many California offices makes efficient management imperative.
In 1971, California district attorney offices had 1,106 attorneys, 522
investigators, and 1,274 clerical employees. Prosecutor budgets for fiscal
year 1969-70 totaled $35,700,000.8 In 1971 California public defender
offices had 782 attorneys, 113 investigators and 244 clerical personnel.
Fiscal 1969-70 expenses for defender offices were $13,800,000.9
As the above figures indicate, prosecution and defense in California are
a big business. They are also vital to the operation of the criminal
justice system. No criminal case is processed unless these offices are
prepared to act. The crime charging process, plea negotiation and trial
of criminal cases are almost entirely a function of the efficiency of the
respective offices. Disposition of persons accused of crimes, the amount
of protection afforded society, the end product of law enforcement activities
and the workloads of correctional agencies are largely determined by the
actions of prosecutor and defender offices. In addition, those agencies
affect both the size and the nature of the criminal case workload of the
courts.
Management of organizations as large and as complex as prosecutor and defender
offices presents a number of problems. In addition to the usual management
difficulties in operating a large office, the nature of prosecutor and defender
duties creates additional problems. Management of the offices includes subjects
such as personnel policies, budgeting, purchasing, physical facilities, filing
and processing systems, case preparation, scheduling and storage and trans-
mittal of large amounts of information.
All the above problems have been exacerbated by the huge increases in the
size and workloads of the offices. For example, the Los Angeles County
District Attorney's Office consisted of 233 deputy district attorneys on
July 1, 1966. On June 26, 1972, that office had 528 deputies. 10 Felony
8 Bureau of Criminal Statistics - "Criminal Justice Agency Resources in
California", June, 1971, p. 32.
9 Ibid. p. 33
10 Los Angeles County Salary Ordinance.
- 24 -
workloads increased from 24,808 in 1966 to 37,953 in 1971. Management
of prosecutor and defender offices is further complicated by the practice
of using experienced professionals in managerial capacities. Since a
thorough understanding of the operations and functions of prosecution
and defense is essential for the proper management of prosecutor and
defender offices, administrators of those offices should possess some
practical knowledge and experience. However, these experienced pro-
fessionals frequently lack training and background in administrative skills.
Finally, the subject of management for California offices represents
different levels and different needs for California's 58 counties.
Prosecutor and defender offices in California vary from a single attorney
prosecutors office with a yearly budget of approximately $7,000 to a
528 attorney prosecutors office with a budget of approximately $15 million
in Los Angeles County.
1) Possible solutions for this problem include conducting management
conferences and training programsfor administrative personnel,
providing office management assistance and advice, developing model
management systems for large medium and small offices and devising
a workload measurement system for professional and clerical personnel
in order to determine staffing needs.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the initiation and adoption
of improved management practices in all California prosecutor and
defender offices.
G. Insufficient Information about the Operations of Judicial Agencies to
Allow Proper Management
A lack of information about the operation and production of an office
makes effective management extremely difficult. Unless bottlenecks and
deficiencies can be identified, they will never be corrected. Further,
managers are unable to reallocate resources in order to equalize workloads
unless they are able to pinpoint the locations and causes of those inequities
in workload. These problems are equally applicable on a statewide level.
Inadequate collection of statistics and data within each county not only
affects that county but also precludes state assistance or correction of those
problems.
The need for management information is especially acute in the larger offices.
Due to the volume of cases, the large number of employees and the immense
amount of paperwork and information which is generated and processed, it
is possible for major items to become "lost" in the process. It is often
impossible for managers of such offices to know about events in their offices,
let alone take any remedial action.
The operation of the courts is plagued by similar difficulties. It is
often impossible in the larger courts to gauge employee effectiveness and
production. It may also be impossible to locate areas which are in need
of correction. The courts are in need of assistance not only in processing
their paperwork but also in determining what has and can be done in such
processing activities.
- 25 -
1) Suggested solutions for this problem are: a) The development of
improved statistical collection and analysis methods of state
and local levels, b) the development of a weighted workload
measurement system for nonjudicial court personnel, c) the imple-
mentation of management information systems for prosecutor and
defender office and d) the implementation of management information
systems for courts.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the implementation of
procedures and methodologies which will allow for the collection
and analysis of information necessary to allow for proper management.
H. There is a Lack of Internal Planning and Research Capacity in Courts,
Prosecutor and Defender Offices
Experience has proven the value of planning and research units. Law
enforcement agencies have used such units to good advantage. The planning
and research unit derived from a realization that employees and managers
with operational responsibilities have scant time to engage in either
planning or research. The larger the office, the greater is the need for
a qualified and competent staff unit whose sole responsibility is to conduct
planning and research necessary for the improvement of the agency.
Planning and research bureaus have been installed in police agencies of
less than 100 sworn and nonsworn personnel. There are many judicial
agencies with up to ten times that number of employees without a similar
capacity. The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office has well over
1,000 employees and the Los Angeles Public Defender's Office has over 800
employees. The San Francisco Superior Court employs approximately 150
people while the municipal court for the Los Angeles Judicial District
counts in excess of 800 employees 11 None of these agencies have a planning
and research unit comparable to that of the Lodi Police Department.
1) A possible solution to this problem is the creation of planning
and research units for all judicial agencies above a certain minimum
size.
2) The primary objective of the CCCJ is the demonstration of the
feasibility and value of internal planning and research units for
judicial agencies. The ultimate objective in this area is the
institution of planning and research units for all judicial agencies
above a certain minimum size.
I. Inefficient Use of Witness Time
Frequent complaints have been heard about the public's reticence in becoming
involved in its system of justice. Concern has been properly expressed
about this non-involvement since the criminal justice system is dependent
upon the public for many things: Witnesses, jurors, complainants and
information. Further, without public support and cooperation, the criminal
justice system will suffer a decline in its effectiveness.
11 Bureau of Criminal Statistics - "Criminal Justice Agency Resources in
California", June, 1971, p. 31, 33, 37-48.
- 26 -
This reluctance to become involved stems in part from the manner in
which the criminal justice system treats its witnesses. The following
account is an example.
"The young man had happened to observe a three-car accident. He
He had been ordered to appear in the office of the local
prosecutor the following morning, along with other witnesses.
"When he arrived, he was ushered into an anteroom. There he
remained until 4:30 in the afternoon. At that time, someone
told him that he could go home. Between 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.,
no one had spoken to him.
"With a little imagination, it is not hard to fill in the details
of the picture. Probably the young man spent his day on a hard
slat bench in a grimy outer office amidst a bewildering flurry
of comings and goings with nothing to read and no one to talk to.
Probably he missed a day of school.
"Probably some harried assistant prosecutor at some point in the
afternoon had finally gotten around to talking to the officer,
and perhaps some of the other witnesses and had decided not to
prosecute. Probably everyone forgot about the boy who was,
after all, only one of the countless anonymous faces swirling
in and out throughout the day.
"And at the end, probably the person who had told him to ao home
felt nothing, thought nothing about the way the young man was
treated, except perhaps for a momentary uneasiness, a shrug,
and a resigned, 'Well that's the way the system works.'
"The plight of this young man was untvoical of that of witnesses
in urban areas throughout the nation in only one respect.
"For most, experiences like those described above are repeated
not once, but several times.
"Several Times the witness will be ordered to appear in some
designated place, often a courtroom rather than a prosecutor's
office.
"Several times he will be made to wait tedious. unconscionably
long intervals of time in grim surroundings.
"Several times he will suffer the discomfort of being ianored bv
busy officials, bewilderment, and the painful anxiety of not
having any information or knowledge about what's going to happen
to him.
- 27 -
"On most of these occasions, he will never even he asked to
testify or give information because of adjournments granted
in huddled conferences at the judge's bench. He will miss
many hours from work (or school) and will lose many hours
of wages. At best he will receive only token payment as
recompense for his time and trouble. "12
The above description is, unfortunately, all too common an occurrence.
It is small wonder that eyewitnesses are reluctant to come forward
and assist the criminal justice system.
Police witnesses are treated in much the same manner. Valuable time
which could be spent on law enforcement duties is often wasted awaiting
a call to testify, a call which often is postponed at the last minute.
The processing of criminal cases is dependent upon a number of variables:
The judge, the prosecutor, the defense, the defendant. witnesses for both
sides, and the condition of the cases calendared for hearing prior to the
case in question. Any one of these factors could force a continuance or
could be responsible for causing delays affecting witnesses. Equally
common are cases in which guilty pleas are entered at the last moment.
Previously, witnesses were considered an abundant resource completely
at the disposal and convenience of the system -- better to have a witness
wait than a judge, courtroom and counsel. There is no reason why anyone
should be forced to wait. Further, there is a growing awareness on the
part of members of the criminal justice system that remedial measures
for this problem are long overdue.
1) The following have been suggested as possible solutions for
this problem:
a) Make use of technological advances, such as videotaping,
to obviate the necessity of personal appearances by
witnesses;
b) Restrict the granting of continuances; and
c) Develop methods for arriving at better estimates of
when witnesses will be required. Encourage increased
and improved use of on-call techniques and issuance
of subpoenas for specific time.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the significant reduction
of the time a witness must spend awaiting to testify.
12 Ash, Michael W., "Witnesses: The Forgotten People of Our Criminal Justice
System, LEAA Newsletter, Vol. 2, No. 7, p. 6 and 7.
- 28 -
J. Duplication of Services and Administration in Superior and Municipal Courts
California has a superior court in each of its 58 counties. In 25 of those
counties, there are also 77 municipal courts 13 Each of those 135 courts
is a separate entity with its own administrative structure, staff and support
service. Within a county, there may be as many as 23 independent municipal
courts 14 Each of those courts may have separate jury services, admin-
istration and staffing.
A number of economies may be effected by a consolidation of services and
administration. Resources available to judicial agencies are scarce.
Since the prospects for increasing those resources are limited, the only
alternative is to make better use of the services and support that are
available. Further, consolidation of certain services and administration
will eliminate costly duplication.
1) Possible solutions include consolidation of certain services and
administrative functions and the creation of a multi-court or
multi-county court administrator for trial courts.
2) The objective of the CCCJ is the elimination of all unnecessary
duplication of services among county courts.
K. Inadequate Staff, Secretarial and Research Assistance
Staffing patterns of each judicial agency vary greatly. The county clerk
serves as the clerk of the superior court. The superior court may also
have its own employees. Each municipal court has its own clerk and staff
whose positions are created by the California Government Code 15 Staffing
for both the superior and municipal courts follow no standard patterns.
Neither do the staffing patterns for prosecutor and defender offices. Some
offices may be more than adequately staffed; others may be woefully under-
staffed. Justice courts, prosecutor and defender offices occasionally
consist of part-time employees.
California judges generally don't have the secretarial and research assist-
ance necessary to help them in performing their duties. The growing
complexity of the criminal law has also placed a premium on legal research
assistance in prosecutor and defender offices. Adequate preparation and
proper rulings are dependent upon thorough research which often is not
performed because of a lack of manpower or time.
1) Possible solutions include:
a) Encouraging the use of para-legal personnel, including law
student internship programs for courts, prosecutors, defenders,
clerks, court administrators and probation departments;
b) Creating standards for the staffing of judicial agencies;
13 Judicial Council of California Annual Report, 1972, p. 77
14 Ibid, p. 114
15 See California Government Code Sections 72000-74889
29
c) Instituting computerized legal research programs; and
d) Creating specialized prosecution teams.
2. The objective of the CCCJ is insuring the provision of the staff,
secretarial and research assistance necessary for the proper func-
tion of judicial agencies.
L. Fragmented Prosecution System
The city attorney retains some responsibility for criminal prosecutions
in many California jurisdictions. City attorney's offices with prosecutorial
responsibilities generally are responsible for prosecution of local ordinance
violations and misdemeanors. Where the city attorney prosecutes misde-
meanors, the result is the existence of two separate agencies responsible
for crime charging and prosecution. The district attorney prosecutes misde-
meanor violations in areas of the county outside the jurisdiction of the
city attorney (usually the area outside the city limits). Thus, there may
be two different sets of standards and policies regarding misdemeanors within
a single county. A fragmented system of prosecution also results in law
enforcement agencies having to determine the gravity of a case in order to
determine to which office the case must be referred. A system of fragmented
prosecution causes problems of cooperation and coordination.
Fragmentated prosecution often results in processing of cases in inappropriate
courts. Cases may be filed as felonies and at some subsequent point (usually
in superior court) the defendant is allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor.
Los Angeles County, with over one-half the number of sentences in superior
court, imposes felony sentences in 41 percent of the cases. The statewide
average for felony sentences imposed in superior court is 56 percent. 16 If
the figures for Los Angeles County are subtracted from the statewide totals,
71 percent of the sentences imposed in superior court are felony sentences.
The above figures are not conclusive evidence of what has been described as
an "extended guilty plea to a misdemeanor." However, they do indicate some
support for such a conclusion.
The final problem with a fragmented system of prosecution is the neglect of
the city prosecutor in programs to improve prosecution. The question of
the desirability of maintaining a city prosecutorial function is far from
being settled. In the meantime, the office of city prosecutor remains a
part of the criminal justice system. As such, consideration of the needs
of the city prosecutor must be made in any general program designed to improve
prosecution.
1) Suggested solutions include an evaluation and identification of
the problems and duplication resulting from a fragmented system
of prosecution.
2) The CCCJ has two objectives in this area. The first objective is
16 CCCJ, California State Plan 1972, p. A-159
- 30 -
to bring an end to the problems caused by fragmentation of the
prosecutorial function. A secondary objective is the provision
of assistance to city prosecutor's offices.
M. Need for Improved Defender Services in Rural Areas
The responsibility for defense of indigents accused of crimes is no
longer subject to question. The Supreme Court of the United States has
held that no person may be imprisoned for any offense, regardless of
its classification (misdemeanor or felony), unless represented by counsel. 17
Sections 987 and 987.2 of the California Penal Code provide for such
representation with the attendant expenses borne by the respective counties.
Thirty-one California counties have adopted the public defender system.
Two other counties (San Diego and San Mateo) utilize organized programs
involving members of the private bar. 18 The remaining counties provide
counsel for indigents either through court appointments or contracts with
law firms or members of the bar. The latter approaches are generally used
by less populous counties because of an insufficient number of cases to
justify the employment of a full-time public defender.
The counties which have adopted the public defender system have done so
because of the economic advantages of such a system over the court appoint-
ment or contract approaches. A full-time public defender is able to provide
more and better services at less cost.
The less-populous counties of California might also profit from using a
public defender system. Current costs of indigent defense in those counties
is a matter of considerable concern. Less populous counties in California
are in need of improved defender services which can be provided more
economically.
1) A suggested solution to the above project is the examination of
the feasibility of creating a regional public defenders office
to serve a multi-county area.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the provision of
improved and economically advantegeous defender services for
less-populous counties of California.
N. Lack of Cooperation and Coordination Among Criminal Justice Agencies
The judicial process relies upon an adversary system in order to determine
truth. That system is based upon an assumption that two vigorous and con-
tending forces engaged in a form of combat before an impartial observer is
the best means of determining the truth in a particular case. The adversary
process is also designed to insure that every relevant item will be placed
before the trier of fact. 19
17 Argersinger V. Hamlin (U.S. Sup. Ct. 6/12/72), 11 Cr.L. 3089
18 Bureau of Criminal Statistice - "Criminal Justice Agency Resources in
California," June 1971, P. 33
19 ABA "Standards Relating to the Prosecution and Defense Function," approved
draft, p. 2-6
- 31 -
While the adversary system was designed to promote productive conflict,
it was never intended to be used to defeat the administration of justice. 20
A substantial amount of cooperation and understanding is required of all
elements of the criminal justice system. This cooperation is necessary
for the orderly and efficient operation of the system and in no way
conflicts with the adversary process.
A similar source of difficulty lies in the attitudes and actions of various
criminal justice agencies towards each other. Each agency is usually
under the leadership of an elected official (for example, a sheriff, district
attorney or judge) and feels no obligation toward other agencies. It is
this failure to view criminal justice from a broader system viewpoint which
leads to friction and unnecessary conflict. For example, a special traffic
enforcement program almost doubled the workload of a local traffic court,
with the result that the court was unable to operate in an optimum fashion.
Judicial process agencies have been able to maintain a precarious balance
between workloads and resources. That balance can be altered radically by
relatively minor events which significantly and unexpectedly increase
workloads.
1) Possible solutions for the problems in this area include:
a) The development of cooperative arrangements, under which
judicial agencies are given advance notice of changes
which may affect their workloads;
b) An articulation of the respective functions and responsi-
bilities of criminal justice agencies; and,
c) The provisions of assistance to judicial agencies whose
workloads have substantially increased as a result of activi-
ties of other criminal justice agencies.
2) The objective of the CCCJ is to encourage cooperation among criminal
justice agencies.
20
Ibid, p. 148-150
- 32 -
II. TRAINING
A. Lack of Training and Standards for Judges
Unlike law enforcement agencies, there is no "judicial academy" at which
judges must satisfactorily complete a specified number of hours of
training prior to assuming the bench. Apart from informal orientation
programs operated by a few courts, judges must generally learn from
experience. In addition to creating difficulties for individual judges,
the lack of an organized training program also adversely affects the
administration of justice. Errors due to inexperience and lack of
training result in increased work for appellate courts and counsel,
prosecutors, defenders, law enforcement personnel and court clerical
employees. Reversal by an appellate court has the effect of negating
most of the work of a number of persons at the trial level. To the
extent that reversible error can be avoided by improved training, the
means of providing that training should be adopted. In addition, judicial
training programs can assist in streamlining and improving the flow of
cases through the courts. The cost of such training is undoubtedly less
than the cost of correcting errors which result from a lack of training.
The ever-increasing workloads of the courts effectively prevent the new
judge from using his first few months on the bench as a training program.
The new judge is expected to bear his share of the caseload as soon as
possible. Because of the pressure of large caseloads, the new judge is
often assigned to cases in areas of the law with which he is unfamiliar.
Thus, a judge with an extensive background in civil law as an attorney
may find himself hearing criminal cases.
Calendar management and court administration are also areas in which scant
training is given new judges. The improved practices developed in calendar
management are of little effect unless those responsible for implementation
are fully conversant with them.
All the above comments are equally applicable to the lack of training and
preparation of subordinate judicial officials. There is even less training
provided for commissioners, referees and temporary judges.
Finally, continuing education of judges and subordinate judicial officials
is a need which is only partially filled by existing programs. New
developments in the law occur daily, changes in procedures are frequent
and new administrative techniques are being developed. Training and
information about those developments is imperative.
1) Possible solutions for the problem of lack of training for judges
include:
a) The establishment of a center for judicial education and research
which would include judicial training programs for commissioners,
temporary judges, and referees;
b) The development of standards and certification programs for
judicial positions; and
c) The creation of a commission to develop improved selection
procedures.
- 33 -
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the provision of training
for all newly appointed judges and subordinate judicial officials.
A secondary objective is the institution of an organized continuing
education program for judges and judicial officials.
B. Lack of Training and Standards for Prosecutors and Defenders
The prosecution and defense function are critical elements in the adminis-
tration of justice. Both determine to a large extent what will be done with
a particular case. The prosecutor determines which charge or charges, if
any, should be filed and is responsible for representing the state in
criminal proceedings including plea negotiations. The defender represents
the accused in those matters. Jointly and separately, the actions of the
prosecution and the defense determine both the outcome of cases and the
speed with which those cases are processed. Errors or lack of judgment on
the part of the prosecutor or defender may produce an unjust result. Errors
or lack of judgment based on inexperience or lack of training can and should
be remedied. The effect upon the justice system of a lack of training in
this area is similar to the effect of comparable deficiencies in judicial
training discussed above.
The average beginning deputy district attorney or deputy public defender is
trained on the job. He may observe more experienced deputies in action,
handle minor cases and, if he is fortunate, receive informal training from
his office on certain aspects of his job. He received very little practical
training in law school unless he participated in a clinical internship
program.
The intermediate level and advanced deputies are trained in approximately
the same manner. There are few continuing education programs in criminal
law and procedure and virtually no programs in administration and super-
vision. Most prosecutor and defender offices are unable to provide the
necessary training of deputies because of ongoing responsibilities. Large
workloads and inadequate staff resources permit only cursory attempts at
training.
There are over 1,800 California attorneys employed by local public agencies
as either prosecutors or defenders. 22 There is a great need for training
of prosecutors and defenders. There is a need to provide such training on
an organized, coordinated and ongoing basis because of the high turnover
rates in those offices. Finally, there is a need to provide such training
on a statewide basis because of the economies and improved programs which
can be realized through a pooling of resources throughout the state.
1) Suggested as solutions for the above problem are:
a) The creation of training units for offices above a certain number
of deputies (a number of smaller offices might jointly operate
such a unit);
b) The creation of statewide training coordinators for both prosecutor
and defender training programs;
22 Bureau of Criminal Statistics, "Criminal Justice Agency Resources in California,"
June 1971, p. 31, 32.
- 34 **
c) Prosecutor and defender training programs;
d) The encouragement of law student intern programs; and
e) The development of standards and certification programs.
2. The objective of the CCCJ in this program is to insure that every
California prosecutor and defender receives the requisite amount
of training necessary to adequately perform his function.
C. Lack of Training and Standards for Court Executives
The founding of the Institute for Court Management in 1970 marked the first
organized training program for court executives in the United States. Since
that time, American University and the University of Southern California
have initiated degree programs in judicial administration. However. each
of the three programs is by necessity limited in size and in the services
they provide. No provision has been made for court administrators unable to
enroll in one of the programs and none of the three programs offers
continuing education or training for persons now holding the office of court
administrator.
California Superior Courts employ court administrators in 13 counties. 23
In addition, the position of clerk of some of the metropolitan municipal
courts is equivalent to that of a court administrator. These courts are
responsible for the bulk of the state's judicial business and yet few
efforts have been made to gather their court executives together to discuss
common problems and solutions.
Increased concern over the administration of the courts combined with
increased interest in the role of the court executive indicate that the
office of court executive will be created in a number of California
courts. Two superior courts have added a court executive position within
the last year 24 Apart from a brief statement in the Standards of Judicial
Administration Recommended by the Judicial Council, 25 there are no standards
or qualifications established for the office of court executive. Such
standards must be developed to insure that the office of court executive
is used to its fullest potential.
1) Listed among the possible solutions to this problem are:
a) The conducting of court executive training programs and
conferences; and
23 Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Orange, Sacramento, San Bernardino,
San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Ventura
and Yolo Counties.
24 Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties.
25 California Rules of Court, "Standards of Judicial Administration Recommended
by the Judicial Council," Section 4.
- 35 -
b) The development of standards and certification programs for
the office of court executive.
2. The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the provision of the
necessary continuing education and interchange of ideas among court
executives. A further objective is the assurance that the office
of court executive will be occupied only by those able to discharge
the duties of that office competently and in a professional manner.
D. Lack of Training and Standards for Court, Prosecutor and Defender Clerical
and Support Personnel
Court, prosecutor and defender clerical staff are often the forgotten
people of the justice system. While judges, prosecutors and defenders
usually occupy the central role in the adjudication process, without the
efforts of clerical and support personnel, there would no adjudication
process. Included in the term "clerical and support personnel" are clerks,
secretaries, marshals, bailiffs, investigators and research assistants.
There are no organized training programs for the above employees. On-the-
job training is once again the rule rather than the exception. Efforts
to improve the adjudication process which do not involve clerical and
support personnel will be less than successful. Training is necessary to
develop an understanding of the criminal justice system, the various roles
within the system and their relationships, improvement programs and to
develop increased competence in performance of the duties of clerical and
support personnel.
1) Suggested programs include:
a) Court, prosecutor and defender clerk training programs;
b) Prosecutor and defender investigator training programs; and
c) Development of standards and certification for clerical and
support personnel.
2) The objective of the CCCJ under this section is the initiation of
programs to train court, prosecutor and defender clerical and
support personnel.
E. Lack of Training in Juvenile Law and Procedure
Previous sections of the training problem area have dealt with the training
needs of personnel. This section is the only portion which considers a
lack of training in a particular subject matter. A lack of training in
juvenile law and procedure is thus listed because of the unique nature of
the subject and because of the importance to the criminal justice system
in improving the quality of juvenile justice.
- 36 -
Juvenile law and procedure differs from adult criminal law and procedure
in a number of important ways. While certain due process standards must
be met, the promotion of the welfare of the juvenile is still the guiding
principle of the juvenile justice system. 26
The juvenile process represents an opportunity to intercept future criminal
justice problem cases at a time when they are most amenable to treatment.
A juvenile offender, if treated properly, can be redirected toward a more
useful life. Because of the sensitivity and awareness required of juvenile
justice personnel, it is essential that they receive adequate training. Law
enforcement officers and probation officers generally receive some training
in juvenile matters prior to or during their service. The Judicial
Council of California regularly conducts institutes on juvenile law for
judges and commissioners. Unfortunately, not much provision has been made
for supplying such training to prosecutors and defenders.
Juvenile law and procedure has undergone sweeping changes within the last
five years. Case law and statutory revisions subsequent to In re Gault
have radically altered the nature of the juvenile justice system. Training
for judicial process personnel in this area is essential.
1) A suggested solution to the above problem is the organizing and
conducting of training programs in juvenile law and procedure.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the assurance that all
judicial process personnel with juvenile justice responsibilities
are given the opportunity to receive a certain minimum amount of
training in juvenile law and procedure.
26
California Welfare and Institutions Code, Sections 502, 503.
27
In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967).
- 37 -
III. DIVERSION
A. General Diversion of Offenders and Cases More Appropriately Handled
Elsewhere
Diversion of certain offenders and certain offenses from the criminal
justice system is one of the most important issues facing that system
today. The system itself admits that, in many cases, it has failed in
fulfilling its responsibilities: correctional programs do not promote
correction, prevention activities do not prevent the commission of crimes
and deterrent measures do not deter. Many argue that the criminal justice
system is largely responsible for the further criminalization of
offenders.
There are a number of reasons for these shortcomings. The entire system,
and especially judicial agencies, must dispose of an overwhelmingly large
caseload. The size of that caseload precludes allocation of the necessary
resources to serious cases or those cases which the system is well-equipped
to handle. Thus, a failure to divert some offenses from the system results
in a dilution of the attention which can be given to the important offenses.
This failure is even more unforgivable in view of the cases which are heard
and perhaps should not be: minor drug violations, minor traffic violation
and the common drunk cases. That the criminal justice system has been
notably ineffective in dealing with these cases is further argument for
diversion.
There are a number of fine efforts being made to divert certain cases
(chiefly juvenile), and to dispose of cases administratively prior to
involvement with judicial agencies. This discussion focuses upon what can
be done by way of diversion when the case is first referred to a judicial
agency.
Diversion programs are often established without first obtaining the support
of the prosecutor and the courts. Since the prosecutor and the courts often
possess the final decision-making power in a given case, programs which fail
to involve them are certain to be less than successful. Where the prosecutor
and the courts actively and enthusiastically participate in diversion
programs, those programs will be much stronger and are more likely to
achieve their purposes.
1) Possible solutions to this problem are:
a) Increased use of citation to the district attorney with possible
informal or voluntary probation under the police department;
b) Deferred prosecution; and
c) Adoption of "no fault insurance," improved settlement procedures and
arbitration.
2) The objective of the CCCJ is the creation of pilot diversion programs
in a limited number of jurisdictions. The ultimate objective is the
adoption in all jurisdictions of improved and successful diversion
programs.
- 38 -
B. Traffic Cases
Minor traffic cases in 1970-71 amounted to 3,731,225 filings in the
municipal courts. There were 809,848 traffic filings in justice courts
in 1971. Parking filings in 1970-71 totaled 6,878,812 (municipal court
6,602,917; justice court 277,895). The total of the above figures is
11,419,885 filings. This figure amounts to 88.5 percent of all filings
in municipal and justice courts, 1970-71 (12,889,994).
Most of the above filings resulted in non-contested matters. Therefore,
the subject of traffic presents two problems for the judicial system: The
disposition of non-contested traffic cases, and the disposition of minor
contested traffic matters. In cases where there is no dispute over a
traffic or parking case, the courts serve a revenue-collecting and pro-
cessing function. This is an inappropriate role for the court system
since there are other agencies better equipped to perform those tasks.
These cases also consume a substantial amount of clerical resources and
result in transforming a major portion of the court's operation into
paper processing. Alternative methods of disposing of these cases
should be adopted to free the courts to perform the job they were
designed to perform -- resolution of disputes.
Minor contested traffic violations consume not only judge and clerical
time, but also the time of the district attorney who must prosecute
those cases. In addition, the police officer often must also appear.
In the great majority of these cases, the "defendant" is merely interested
in telling his side to the court. The "guilty, with an explanation"
plea accounts for most of these cases. Once again, this is a misuse of
court and prosecutor time. An alternative to the use of the criminal
justice system should be developed.
It is important to note that no one is advocating the removal of serious
traffic offenses from the criminal justice system. These offenses are
properly a part of that system, since they represent conduct with which
the criminal justice system is designed to deal.
1) Possible solutions to this problem include:
a) Summary disposition of minor traffic violations;
b) Administrative disposition of minor traffic violations;
c) Greater use of traffic referees (possibly on a multi-county
basis); and
d) Decriminalization of minor traffic cases.
2) The objective of the CCCJ is the removal of minor traffic offenses
from the criminal justice system.
C. Drug Cases
The increase in the incidence of drug abuse is a major social tragedy.
The problem of drug abuse has touched a great number of California citizens.
28 Judicial Council of California Annual Report, 1972, p. 124, 143, 155.
39
The California Council on Criminal Justice has identified drug abuse as its
highest priority. This Section focuses on the effect of drug offenses upon
the judicial process. In terms of workload, drug abuse cases account for
41 percent of felony cases processed by the courts; in 1970 there were
29,030 felony drug cases processed (this includes 13,084 marijuana cases). 29
In addition to constituting a significant portion of the workloads of
judicial agencies, current handling of drug cases casts some doubt on the
ability of the criminal justice system to effectively treat drug users or
deter potential drug users. Drug users generally need intensive counseling
and therapy. This treatment is often impossible to obtain in existing
criminal justice facilities. Clearly, an alternative to large workloads
with ineffectual results is necessary.
Most drug abuse programs attempt to treat drug abuse cases prior to their
referral to judicial agencies. Many of these programs deserve commendation
for their accomplishments. This section is concerned with those cases
which have become the responsibility of a judicial agency: either the
prosecutor or the courts or both. The need at this stage is for effective
programs which will serve as an alternative to further processing by the
judicial agency.
1) Possible solutions are:
a) Increased use of civil addiction proceedings under Section 3100 of
the Welfare and Institutions Code;
b) Drug abuse institutes for local judicial agencies; and
c) The creation of a special drug abuse unit in the prosecutor's office.
2) The objective of the CCCJ under this section is to reduce the number of
drug cases processed in the courts.
D. Alcohol Cases
Arrests under Section 647f of the Penal Code constitute a major source of
initiation to criminal justice agencies. In 1970, the common drunk accounted
for 258, 151 misdemeanor arrests out of a total of 707,305 misdemeanor arrests
in California. 30 The common drunk case has been aptly described as the
revolving door syndrome. An alcoholic, usually a resident of skid row, is
arrested, booked, jailed, tried and sentenced, usually within a 24-hour
period. He may be sentenced to jail or to a work detail. One thing is
certain though, he will be back through the cycle shortly after he is
released.
The common drunk generally poses no threat to society and is arrested
chiefly for his own protection. While intoxicated, the alcoholic is an
easy mark for criminals, is in danger of being hit by motor vehicles or is
in need of medical attention. The common drunk is often an esthetic
problem more than a criminal justice problem. The criminal justice system
provides protection, medical care if necessary, temporary shelter and
short-term detoxification. The costs of these services are great.
Arresting and booking the common drunk consumes substantial police time.
29 Felony Defendants Disposed of in California Courts, BCS 1970, p. 9.
30 Crimes and Arrests, BCS 1970, p. 7.
- 40 -
Custody in a local jail is also costly. An alternative to the arrest/
custody, trial and return syndrome, which provides some treatment for
the alcoholic is sorely needed.
1) Suggested solutions concern either implementation or expansion of the
provisions of Penal Code Section 647ff. Penal Code Section 647ff provides
for civil custody and detoxification in lieu of the criminal process. The
major difficulty with this section is the expense involved in providing
detoxification centers which meet the standards for such centers. There-
fore, a possible solution consists of expanding some of the standards for
establishing detoxification centers. Another approach is the
provision of funds for establishing detoxification centers under
existing laws and regulations.
2) The objectives of the CCCJ are to establish a sufficient number of
detoxification centers to implement Penal Code Section 647ff and to
insure that these centers are utilized in all common drunk cases.
- 41 -
IV. UNIFORMITY OF RULES, FORMS AND PROCEDURES
California has 58 counties and while all counties operate under the same
criminal law and procedure, practice and forms may differ markedly from
county to county. The development of improved and uniform practices will
take the guesswork out of criminal law practice and allow criminal justice
personnel to devote their full time to the substantive issues of criminal
law. The need for a certain amount of uniformity of rules, forms and
practices is evident in view of the mobility of California's population
and its criminal justice personnel. A deputy district attorney in Santa
Barbara who leaves to become a deputy district attorney in Sacramento,
should be able to do SO with a minimum amount of retraining.
A. Lack of Uniform Crime Charging
The district attorney's decision to file criminal charges initiates the
formal processing of the accused through the adjudication system. The
criminal complaint also commences the involvement of the court and defense
counsel. There are a number of critical decision points in the adjudica-
tion process. Crime charging is easily the most important point since it
is the first step and since subsequent actions are in large measure deter-
mined by that decision. The crime charging process may well determine in
what manner and for what amount of time the criminal justice system will
exercise jurisdiction over the accused. Crime charging also helps deter-
mine the measure of protection and recompense which will be afforded to
society.
In addition to the decision to file criminal charges, the number and nature
of counts alleged, the possibility of alternative dispositions and the
initiation of the plea negotiation process are also determined in the crime
charging process. The prosecutor is vested with a substantial amount of
discretion in making these determinations. Standards are necessary for the
proper exercise of this discretion. 31 Since the charging process sets the
stage for plea negotiations (discussed in another section), and since the
negotiated plea is by far the most prevalent means of disposition, the
appropriate exercise of discretion in crime charging is of paramount
importance.
Deficient crime charging policies result in a denial of justice to either
society or the accused. Overcharging results in an unnecessary increase in
contested matters or an unnecessary filing in superior court of cases which
should be disposed of at a lower level. Undercharging results in an
offender's return to society without adequate assurance of the future
protection of society. Uniform crime charging policies are necessary to
promote optimum practices and to insure that criminal justice is uniformly
and expeditiously secured throughout the State of California.
1) Suggestions for improvement in this area are: the creation of a high
level policy committee to develop crime charging standards and practices
and the implementation of those standards in an experimental program.
The policy committee might also examine and develop uniform police
reporting and charging practices and citation hearing practices.
31 ABA "Standards Relating to the Prosecution and Defense Function,"
Approved Draft, p. 92ff.
- 42 -
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the adoption of uniform
crime charging policies and practices throughout California.
B. Lack of Uniform Local Rules of Court
Local rules of court are the operating policies and procedures of the local
court. Both California law and procedure and the California Rules of
Court adopted by the Judicial Council leave many operational details to the
discretion of local courts. Local court rules include such topics as:
"Organization of the Court," "Pre-trial and Setting for Trial,' "Conduct of
Trial," "Impaneling Juries" and "Probate. "32 Local rules may also include
prescribed forms and local filing fees.
California attorneys regularly practice before a number of courts in a
number of different counties. The difficulties caused by each county having
its own local rules are not difficult to imagine. The diversity and confusion
resulting from a multiplicity of local rules interferes with the efficient
administration of justice in California.
In the Third and Fifth Appellate Districts of California, uniform local
rules of court have been developed for local courts within the district.
This practice could be extended to other appellate districts.
1) The provision of staff assistance in drafting uniform local rules of
court has been suggested as a possible solution to the above problem.
2) The objectives of the CCCJ is the development and adoption of uniform
local rules of court similar to those in effect in the Third and Fifth
Appellate Districts.
C. Lack of Uniform Standards, Practices and Forms for Criminal Law
Each of California's 58 district attorney's offices is an independent
unit. California public defender offices are also independent units.
Similarly, there are 309 separate courts in California. 33 While all of
these entities enjoy a considerable amount of autonomy, they also frequently
utilize materials and practices developed in other offices. An example
of this exchange is the extent to which the Los Angeles County Superior
Court Benchbooks and Deskbooks are used in other superior courts.
Uniform statewide practices and forms can be an asset if they incorporate
the best of existing practices. Under a uniform system, professional and
clerical staff will be able to spend less time learning (or relearning, in
case of a transfer) the mechanical aspects of their jobs. The time thus
saved could be devoted to matters of substance. In addition, well-developed
manuals will assist in improved employee performance.
1) Suggested solutions include:
a) The development of uniform statewide pleading and practice forms;
b) Distribution of materials and benchbooks such as those produced
by the California College of Trial Judges;
32 See, for example, the Rules of the Superior Court, County of Sacramento
33 Judicial Council of California Annual Report, 1972, p. 58.
43
c) The distribution of misdemeanor benchbooks; and
d) The development of uniform prosecutor, defender and clerical
manuals.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this program is the development and adoption
of uniform statewide standards, practices and forms for criminal law.
D. Lack of a Uniform Felony Bail Schedule
1) Persons arrested for a felony late at night or on weekends are often
detained for a long period of time because of the inability to
locate a magistrate for release on bail or own recognizance.
a) A felony bail schedule should be established.
b) The objective of CCCJ is to ensure that incarceration following
arrest is used as selectively as possible.
- 44 -
V. APPELLATE PROBLEMS
Many of the problems which have affected the appellate courts for years
have only recently gained widespread recognition as the number of appellate
filings have dramatically increased. In 1960-61 there were 2,874 appeals
filed in the courts of appeal; in 1970-71 there were 8,684 appeals filed
in these courts. 34 Although a significant percentage of these appeals are
completely devoid of merit, present California law compels the appellate
courts to write an opinion in each case. As a result, the time delay from
initial filing with the appellate court until its decision as finally rendered
is often over a year.
A more serious problem than delay is the quality of representation on appeal.
Counsel is appointed in approximately 50 percent of the cases. Most of
these appointed attorneys are young and inexperienced and as a result, the
quality of their work is often substandard. Because of this, appellate judges
find that their staffs must spend a great amount of time on criminal cases.
A. Piecemeal Pre-Trial Appellate Review
There are various points at which appellate review may be sought prior
to trial. As a result of the need for a timely decision, the appellate
court must often interrupt its regular business to decide the merits.
Separate appellate review may be sought in a number of different instances.
1) A possible solution to this problem is consolidation into a single
motion for pre-trial appellate review, requiring to raise all grounds
for pre-trial review at the same time.
2) The objective of CCCJ is the improvement of the present time consuming
pre-trial appellate review process.
B. Appellate Delay
During fiscal year 1970-71, the average time, statewide, from notice of
appeal to filing of opinion was 16 months for civil appeals and 14 months
for criminal appeals. The average delay from the time an appeal was
ready for calendaring to the filing of the opinion was six months for
civil appeals and less than three months for criminal appeals. 35 Numerous
factors contributed to this delay and the mere increase in the number of
filings (an average of 8 percent a year) may not be the most important.
Due to the large number of indigent appeals, counsel must often be appointed
by the court. Though most of these attorneys are conscientious, they are
inexperienced and presentations are often of substandard quality. As a
result clerks of the appellate judges often spend a great deal of time
reviewing criminal cases to make sure that every issue has been appropriately
raised and argued. This takes away from the time the clerks need to spend
on other important matters and contributes to appellate delay. Additionally,
many inexperienced and experienced counsel, because of pressing workloads,
submit their briefs many months after they are due, thus compounding the
delay.
34 Judicial Council of California Annual Report, 1972, p. 68.
35 Ibid.
- 45
1) Most of the suggestions. for reducing appellate court delay
are of a procedural nature and require little in the way of
funds. A major concern is an adequate record of the trial
court proceedings. This may be accomplished by increased
supervision of the preparation of the transcript. Specifically,
financial sanctions might be imposed for late preparation; trial
counsel could be retained until the record is complete; appellate
counsel could be appointed at an earlier stage of the proceeding;
electronic court reporting could be implemented to provide a
more accurate and timely record; the submission of an appeal could
be made on a settled statement rather than upon a record. Sanctions
could be imposed on counsel for a late submission.
Finally, experimentation could be conducted with a certification
program, similar to that required by Penal Code Section 1237.5,
whereby, appeals would be presented for hearing in the supreme
court only if certified meritorious.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to eliminate undesirable appellate delay.
C. Unmeritorious Appeals
Whether there are sufficient grounds for appeal is often a difficult
question. However, appeals are often made merely as a delaying tactic
with the knowledge that the appeal has little chance of success.
Unfortunately, even when it is quite apparent that an appeal has no
chance of success, an opinion must be written.
1) An approach to this problem is restricting the issues on appeal
by use of a petition for hearing or a petition for leave to
appeal with the petition specifically outlining the grounds for
appeal. With the issues on appeal outlined, it would be possible
to rank the appeals according to merit. Lastly, if judges were
allowed to render oral opinions in certain cases, a great deal
of time would be saved.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to eliminate all unmeritorious appeals.
D. Lack of Competent Appellate Counsel
Counsel was appointed by the court in approximately 60 percent of the
more than 2,000 criminal appeals heard in 1968. 36 It is becoming increasingly
difficult for courts to recruit attorneys to handle criminal appeals.
The situation is due primarily to the increase in the number of indigent
appeals and the marginal compensation given appointed attorneys. Although
the courts have been able to recruit a sufficient number of attorneys, it
appears that quality has suffered. It is estimated that 40 percent of the
appeals which are submitted are of substandard quality. Close to 90 percent
of appeals are handled by attorneys who are in their first three years of
practice.
36 Report of Assembly, Interim Committee on Criminal Procedure,
"Statewide Public Defender's Office", 1970
- 46 -
1) Generally, the attorney who tries the case is not the same
one which carries the appeal. As a result, an attorney who
is thoroughly familiar with the case and various appealable issues,
turns the case over to another attorney who must start from the
beginning. A possible solution would be to have the trial attorney
handle the case on appeal. Another approach would be to establish
an Appellate Defender System whereby attorneys experienced in appellate
practice could provide a higher standard of representation. To
insure a minimum standard of ability, an appellate certification
process could be established with such certification required of all
attorneys who appear before an appellate court.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to insure that competent appellate counsel
is provided in .all cases which merit an appeal.
- 47 -
VI. JURY SELECTION AND UTILIZATION
The use of jurors in criminal trials is more than a Constitutional
guarantee. It is also the only opportunity which the general public
has to participate directly in the judicial system. What the juror is
exposed to as a juror unquestionably influences his future attitude toward,
and support for, the judicial system. An equally important consideration
is the effect that poor jury utilization has on the administrative func-
tioning of the courts.
A. Insufficient and Inefficient Use of Juror Time
Jurors are often puzzled by the intracacies of the law. But perhaps
even more exasperating for the juror or prospective juror is that he
is required to appear for jury duty and frequently wait for long periods
of time. Compensation and amenities provided for jurors are minimal.
Voir dire is often needlessly lengthy and sometimes leads to what is
clearly jury indoctrination by counsel.
On a purely administrative level, there are a number of changes which
can easily be implemented. Superior and municipal courts have
separate jury pools resulting in needless duplication. Many trials are
delayed because an insufficient number of prospective jurors have been
notified in advance to appear. In short, experimentation with a number
of possible methods of better utilization of jurors is possible.
1) A variety of possible solutions has been suggested. A number of
these solutions can easily be implemented on an experimental basis.
A common jury pool for superior and municipal courts could be
adopted. A certain number of prospective jurors could be placed
on call. Uniform and improved procedures and aids for juror edu-
cation could be developed. Jury service could be given more appeal
by increasing juror compensation, improving juror facilities,
providing for tax deductions for jury time served, awarding certi-
ficates of appreciation. Improved methods of juror selection could
be initiated whereby exemptions are reduced, earlier notification
of jurors is made, and better use of a questionnaire is made to
determine juror suitability. Judges could be allowed to conduct voir
dire in criminal cases. Limitations could be placed on the right
to a jury trial in minor criminal offenses. Jury size should be
reduced.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to maximize the efficient use of juror time
and to eliminate outmoded procedures which do little more than to
contribute to trial court delay.
B. Problems Resulting from Deadlocked Juries
Undoubtedly one of the most frustrating aspects of a trial is a hung jury.
It also represents a tremendous loss in court time. The requirement of
unanimity of verdict in a criminal trial effectively places a jury under
the control of the lone dissenting juror.
- 48 -
1) An empirical study should be made of the frequency of occurrence,
causes, effects and amount of time consumed by hung juries.
Alternatives to the unanimous verdict might be examined: Reduction
of the number of jurors required to return a verdict, allowing a
judge to render a judgment should the jury fail to agree, allowing
the judge to render a judgment based on the majority opinion of the
jury, or by replacing the jury with a three-judge panel.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to eliminate the number of hung juries.
C. Inadequate Juror Security
In controversial trials, many jurors -- reasonably or unreasonably --
fear reprisals from defendants or their sympathizers. Although the
problem has not gained widespread attention, a juror should not have
to subject himself to even the remote possibility of future harassment.
1) A study should be conducted in which standards for juror security
are established.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to eliminate any possibility of danger to
a juror as a result of his participation in a trial.
- 49 -
VII. PLEA BARGAINING AND SENTENCING
A. Plea Bargaining
Plea bargaining is the term used to describe the process whereby a
defendant pleads guilty to one or more charges or lesser included
charges in the hope of obtaining a more favorable disposition. The
major advantage to the defendant lies in the relative certainty of
obtaining a specified disposition under a negotiated plea rather
than risking the uncertainty of a trial. The major advantage to the
criminal justice system lies in reducing congested court calendars
by dispositions without time-consuming trials. Negotiated pleas are
not only recognized as an acceptable form of disposition, they are
also recognized as essential to the continued operation of the system.
Contested cases account for only 14 percent of the criminal cases
disposed of in superior court.
Plea bargaining can serve the ends of justice for both the accused
and society when conducted properly. In order for the plea negotiation
process to function properly, both the prosecutor and the defender
must be competent, prepared, fair and not under pressure to dispose of
the case by plea because of workloads. Court calendars must be such
that a defendant can receive a speedy trial if he SO desires. The
absence of any one of these and other requisites creates the possibility
of an unjust outcome.
Even though the negotiated plea has been a fact of life for many years,
38
it is only recently that plea bargaining has received official acceptance.
There is a need to develop standards for plea negotiations to insure
just and fair dispositions. There is a need to improve the plea negotiation
process itself for the same reasons. Finally, there is a need to examine
the current role of the probation department in the process to determine
whether changes in that role are required.
1) Suggested solutions are:
a) The development of uniform plea negotiation practices based
in part on a study of existing practices and,
b) A study of the role of the probation department in the
plea negotiation process.
2) The objective of the CCCJ is the improvement and standardization
of the plea negotiation process.
B. Lack of Uniformity in Sentencing
Sentencing refers to the stage of the criminal process where punishment is
imposed upon a convicted offender. This stage of the adjudication process
is important because of the effect the disposition will have upon the offender
and upon society.
37
Judicial Council of California Annual Report, 1971, p. 109.
38 Boykin V. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, In Re Tahl; 1 Cal. 3rd 122;
People V. West, 3 Cal. 3rd 595.
- 50 -
39
The judge has a broad amount of discretion in imposing sentence.
The sentence imposed may vary from probation to the statutory maximum.
Despite the indeterminate sentence, a great deal of control over the
sentence still resides with the judge. It is the judge who decides
whether to commit a convicted felon to a state institution. Although
various modifications of the sentencing function such as sentencing
by panels of judges or clinicians have been suggested, the sentencing
process is, and will probably remain, a solitary responsibility. Despite
probation reports, special diagnostic services and the assistance of
counsel for the prosecution and the defense, it is the judge who must
make the sentencing decision.
As a result of the individual nature of the sentencing process, sentencing
practices may vary widely among the more than 1000 California trial judges.
Such variances may, for the most part, may be desirable. The sentencing
stage is one of the few areas of the criminal 40 justice system which allows
for an individualized application of the law. However, some uniformity
of sentences is desirable.
The California Legislature has recognized the importance of achieving a
certain amount of uniformity in sentencing by providing for conferences
of trial judges, under the direction of the Judicial Council, to discuss
sentencing practices. 41 The Judicial Council Sentencing Institutes have
been well received, and have contributed much to the promotion of uniformity
of sentencing practices in California. However, there is a need for greater
uniformity of sentences.
1) Among the solutions suggested for this problem are:
a) The adoption of sentencing standards and uniform sentencing
practices based upon a broad consensus of the California
judiciary;
b) An empirical study of sentences imposed; and
c) An evaluation of the probation subsidy program.
2) The objective of the CCCJ in this area is the encouragement of
greater uniformity of sentencing practices.
39 Witkin California Criminal Procedure, p. 606.
40 Cardozo, Benjamin N., The Nature of the Judicial Process, Yale University
41
Press, New Haven, 1965, p. 108ff.
California Government Code, Section 68551.
- 51 -
VIII. RESEARCH
A. Difficulty of Assessing Impact of Legislative, Judicial, Executive,
and Administrative Changes Upon the Adjudication Process
As various legislation is adopted, it is sometimes not realized until
too late the severe burden it places on the judicial system. No methodology
exists for determining with sufficient accuracy the workload impact of
legislative enactments, executive, administrative and judicial decisions.
1) A possible solution to this problem is development of a methodology
for determining workload increases that may result from legislative,
executive, administrative, or judicial changes. A system should also
be developed whereby information about changes -- including both the
nature and effect of the changes -- is disseminated to agencies which
should be aware of those changes.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to encourage the development of a system
methodology for assessing the workload impact of legislative changes
and to provide information about these changes to those agencies
which may be affected.
B. Lack of Flexibility to Experiment
Much experimentation is unnecessarily restricted because of the resistance
of agencies and individuals to changes in their methods of operation. Given
the necessity for experimentation, much more could be accomplished in this
area if cooperative and positive attitudes toward experimentation could be
developed.
1) An approach should be developed which will allow or provide greater
acceptance and cooperation among judicial agencies and personnel
subject to experimental programs.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to eliminate obstacles to experimentation
and provide for maximum flexibility in the system for the conduct
of experiments.
C. Need for Restatement of Code Sections Affecting the Judicial System
A number of code sections which concern the judicial system are outdated
and inapplicable to the system as it now operates. Moreover, code sections
affecting the judicial system often overlap or duplicate one another, and
are dispersed throughout the codes.
1) A comprehensive "Judicial Code" should be drafted to compile all the
laws affecting the judicial system.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to improve the body of law affecting the
judicial system.
- 52 -
D. Inadequate Court Financing
The present methods of financing our trial courts are a patchwork.
The counties bear all capital costs. Salaries for superior court
judges are primarily state expenses, while municipal and justice
court judges are paid entirely by the counties in which they sit.
The Legislature prescribes the salaries of superior and municipal
court judges but each county determines the salaries for its justice
court judges. Likewise, the counties finance any retirement benefits
for justice court judges but the state financially supports and administers
the retirement system for superior and municipal court judges. And,
as noted above, the 42 counties bear the expense of all non-judicial
court personnel.
1) A joint state/local commission should be created to explore and
recommend improved court financing approaches.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to develop a court financing system with
clearly outlined state and local responsibilities and resources.
E. Need for Experimentation with Recommendations Concerning the Courts
A number of excellent recommendations concerning improvement of the
judicial system have been made. Little action has been taken or most
of these recommendations; many of them should be implemented on an
experimental basis to test their worth.
Studies and reports on court consolidation and reorganization -- although
given much attention -- have not been implemented. Moreover, few counties
cooperate in sharing judicial agency resources or information when such
cooperation could be valuable.
1) An area court administration project might be established to fill the
administrative gap between local and state judicial administration.
A multi-county court coordinator/administrator position could be
established. These offices would foster inter-county cooperation and
eliminate unnecessary duplication where feasible. Experimentation with
court consolidation and court reorganization could be undertaken in
selected courts.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to actively encourage implementation of some
of the recommendations which have resulted from extensive studies
of the courts.
F. Problems Resulting from Piecemeal Revision of Juvenile Law
Juvenile law has been extensively revised on a piecemeal basis by recent
cases and statutes.
1) A juvenile justice commission could be established to re-examine
juvenile court law.
2) The objective of the CCCJ is the re-examination and recodification
of juvenile law.
42
Select Committee on Trial Court Delay, Report 6, p. 86.
53
IX. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
A court handled on a sound administrative basis is a vital asset to a
smoothly functioning judicial system. But of equal importance, are the
resources available to the court. Without adequate facilities to conduct
a trial, modern and adaptable methods of reporting the proceedings, an
accessable and extensive information system, judicial administration is
severely handicapped. Unfortunately, facilities and equipment are often
prohibitively expensive. Faced with limited funds, many courts augment
their staffs rather than provide the means by which existing personnel can
operate more efficiently. Without sufficient resources with which to
operate, sound administration of the courts is unnecessarily undermined.
A. Lack of Adequate Methods for Reporting in Lower Courts
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that defendants in all
criminal cases are entitled to "records of sufficient completeness"
to present their claims to an appellate court. 43 Generally, reporters
are used routinely in lower courts only for the reporting of felony
preliminary hearings. Although the need for verbatim transcripts of
all municipal court proceedings is questionable (as is the case with
superior courts in matters such as uncontested dissolutions), some
form of record is of value. It provides judges and attorneys with a
reference source as to what has transpired, as well as being useful in
preparing settled statements on appeal.
It has, for some time, been the experience of many large metropolitan
courts that it is extemely difficult to recruit qualified court reporters.
The decision mentioned above will compound this problem.
Another problem that has arisen as a result of the shortage of qualified
reporters is increased requests for extensions of time for the preparation
of transcripts on appeal and preparation of transcripts from preliminary
hearings. This problem has become another element of undesirable delay
in the judicial process.
1) Suggested solutions to the shortage of court reporters involve
the use of electronic court reporting. Through the use of a
single or multi-track recording device, transcripts may be produced
without the necessity of waiting for the reporter to transcribe
his notes.
2) The objective of the CCCJ is to improve court reporting procedures
and methods. Where necessary, alternate methods of court reporting
should be developed to supplement or supplant the existing system.
43
Mayer V. City of Chicago, (U.S. Supreme Court 1971) 30 L.Ed. 2nd 372.
- 54 -
B. Requirement of Processing Large Amounts of Information
When a person is arrested, considerable data is accumulated by the
arresting agency. Often this data is transcribed into a documentary
form by the police department, and usually only portions of the data
are passed on to other agencies. A similar process occurs in each
succeeding agency; the district attorney's office, the municipal court,
the superior court, the public defender and the probation office. Each
agency keeps its own records and very little of the information collected
is shared. This duplication is unnecessary, inefficient and often leads
to conflicting information. Complete and recent data, easily accessible
and reasonably accurate, insures consistency of background information
between the district attorney and the public defender. Also important,
is the ability of the court to gain rapid access to that data which is
necessary in the consideration of release on own recognizance or sentencing.
Improved information systems should greatly facilitate the ability of the
court to swiftly try persons and sentence offenders. The immediate effect
is that the serious offender is on the street a much shorter period of time
while awaiting trial and thus can be treated before he has an opportunity
to commit further offenses. With the certainty of trial and sentencing
increased, negotiated disposition on routine cases would be expedited.
Carrying this reasoning further, a drastic reduction in inter-departmental
duplication of clerical work would occur, thus enabling greater court out-
put without necessary corresponding increase in personnel.
1) Approaches to the problem of inadequate court information centers
around more extensive use of electronic data processing. The
inadequate information systems which are presently operational
should be modified and improved to incorporate the latest techniques
of swift and accurate data retrieval. Technical assistance must
be provided both to enable modification of existing systems and to
establish new systems as economically as possible.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to assist in the creation and implementation
of information systems.
C. Inadequate Facilities and Equipment of Judicial Agencies
Judicial agencies are often plagued by inadequate facilities and equipment.
Unavailability of courtrooms prevents the use of referees or temporary
judges to help handle case backlog. Juries are often forced to deliberate
in uncomfortable or inadequate conference rooms. Judges or attorneys who
must use library facilities of the court frequently find inadequate and
outdated material, or cramped working quarters and are thus hampered in
performing necessary research. The facilities and equipment of the district
attorney, the public defender, court clerk and other support agencies are
also inadequate--limited space is often their most aggravating problem. It
is difficult for judicial agencies to determine the best equipment to use
for a particular function or activity. Whe- equipment an agency uses proves
impractical or ineffecient, there is generally no method by which other
judicial agencies can be informed of this inadequacy.
- 55 -
1) A suggested solution to the problem of inadequate facilities and
equipment in judicial agencies is assisting in the devolvement of
standards for improving physical facilities and equipment. With
such standards as a guideline, judicial agencies would have greater
ability to examine their existing arrangements compared with those
which could provide maximum efficiency. Persons acquainted with
the array of equipment available for office use could observe and
evaluate the equipment courts and court-support agencies use. They
could additionally conduct costs/benefit analyses to determine which
equipment is most efficient.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to improve the facilities and equipment of
judicial agencies and to provide technical assistance to those
agencies in selecting the most suitable equipment available.
D. Inadequate Court Security Measures
As a result of unfortunate occurrences in the past, there has arisen a
need for greater security measures in the courtroom. Some controversial
trials have necessitated expensive modifications of a courtroom to meet
a high standard of security. Although need does not require -- nor money
permit -- that all courtrooms be constructed in such a manner, many in-
expensive but important changes in existing courtrooms can provide significant
increases in security.
1) A substantial part of the solution to this problem would be the
creation of improved security procedures. However, in the long
run, it is likely that large amounts will have to be spent to
greatly improve the security of the courtroom. Prior to these
large capital expenditures, security standards and procedures for
physical facilities, equipment and personnel must be developed.
Minimum standards for all courtrooms must be established along
with standards for the various levels of security.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to develop uniform security standards for
the courts and their personnel and to actively encourage, their
adoption.
- 56 -
X. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND EDUCATION
A. Lack of Public Knowledge and Understanding of the Functions and
Problems of the Judicial System
Information disseminated about the judicial system is severely limited
and sometimes inaccurate. Statistics are disseminated without sufficient
explanation and thus are often misleading. The techniques which are used
to disseminate that material which the public is provided, are usually of
such an unsophisticated nature that they often are ignored entirely. The
power of the news media is unquestioned. Thus, it is vitally important
that the media have an unbiased and thorough knowledge of the court system,
so that a fair and accurate presentation of news dealing with the judicial
system is given.
1) Suggested approaches to this problem center around providing more
correct and more extensive information to the public about the judicial
system. Media techniques such as cartoons and "tests" could be utilized.
Statistics could be provided and interpreted to show their true sig-
nificance. Educational programs could be developed to educate news
media representatives about the judicial and legal system.
2) The objective of CCCJ is to ensure that the public is adequately
informed about the nature, role, and function of the judicial system.
- 57 -
GENERAL POLICIES, CONSTRAINTS AND OBJECTIVES
FOR SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
GENERAL POLICIES, CONSTRAINTS AND OBJECTIVES
FOR SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
The goal of the System Development Program as articulated by the CCCJ is to
"measurably improve or refine the criminal justice system for more effective
performance."
The objectives of the program as identified by the CCCJ are:
1. Impact conditions or situations which affect the well-being or success
of the criminal justice system by: (a) reducing crime, (b) improving
the quality of justice or (c) reducing the cost of administration.
2. Develop public understanding and support of the criminal justice system.
3. Impact two or more elements of the criminal justice system.
4. Develop a transferable demonstration model that is applicable in juris-
dictions of various sizes, i.e., large, medium and small. (CCCJ will
coordinate, monitor and provide statewide dissemination of results.)
5. Enhance interaction in project development between the Council, task
forces, regions and criminal justice system components.
6. Help develop projects with results which can be measured within the
prescribed grant period.
The System Development Program will be governed by policies generally in effect
for the Improvement of Courts, Prosecution and Law Reform Program.
1. Preference will be given to projects which will further the development
of the judicial system throughout the state.
2. Preference will be given to projects where, because of their experimental
nature, no other possible source of funding exists. Programs whose merit
and value have been conclusively proven and, in view of the substantial
savings such programs bring, should properly be a concern of local govern-
ment, will generally not receive funding.
3. Evidence of commitment will be required on the part of an appropriate
local agency to continue a program which was designed, if successful, to
be incorporated as a part of the local criminal justice system. Similar-
ly, some assurance that recommendations of studies conducted with CCCJ
funding will be implemented is required.
- 58 -
4. Projects which are primarily civil law in nature and have no appreciable
impact upon the criminal justice system will generally be discouraged.
5. Construction programs and programs requiring large amounts of costly
equipment will generally be discouraged due to the limited amount of
funds available.
6. Programs designed primarily to augment existing agency staffs will also
be discouraged due to the limited amount of funds available.
In addition to the above policies, the CCCJ has adopted the following selection
criteria:
Projects or areas of emphasis should:
1. Be related to Council priorities;
2. Be related to regional plans;
3. Not be eligible for funding from other funding sources (Crime Specific,
Laboratory Development, Resource Centers, Part E);
4. Address problems which are prevalent in more than one region;
5. Have transferable characteristics;
6. Show inter-relationships between all elements of the criminal justice
system even though a particular component may be the target for the
project funds.
Due to the nature of the funds involved, and the uncertainty of obtaining continu-
ation funding, projects which will require multi-year funding should make provision
for securing such continuation funding. Since periods longer than the normal 12-
month project period may be required, projects may be funded for a period not to
exceed 18 months.
Projects submitted for funding must correspond with the solutions listed in the
priority category of the System Development Action Plan. Projects must also dem-
onstrate a potential impact upon the courts system and they must fulfill all
requirements for evaluation.
- 59 -
RANKING AND CLASSIFICATION OF
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION AND
RANKING OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
The Courts Task Force has identified 107 possible solutions to the problems
listed in the preceding sections. While the Task Force makes no claim that
its listing of solutions is an exhaustive one, that list does represent over
two months of concerted effort to identify all possible and feasible solutions.
A number of suggestions listed will require legislative or constitutional changes.
They are listed because they constitute possible improvements to the judicial system.
A number of solutions listed will require no extra funding in order to be imple-
mented. They are included in the listing because they represent important and
necessary changes which should be implemented or encouraged.
Solutions under each problem were ranked on the basis of the impact each solution
might have on that problem. An overall ranking of solutions was then developed
based on overall impact and importance, cost and feasibility and likelihood of
implementation. The last criteria used in ranking solutions was an attempt to
allocate funds to as many problem areas as possible. Problem area I is the most
important problem area, but $5.7 million would be required to implement all the
solutions listed for that problem area. Even if that amount were available, other
important problem areas would be ignored. Problem area II is also important, but
there are a number of existing programs, many funded by CCCJ in this area. Thus,
the following ranking is an attempt to provide funding for the most important
solution or solutions in as many problem areas as possible. A listing of the
allocation of funds by problem area follows the ranking of solutions.
- 60
CCCJ
PROBLEM
RANK
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
FUNDS
CATEGORY
(See Discussion Beginning on Page 75)
1
Technical assistance in establishing calendar manage-
$170,000
IA
ment practices, including a conference for court ad-
ministrators and presiding judges.
2
Creation and enforcement of tough rules on granting
45,000
IB
of continuances.
a) Establishment of a rule which requires reporting
of all continuances to the Judicial Council.
b) Stern enforcement of Penal Code Section 1050.
i) Calendar judge is the only judge who can
grant continuances.
ii) Require proof by counsel that client has
been notified of request for continuance.
iii) Trail cases unable to go to trial but good
cause not shown. Reports will be filed on
all cases thus trailed.
c) Make standards concerning continuances a Rule of
Court.
3
Develop criteria and experiment with alternatives to
70,000
ID
the grand jury/preliminary hearing system, including:
a) Non-adversary one-judge "Grand Jury;"
b) Affidavit proceeding similar to deposition;
c) Direct filing by affidavit in Superior Court;
d) Hold preliminary hearings in Superior Court.
4
Provide court administrators and supportive secre-
180,000
IE
tarial staff for six courts (Superior and Municipal)
of five or more judicial positions.
5
Restrict issues on appeal through use of a petition
NONE
VC
for hearing or a petition for leave to appeal which
specifies grounds for appeal.
6
High-level policy committee to develop crime charging
350,000
IVA
standards and an experimental program.
a) Uniform police reporting and charging.
Included
IVA
in above
b) Uniform citation hearings.
Included
IVA
in above
- 61 -
c) Develop uniform statewide pleading and practice
Included
IVC
forms.
in above
d) Development of uniform prosecutor, defender and
Included
IVC
clerical manuals.
in above
7
Increased use of citation to the District Attorney
$100,000
IIIA
with informal/voluntary probation (police).
8
Schedule multiple motions for hearing at the same
NONE
IC
time.
9
Expand standards and possible centers which may be
NONE
IIID
used for detoxification.
10
A. Development of a system for determining
100,000
IG
staffing needs for non-judicial court
(Funding from other sources)
personnel.
B. Develop a system for determining prosecu-
150,000
IF
tor and defender professional and clerical
staff needs.
11
Develop a methodology for determining judicial
150,000
VIIIA
workload increases arising from legislative
changes.
a) Development of a methodology for
(Undetermined)
determining judicial workload in-
creases arising from executive,
administrative and judicial deci-
sions.
12
Make greater use of technological advances such as
225,000
I-I
conducting examination of witnesses on video tape,
similar to depositions.
13
Insure timely processing of appeal through increased
VB
supervision of preparation of record.
a) Financial sanctions for late preparation.
LEGISLATION
b) Retention of trial counsel until record pre-
NONE
pared.
c) Early appointment of appellate counsel.
NONE
d) Use of electronic court reporting.
LEGISLATION
e) Appeal without record, based on settled state-
NONE
ment.
14
Encourage adoption of improved settlement procedures.
NONE
IIIA
15
Reclassify minor traffic violations as civil matters.
LEGISLATION
IIIB
16
Summary disposition of traffic violations.
70,000
IIIB
17
Retention of trial counsel as counsel on appeal.
NONE
VD
-62-
18
Develop arbitration procedures.
$ 60,000
IIIA
19
Institution of a "single writ" concept.
LEGISLATION
VA
20
Computerized case scheduling and calendaring
100,000
IA
systems.
21
Encourage adoption of no fault insurance.
LEGISLATION
IIIA
22
Require written noticed motions including Points and
NONE
IC
Authorities and written Responses.
23
Omnibus pretrial hearing--pilot project.
45,000
IC
24
Court executive training programs and conferences.
40,000
IIC
25
Conduct management conferences for prosecutor and
40,000
IF
defender administrative personnel.
26
Develop co-operative arrangements whereby judicial
NONE
IN
agencies are given advance notice of changes which
will affect their workloads.
27
Administrative disposition of minor traffic matters.
LEGISLATION
IIIB
28
Empirical study of frequency of occurrence, causes,
80,000
VIB
effects and amount of time consumed by hung juries.
29
Examine feasibility of alternatives to unanimous
LEGISLATION
VIB
verdicts:
a) Reduce number of jurors required to return a
verdict.
b) Allow judge to render judgment either way if
jury fails to agree.
c) Allow judge to render judgment based on verdict
agreed on by a majority of the jury.
LEGISLATION/
30
Allow oral opinions.
CONSTITUTION
VC
31
Priority of appeals according to merit.
NONE
VA
32
Comparison of individual and master calendar systems
70,000
IA
and combinations thereof.
33
Implementation of Penal Code Section 647ff.
250,000
IIID
34
Modification of jury trial.
LEGISLATION/
VIA
CONSTITUTION
a) Eliminate right to jury trial;
- 63 -
b) Eliminate right to jury trial in minor criminal
cases;
c) Eliminate right to jury trial in civil cases;
d) Eliminate right to jury trial in specified
cases;
e) Reduce jury size;
f) Replace jury with three-judge panel.
35
Assist in improving internal operations of prose-
$150,000
IF
cutor and defender offices through developing
model management systems for large, medium and
small offices and creating management assistance,
consultation, etc., resources for the offices.
36
Local drug abuse institutes/workshops.
30,000
IIIC
37
Provide electronic court reporting for the lower
50,000
IXA
courts.
(Funding from
other sources)
38
Establish a felony bail schedule.
LEGISLATION
IVD
39
Limit Federal Court review of State Court convic-
NONE
VB
tions.
40
Distribution of materials produced by the Califor-
40,000
IVC
nia College of Trial Judges.
41
Distribution of misdemeanor benchbook.
20,000
IVC
42
Common calendaring systems for multi-courts and
100,000
IA
multi-counties.
43
Development of uniform plea negotiation practices.
35,000
VIIA
Study of existing practices.
ADMINISTRATION
30,000
$2,600,000
- 64 -
44
Deferred prosecution programs.
500,000
IIIA
45
Center for Judicial Education and Research.
200,000
IIA
a) Training programs for presiding judges.
b) Improved pre-service and continuing education
programs for judges of courts of record.
c) Training programs for Justice Court Judge.
d) Mandatory training programs.
e) Training programs for commissioners, referees
and temporary judges.
46
Support the establishment of a juvenile justice
$100,000
VIIIF
commission to re-examine juvenile court law.
47
Study the role of the probation department in
60,000
VIIA
the plea bargaining process.
48
Civil addiction proceedings (W & I 3100) in lieu
120,000
IIIC
of criminal prosecutions.
49
Create standards for staffing of judicial agencies.
80,000
IK
50
Create a planning and research unit for each court,
950,000
IH
prosecutor or defender office above a certain mini-
mum size.
51
Training unit for offices above a certain number
390,000
IIB
of deputies.
52
Adoption of standards and uniform sentencing
80,000
VIIB
practices based on consensus on sentencing
patterns and uniform sentencing alternatives.
53
Adopt improved juror selection procedures.
60,000
VIA
a) Reduce exemptions;
LEGISLATION
b) Develop standardized and improved juror ques-
40,000
tionnaire;
c) Improved techniques which allow for earlier
50,000
notification of jurors.
54
Examine the feasibility of creating a regional
45,000
IM
public defender office to serve a number of rural
counties.
- 65 -
55
Court, prosecutor and defender clerk training
$100,000
IID
programs.
56
Provide court administrators and supportive
480,000
IE
secretarial staff for sixteen courts (Superior
and Municipal) of five or more judicial positions.
57
Create commission to develop improved selection
100,000
IIA
procedures for appointment of judges.
58
Provide financial assistance for the operations
100,000
IIA
of the commission on judicial qualifications.
59
Use of expanded motion for new trial.
LEGISLATION
VB
60
Encourage paralegal assistance, including law
NONE
IK
student internship programs for courts, prosecu-
tors, defenders, clerks, court administrators
and probation departments.
61
Create common jury pool for Superior and Municipal
60,000
VIA
Courts. Adopt on-call techniques.
62
Development of improved statistical collection and
200,000
IG
analysis procedures at state and local levels.
63
Implementation of court management information
200,000
IG
systems.
64
Implementation of management information systems
200,000
IG
for prosecutor and defender offices.
65
Prosecutor and defender training programs.
170,000
IIB
66
Statewide training coordinators for prosecutor
140,000
IIB
and defender programs.
67
Special drug abuse unit in prosecutor office with
60,000
IIIC
emphasis on diversion.
68
Experiment with judge-conducted voir dire in
50,000
VIA
criminal cases.
69
Make jury service more attractive through increased
VIA
incentives.
a) Increased juror compensation;
LEGISLATION
b) Improved juror facilities and parking;
EXPENSIVE
c)
Provision of tax deduction for jury time
LEGISLATION
served (limit on deliberation time);
66
d) Awarding of jury service certificate.
NONE
70
Prosecutor and defender investigator training
$ 45,000
IID
programs.
71
Adoption of sanctions to insure timeliness.
NONE
VB
Authorizing administrative judge only to grant
extension.
72
Training programs in juvenile law and procedure.
50,000
IIE
73
Examination of problems of branch courts.
40,000
IA
74
Uniform and improved procedures and aids for
75,000
VIA
juror education and pre-service training.
75
Provide technical assistance for EDP programs.
60,000
IXB
76
Conduct a costs/benefits analysis of certain types
50,000
IXC
of equipment (e.g., dictation equipment, automated
typewriters for routine matters).
77
Evaluation of impact where CCCJ grants to other
150,000
IN
elements of the system have increased the work-
loads of judicial agencies.
78
Evaluation of problems and duplication resulting
90,000
IL
from a dual system of prosecution.
79
Study and develop recommended standards for juror
120,000
VIC
security.
80
Multi-county traffic court referee.
120,000
IIIB
81
Certification of appellate counsel.
65,000
VD
82
Computerized legal research.
300,000
IK
83
Provide assistance/develop standards for improving
80,000
IXC
physical facilities and equipment.
84
Implement court EDP systems.
200,000
IXB
85
Provide financial assistance for the drafting of a
45,000
VIIIC
"Judicial Code."
86
Create a joint state/local commission to recommend
80,000
VIIID
improved court financing approaches.
87
Establish a multi-county court coordinator/adminis-
40,000
IXE
trator position.
- 67 -
88
Development of standards and certification for
$ 50,000
IIC
court executives.
89
Development of standards and certification for
60,000
IIB
prosecutors and defenders.
90
Institute an experimental certification program
75,000
VB
for Petitions for Hearing in the Supreme Court.
91
Develop and implement court security standards
80,000
IXD
and procedures for physical facilities, equip-
ment and personnel.
92
Development of standards and certification for
70,000
IID
court clerical personnel.
93
Encourage court consolidation and court reorganiza-
NONE
VIIIE
tion.
94
Assist in the creation of integrated criminal
EXPENSIVE
IXB
justice information systems.
95
Develop methods for arriving at better estimates
80,000
I-I
of when witnesses will be required. Encourage
increased and improved use of on-call witnesses.
Issue subpoenas for specific times.
96
Establish an area court administration project
90,000
VIIIE
composed of: an area administrator and county
court administrators.
97
Consolidation of services and administration.
120,000
IJ
98
Development of local rules of court similar to
50,000
IVB
practices in effect in the Third and Fifth
Appellate Districts. Require approval of rules
by Judicial Council.
99
State Public Defender System.
LEGISLATION
VD
100
Provide for rapid and thorough dissemination.
Included in
Information about changes (nature and effect)
#45
should be disseminated to agencies which should
know about those changes.
101
Multi-court/multi-county court administrator for
400,000
IJ
trial courts.
102
Develop standards and certification for judicial
60,000
IIA
positions.
- 68 -
103
Creation of specialized prosecution teams.
$100,000
IK
104
Evaluation of the probation subsidy program.
60,000
VIIB
105
Assist in disseminating better and more-correct
500,000
XA
information about the judicial system.
a) Report statistics on convictions.
60,000
XA
b) Greater use of media techniques, e.g.,
150,000
XA
cartoons, national "tests," etc.
106
Articulation of respective functions and respon-
90,000
IN
sibilities of various agencies.
107
Educate the media about the judicial and legal
250,000
XA
system.
TOTAL
$11,315,000
- 69 -
PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
BY PROBLEM AREA
PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF FUNDS BY PROBLEM AREA
I.
CALENDAR MANAGEMENT AND OFFICE MANAGEMENT
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
1
Technical assistance in establishing
$170,000
calendar management practices, including
a conference for court administrators
and presiding judges.
2
Creation and enforcement of tough rules
45,000
on granting of continuances.
3
Develop criteria and experiment with alter-
70,000
natives to the grand jury/preliminary hear-
ing system.
4
Provide court administrators and supportive
180,000
secretarial staff for six courts (Superior
and Municipal) of five or more judicial
positions.
8
Schedule multiple motions for hearing at
NONE
the same time.
10
A.
Development of a system for determin-
100,000
ing staffing needs for non-judicial
(Funding from
court personnel.
other sources)
B.
Develop a system for determining
150,000
prosecutor and defender professional
and clerical staff needs.
12
Make greater use of technological advances
225,000
such as conducting examination of witnesses
on video tape, similar to depositions.
20
Computerized case scheduling and calendar-
100,000
ing systems.
22
Require written noticed motions including
NONE
Points and Authorities and written Responses.
- 70 -
I. CALENDAR MANAGEMENT AND OFFICE MANAGEMENT - Continued
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
23
Omnibus pretrial hearing--pilot project
$ 45,000
25
Conduct management conferences for prose-
40,000
cutor and defender administrative person-
nel.
26
Develop co-operative arrangements whereby
NONE
judicial agencies are given advance notice
of changes which will affect their work-
loads.
32
Comparison of individual and master calendar
70,000
systems and combinations thereof.
35
Assist in improving internal operations of
150,000
prosecutor and defender offices through
developing model management systems for
large, medium and small offices and creat-
ing management assistance, consultation,
etc., resources for the offices.
42
Common calendaring systems for multi-courts
100,000
and multi-counties.
TOTAL
$1,345,000
51.8%
II. TRAINING
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
24
Court executive training programs and
$ 40,000
conferences.
TOTAL
$ 40,000
1.5%
III. DIVERSION
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
7
Increased use of citation to the District
$ 100,000
Attorney with informal/voluntary proba-
tion (police).
- 71 -
III. DIVERSION - Continued
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
9
Expand standards and possible centers which
NONE
may be used for detoxification.
14
Encourage adoption of improved settlement
NONE
procedures.
15
Reclassify minor traffic violations as civil
LEGISLATION
matters.
16
Summary disposition of traffic violations.
$ 70,000
18
Develop arbitration procedures.
60,000
21
Encourage adoption of no fault insurance.
LEGISLATION
27
Administrative disposition of minor traffic
LEGISLATION
matters.
33
Implementation of Penal Code Section 647ff.
250,000
36
Local drug abuse institutes/workshops.
30,000
TOTAL
$510,000
19.6%
IV.
UNIFORMITY OF RULES, FORMS AND PROCEDURES
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
6
High-level policy committee to develop crime
$350,000
charging standards and an experimental
program.
38
Establish a felony bail schedule.
LEGISLATION
40
Distribution of materials produced by the
40,000
California College of Trial Judges.
41
Distribution of misdemeanor benchbook.
20,000
TOTAL
$410,000
15.8%
- 72 -
V. APPELLATE PROBLEMS
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
5
Restrict issues on appeal through use of a
NONE
petition for hearing or a petition for
leave to appeal which specifies grounds
for appeal.
13
Insure timely processing of appeal through
NONE
increased supervision of preparation of
record.
17
Retention of trial counsel as counsel on
NONE
appeal.
19
Institution of a "single writ" concept.
LEGISLATION
30
Allow oral opinions.
LEGISLATION/
CONSTITUTION
31
Priority of appeals according to merit.
NONE
39
Limit Federal Court review of State Court
NONE
convictions.
TOTAL
NONE
0%
VI. JURY SELECTION AND UTILIZATION
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
28
Empirical study of frequency of occurrence,
$ 80,000
causes, effects and amount of time consumed
by hung juries.
29
Examine feasibility of alternatives to
LEGISLATION
unanimous verdicts.
34
Modification of jury trial.
LEGISLATION/
CONSTITUTION
TOTAL
$ 80,000
3.1%
- 73 -
VII. PLEA BARGAINING/SENTENCING
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
35
Development of uniform plea negotiation
$ 35,000
practices. Study of existing practices.
TOTAL
$ 35,000
1.3%
VIII. RESEARCH
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
11
Develop a methodology for determining
$150,000
judicial workload increases arising from
legislative changes.
a. Development of a methodology for
(Undetermined)
determining judicial workload in-
creases arising from executive,
administrative and judicial deci-
sions.
IX. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
37
Provide electronic court reporting for the
$ 50,000
lower courts.
(Funding from
other sources)
TOTAL
NONE
0%
X. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND EDUCATION
RANK
SOLUTION
COST
None
NONE
0%
ADMINISTRATION
$ 30,000
1.1%
TOTAL
$2,600,000
100%
-74-
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
1. Technical Assistance in Establishing Calendar Management Practices
A team of calendar management experts and supporting staff will be established
to provide the necessary management expertise for dealing with complex
calendar problems. Present calendaring practices will be examined and sugges-
tions will be made for the development of more effective procedures. The team
will provide additional expertise to those courts that have court administrators
and will provide the essential management training for effective calendar
management to both presiding judges and their clerks.
One of the first programs the team will undertake is to coordinate and conduct
a training conference on calendar management for court administrators and
presiding judges.
The team will also be a research and information center for the courts. A
court administrator or presiding judge will be able to consult the team for
answers to pressing calendar problems or for general information on calendar
management.
The team will be an important first step toward development of uniform calendar
management practices. It will work closely with the Sacramento and San
Francisco calendar management teams in developing a "Model Calendar Management
Manual" suitable for use in all California courts.
The estimated cost of the team is $170,000. This will include team salaries,
salaries of supporting staff, and operating expenses for the team.
2. Creation of Stern Rules Regarding Continuances
The courts should rigidly enforce the provisions of Penal Code Section 1050
regarding continuances and thereby establish rules that will promote closer
adherence to the requirements of this section.
It should be emphasized that Section 1050 requires that:
"No continuance of a criminal trial shall be granted except upon
affirmative proof in open court, upon reasonable notice, that the
ends of justice require a continuance Whenever any continuance
is granted, the facts provided which require the continuance shall
be entered upon the minutes of the court or, in a justice court,
upon the docket."
Stern enforcement of these requirements should reduce the number of continuances
granted for frivolous or insubstantial reasons.
- 75
In order to promote closer adherence to the requirements of Section 1050, rules
should be established which:
a) Require the reporting of all continuances;
b) Authorize only the presiding judge or master calendar judge to
grant continuances; and
c) Require the reporting of cases trailed in lieu of granting continuances.
Approximately $45,000 will be required to provide the necéssary staff assistance
in monitoring and evaluating the project.
3. Alternatives to Grand Jury/Preliminary Hearing Systems
Criteria and experiments with alternatives to the grand jury and preliminary
hearing systems should be developed. Suggested alternatives include:
a) A non-adversary, one-judge "grand jury";
b) An affidavit proceeding similar to a deposition;
c) Direct filing by affidavit in superior court; and
d) Holding preliminary hearings in superior court.
The alternatives to be developed will be calculated to reduce the present undue
consumption of time and misuse of preliminary hearings. Legislative and/or
constitutional changes will probably be necessary to implement some of the
alternatives.
Approximately $70,000 will be needed to sufficiently develop the criteria
and alternatives for legislative consideration.
4. Court Administrators for Superior and Municipal Courts of Five or More Judicial
Positions
Court administrators and supportive secretarial staff will be provided for six
superior or municipal courts of five or more judicial positions. The court
administrators will become involved in and improve general management of the
court, personnel management, data processing management, financial management,
calendar management, jury and witness management, space and equipment
management, and public information and report management.
The estimated cost of providing a court administrator and supportive secretarial
staff is $30,000 per court. One hundred eighty thousand dollars will be needed
to provide court administrators for six courts of five or more judicial
positions.
- 76 -
5. Restricting Issues on Appeal
Issues on appeal should be restricted through use of a petition for hearing
or a petition for leave to appeal which specifies the grounds for appeal. The
essential feature of this procedure is that it will provide a means for
screening out and disposing of cases involving only frivolous issues without
the necessity of the court issuing a written opinion.
This solution will not require grant funds, although it may require legislation
and/or rule changes.
6. Policy Committee to Develop Crime Charging Standards
A high-level policy committee will be created to study the crime charging
practices of prosecutorial agencies throughout the state and to develop
crime charging standards. After these standards are developed, an
experimental program will be implemented to test the validity and merit of
the standards.
The committee will have four major objectives:
a) Development of uniform police reporting and prosecutor charging
practices;
b) Development of uniform citation hearings and formalization of the
citation process;
c) Development of uniform statewide pleading and practice forms; and
d) Development of uniform prosecutor, defender and clerical manuals.
It is estimated that this project will cost $350,000. This estimate is based
on the magnitude of the task and the inclusion of related activities, such as
development of the experimental program and development of the manuals.
7. Increased Use of Citation to the District Attorney with Informal/Voluntary
Probation by Police
This solution will establish a program which will utilize citation to the
district attorney in an attempt to divert cases from the judicial process.
This solution would also establish programs of informal/voluntary probation
handled by the police department. The police would be allowed to release
certain offenders on voluntary probation to the police department. If the
offender refused to participate in the voluntary program, the police could
file a report with the district attorney and the offender would then be
handled through regular procedures.
It is estimated that $100,00 would be needed for this diversion project.
- 77 -
8. Schedule Multiple Motions for Hearing at the Same Time
A calendaring practice of scheduling multiple motions for hearing at the same
time should be developed and utilized in all trial courts throughout the state.
This practice should reduce trial delay and facilitate calendar management.
The project should not require grant funds and may be implemented by a Rule of
Court.
9. Standards and Centers for Detoxification
The standards for placing persons in civil protectice custody for detoxifica-
tion should be expanded SO that more facilities can be used at a minimal cost.
The number of detoxification centers will be increased by designating a number
of possible centers which meet certain minimum requirements.
Grant funds will not be required to implement this suggestion. Legislation may
be required for expansion of the standards for detoxification and expansion of
the standards for eligible detoxification centers.
10A. Non-Judicial Staffing Needs
A weighted workload system similar to that used by the Judicial Council will be
developed for non-judicial court personnel (administrators, bailiffs, clerks,
secretaries, etc.). This system will be a valuable manpower-planning tool for
court administrators.
The cost of development is estimated to be $100,000. Funds will be secured
from other sources.
10B. Prosecutor and Defender Staffing Needs
A weighted workload system will be developed for prosecutor, public defender,
professional and clerical personnel. Such a system will provide these offices
with greater manpower-planning capabilities.
Development of this system will cost about $150,000. This figure is compara-
ble to the cost of development of the weighted caseload system for the judici-
ary.
11. Methodology for Determining Judicial Workload Increases Arising from Legislation
A methodology will be developed for determining judicial agency workload in-
creases that may arise from legislative changes. Such a methodology will aid
legislators in determining the impact of their actions and, more importantly,
will provide a tool for more meaningful planning on the part of judicial
agencies. The Chief Justice of the United States emphasized the need for such
"Judicial Impact Statements" at the American Bar Association Convention.
It is estimated that such a project will cost $150,000. A Request for Proposal
will be developed to secure consultant services for this project.
-78-
a) Methodology for Determining Judicial Workload Increases Arising from
Executive, Administrative and Judicial Decisions
Such a methodology should be developed and is only mentioned here as a
desirable goal.
12. Greater Use of Technology--Video Tape Examination of Witnesses
A pilot program in conducting examination of witnesses on video tape should
be implemented to demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the
particular program, and to demonstrate the potential of technological
advances in the courts. Video taped examination of witnesses might reduce
court time spent examining witnesses, allow witnesses to testify at their
convenience, and would eliminate the possibility of the jury hearing
inadmissable testimony.
It is estimated that $225,000 will be needed to obtain equipment, develop
procedures and implement this program on an experimental basis.
13. Timely Processing of Appeals through Increased Supervision of Preparation of
Records
Timely processing of appeals can be better ensured through an increased
supervision of the preparation of trial records. Five possible approaches
have been suggested:
a) Financial sanctions on court reporters for late preparation of records.
b) Retention of trial counsel until the record is prepared.
c) Early appointment of appellate counsel.
d) Use of electronic court reporting.
e) Allowing appeals to be taken without a record, based on a settled
statement of the lower court proceedings.
None of the suggestions will require grant funds for implementation. Legislation
or court rules may be required to implement this solution.
14. Encourage Adoption of Improved Settlement Procedures
Effective settlement procedures can assist greatly in the processing and
disposition of cases. The CCCJ should encourage the development and adoption
of improved settlement procedures. This solution will not require grant
funds.
15. Reclassify Minor Traffic Violations
Minor traffic violations should be reclassified as civil matters. The harm
involved in these violations and the impact on the public is relatively minor
compared to the court time and expense they consume. A traffic violation
classified as a civil matter will be processed by an administrative agency.
This reclassification will substantially alleviate court congestion in
California.
79
Legislation will be required to reclassify minor traffic violations as civil
matters. Grant funds will not be necessary to implement this solution.
16. Summary Disposition of Traffic Violations
Programs which provide for the summary disposition of minor traffic violations
will be developed, improved and expanded. Summary disposition of these
violations will streamline the processing of such cases, thus releasing
valuable judge and prosecutor time for more serious criminal matters.
The cost of this program is estimated at $70,000 for the staffing of two
traffic court commissioners.
17. Retention of Trial Counsel on Appeal
Trial counsel should be retained as counsel on appeal. This practice will
assist in expediting appeals since counsel will already be familiar with the
case. This solution will not require grant funds.
18. Develop Arbitration Procedures
Arbitration has often been mentioned as an alternative to the processing of
cases through the courts system. There are a number of arbitration programs
designed to reduce civil case backlogs. The CCCJ should assist in these
efforts since reduced civil workloads will allow more time for criminal cases,
lessen pressures upon the courts, assist in calendar management and improve
public attitudes toward the judicial system.
Sixty thousand dollars will be used to provide staff assistance and monitoring
in order to develop model arbitration programs.
19. Institution of a Single Writ Concept
The current collection of writs, each with its own rules, should be combined
into a single form of writ. Another facet of this solution involves the
consolidation of all the possible instances of pre-trial appellate review in
an individual case.
Legislation will be necessary to implement this "single writ" concept. Grant
funds will not be needed.
20. Computerized Case Scheduling and Calendaring Systems
This solution will provide an experimental computerized calendaring system for
a California court. This system should make it possible for the judge or
administrator in charge of the calendar to monitor the flow of cases, measure
cases against fixed standards or timetables for disposition, and assign
priorities among cases. The system should allow identification of those cases
which have not met time standards at various stages of the trial process and
thus should greatly facilitate the flow of cases. The system will also make
calendaring decisions.
It is estimated that $100,000 will be needed to implement this system. The
grant funds will provide the necessary system design and implementation and
training for the court's calendaring personnel.
- 80 -
21. Encourage Adoption of No Fault Insurance
The CCCJ should encourage the enactment of legislation providing for compulsory
no-fault automobile insurance in California. Since litigation regarding motor
vehicle accidents is a time-consuming and delay-causing class of litigation. the
concept of no-fault insurance would provide a means of alleviating court
congestion and delay.
Grant funds will not be required.
22. Written Noticed Motions with Points and Authorities and Written Responses
All courts should require pre-trial motions to be in writing, noticed for a
time certain and accompanied by points and authorities. Written responses
accompanied by points and authorities to the motions should also be required.
These requirements should reduce the number of court appearances by screen-
ing out many frivolous motions calcul ted to delay, expedite the hearing on
genuine motions by reducing areas of contention, and reducing or eliminating
the need for continuances.
No grant funds will be required for implementation of this solution, although
legislation and/or rule changes may be necessary.
23. Omnibus Pre-Trial Hearing
A pilot project will be developed in which all pre-trial motions will be made
in a single omnibus pre-trial hearing. Both the defense and the prosecution
will have the right to pre-trial appellate review of the determinations made
at the omnibus hearing. These omnibus hearings will eliminate delays produced
by successive pre-trial motions and petitions for appellate review.
It is estimated that $45,000 will be needed to implement this pilot project.
24. Court Executive Training Programs and Conferences
Training programs and conferences will be conducted for court executives.
These programs and conferences will aid in the development of a comprehensive
body of California court management theory, and of standards, qualifications
and functions of court executives. The meetings will be used to inform
court executives of court management practices and techniques, provide them
a forum for the discussion of common problems and encourage the dissemination
of ideas and innovative programs.
It is estimated that $40,000 will be sufficient to organize and conduct two or
three such programs or conferences.
- 81 -
25. Management Conferences for Prosecutors and Public Defenders Administrative
Personnel
Three or four conferences will be held to train managerial personnel, including
those in non-attorney positions. Emphasis will be placed upon skills and
techniques necessary to improve the management and efficient operation of both
prosecutors' and public defenders' offices. The program will be modeled after
similar successful programs presently used by the Federal Government.
Development of the program content and actual presentation of the conferences
could be accomplished by a management consulting firm. This firm should be
thoroughly acquainted with the unique managerial problems facing prosecutors'
and public defenders' offices.
Approximately $40,000 will be required to conduct two such conferences.
26. Co-operative Arrangements for Advance Notice to Judicial Agencies of Changes that
will Affect Workloads
Co-operative arrangements should be developed among the various agencies of the
criminal justice system so that judicial agencies will be given advance
notification of changes or special enforcement programs that may affect
judicial agency workloads.
Expenditure of grant funds should not be necessary to implement this solution.
The various agencies involved should merely be made aware of the impact which
their activities have on judicial agencies SO that simple procedures can be
developed for reporting changes in activities or special activities which may
affect the workloads of judicial agencies.
27. Administrative Disposition of Minor Traffic Matters
Legislation should be sought to remove minor traffic violations from the courts
and to have such violations disposed of by an administrative agency such as the
Department of Motor Vehicles. This solution will divert a large number of cases
from the courts, allowing more time to be spent on important cases.
Grant funds will not be required to implement this solution.
28. Hung Juries
A study should be undertaken to determine the frequency of occurrence, causes,
effects and amount of time consumed by hung juries in order to determine
whether legislation should be considered.
It is estimated that the study will cost $80,000.
- 82 -
29. Alternatives to Unanimous Verdicts
A number of alternatives to the requirement of unanimous jury verdicts in
criminal cases should be examined. The suggested alternatives are:
a) Reduce the number of jurors required to return a verdict;
b) Allow the judge to render judgment either way if the jury fails to
agree on a verdict; and
c) Allow the judge to render judgment based on the verdict agreed on by
a majority of the jury.
Implementation of any of these alternatives might reduce trial delay and expense
caused by hung juries.
Grant funds will not be required for this solution.
30. Oral Opinions
Procedures and standards should be developed for allowing oral opinions from
appellate courts in certain cases. Allowing oral opinions will reduce the
workload of the appellate courts and will aid in speedy disposition of
appeals.
Grant funds will not be required for this solution. Legislation and
Constitutional change may be required to implement these procedures.
31. Priority of Appeals According to Merit
A program of priority ranking of appeals according to their merit should be
implemented in the appellate courts. This system will encourage timely dis-
position of appeals raising substantive issues while at the same time
deferring consideration of frivolous appeals until time permits their hearing.
Legislation may be necessary to implement this program. Grant funds will not
be needed.
32. Calendaring Systems
This project will involve a comparison of individual and master calendaring
systems and various combinations thereof, to determine which calendaring
system is the most effective management tool for the courts.
It is estimated that this study will cost $70,000.
33. Implementation of Penal Code Section 647ff
Detoxification centers should be established to implement the civil protective
custody provisions of P.C. 647ff. Standards for detoxification centers will be
further developed and eligible detoxification centers will be designated. The
project will divert a number of alcohol cases from the judicial system, thereby
reducing the workload of the judicial system.
It is estimated that $250,000 will be needed to implement P.C. 647ff in a
single California county.
- 83 -
34. Modification of Jury Trial
Modifying the jury trial could greatly reduce the expense of trials and reduce
trial delay. Five suggestions have been made regarding limitation of the right
to jury trial:
a) Eliminate the right to jury trial in all cases, allowing the judge to
be the sole trier of fact;
b) Eliminate the right to jury trial in minor criminal cases;
c) Eliminate the right to jury trial in civil cases;
d) Eliminate the right to jury trial in specified cases;
e) Reduce jury size; and
f) Replace the jury with a three judge panel.
All of these suggestions will require legislation or Constitutional changes to
be implemented. It should be noted, however, that regarding the last suggestion,
a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision holds that a jury of six persons is
Constitutionally sufficient in a criminal trial. William V. Florida (1970),
399 U.S. 78, 90 S.Ct. 1893.
Grant funds will not be required for these suggestions.
35. Model Management Systems and Management Assistance for Prosecutor and Defender
Offices
This project will assist in improving the internal operations of prosecutor and
public defender offices through development of model management systems for
large, medium and small offices. Management assistance and consultation resources
will also be developed. This assistance will increase the operating efficiency
and operating uniformity of these offices throughout the state.
It is estimated that $150,000 will be required for this project.
36. Local Drug Abuse Institutes/Workshops
Drug abuse institutes or workshops will be established on a local level to provide
training for judges, prosecutors and defenders. These workshops will emphasize
the judicial systems' problems in disposing of drug cases and will increase
awareness of alternate methods for handling drug cases, especially local
diversionary programs.
Fifteen local workshops could be conducted for approximately $2,000 each, or
a central staff could be hired for approximately $20,000 to conduct five work-
shops at $2,000 each. (Either solution would require a total of $30,000
to implement.)
- 84 -
37. Electronic Court Reporting
Electronic court reporting equipment and training in the use of the equipment
will be provided for lower courts. This will provide a more efficient and
perhaps more accurate means of reporting. This project will solve the problems
that arise because of the shortage of qualified court reporters.
It is estimated that such a project will cost $50,000. The funds will come
from other sources.
38. Felony Bail Schedule
A uniform felony bail schedule should be established. If such a system were
implemented, it would eliminate the necessity of the presence of a magistrate
or having the amount of bail set in the warrant for release on bail in felony
cases.
Legislation will be required. No grant funds are necessary.
39. Limit Federal Court Review of State Court Convictions
Federal Court review of State Court convictions should be limited, for in many
cases this review adds to the expense and problems of the state's judicial system
without contributing to the fairness of the trial or hearing or further
guaranteeing the rights of the convicted person. Law is probably more
effectively, responsively and inexpensively administered at the lower levels
of the judicial system. Effort should be directed toward combating the trend
of federal infringement upon the local or state administration of justice.
Limiting Federal Court jurisdiction will be an important first step in this
direction.
Grant funds will not be required for this solution.
40. Materials Produced by California College for Trial Judges
This project will finance the costs of printing the materials produced by the
California College of Trial Judges and distributing them to all of the
superior and municipal court judges who have been unable to attend the college.
These materials will provide valuable information on the conduct of trials.
court management, and recent developments in criminal law and procedure. They
will provide valuable resource information which should greatly improve the
professional skills of the state's trial judiciary.
41. Misdemeanor Benchbook
This project will provide funds for printing and distributing the Misdemeanor
Benchbook. It is expected that this resource will be as valuable to
California's lower court judges as the Los Angeles County Superior Court
Benchbook has been to superior court judges.
Based on the cost of distributing the Superior Court Benchbook, it is
estimated that this project will require $20,000.
- 85 -
42. Common Calendaring Systems for Multi-Courts and Multi-Counties
Common calendaring systems for multi-courts or small courts on a multi-county
basis will make it possible to deal with one of the most troublesome variables
of trial scheduling--availability of counsel. Lengthy delays often result from
actual or claimed conflicts in court engagements of counsel. Multi-court or
multi-county cases scheduling will make better use of attorney availability
and priorities than is possible under existing calendar practices. A
centralized record of attorney commitments and active civil and criminal
cases will be utilized to coordinate the calendars of the multi-courts or
courts of a number of contiguous counties.
Based on a Judicial Council estimate, $100,000 will be needed to implement this
solution. The funds will be used to develop the system and provide training
for the calendaring personnel who will operate the centralized calendaring
administration.
43. Uniform Plea Negotiation Practices
A study will be conducted of the policies and practices regarding plea
negotiations of prosecutors throughout the state. After the study, uniform
plea negotiation policies and practices will be developed. It is estimated that
such a project will cost $35,000.
44. Deferred Prosecution
This solution will implement a program of deferred prosecution. The prosecutor's
office will file charges but will not prosecute selected offenses if the
offender voluntarily agrees to participate in a designated rehabilitation
program. Should the offender fail to participate as required, the prosecutor
will seek conviction on the charges filed. This should divert a number of
cases from the court caseload and will save the prosecutor's office a great
deal of time otherwise spent in prosecuting these offenses.
Extensive information on existing diversion programs will be gathered and
compiled for distribution to the prosecutors so that they may properly divert
the selected offenders.
It is anticipated that it will cost $500,000 to implement three model programs.
This amount will be used to establish the programs, pay additional staff in the
prosecutor's office to screen offenders for diversion and follow-up the diverted
offender's progress. A portion of the funds will also be used to gather and
compile the information about existing diversion programs.
45. Center for Judicial Education and Research
An education and research center should be created for California judges at all
levels. The center will gather, compile and publish materials for judicial
education. It will coordinate and assist in the conduct of judicial educational
programs which will provide pre-service and continuing education programs for
judges, special programs for presiding judges, and special programs for justice
court judges, commissioners, referees and temporary judges will also receive
training.
- 86 -
The center staff will plan and conduct research in fields pertinent to judicial
education. They will also keep abreast of legislative changes and administrative
or judicial decisions that may affect the courts.
It is estimated that it will cost $200,000 to establish and maintain the center
for one year. Establishment of the center will probably represent the combined
efforts of the Judicial Council, the Conference of California Judges, and other
judicial organizations. Alternative sources of funding will be explored for
continuation of the center after funding ceases.
46. Juvenile Justice Commission
This project will support the establishment of a juvenile justice commission
to re-examine and reorganize juvenile court law. The commission will compile
juvenile court law into a comprehensive body which will integrate the
piecemeal revisions and major developments which have taken place in the last
decade.
Operating expenses for the commission will be approximately $100,000.
47. Study the Role of the Probation Department in the Plea Bargining Process
A study should be conducted to determine existing and optimum roles for a probation
department in the plea bargaining process.
Approximately $60,000 will be required.
48. Civil Addiction Proceedings in Lieu of Criminal Prosecutions
Greater use of Welfare and Institutions Code Section 3100, which provides for civil
addiction proceedings for narcotics addicts, or those in imminent danger of becoming
addicts, will divert a number of narcotics cases from the criminal system and allow
offenders to obtain medical treatment.
It is estimated that $120,000 will be necessary to encourage widespread use of this
procedure, and provide the necessary staff for monitoring and implementing the
procedure.
49. Standards for Staffing of Judicial Agencies
Standards for staffing of judicial agencies should be created. Adoption of the
standards should eventually result in improved staff and uniform staffing policies
throughout the state.
It is estimated that $80,000 will be necessary to develop these standards.
50. Planning and Research Units for Judicial Agencies
Prototype Planning and Research Units should be established in certain courts,
prosecutor and public defender offices above a specified minimum size. These
units will plan and conduct research in fields pertinent to agency operations.
There are 28 judicial agencies which would qualify for such units.
- 87 -
A cost of $50,000 will be required for each larger agency. A one-man staff and
support at a cost of $25,000 would suffice for each of the smaller agencies.
The total cost of this program is $950,000.
51. Training Units for Prosecutor and Public Defender Offices
Training units should be created in prosecutor and public defender offices above
a minimum size. These units would keep abreast of the rapid changes in criminal
law and procedure and provide "in house" training and educational materials for
the agencies. These units will be able to supervise and direct law student
interns so that the interns will receive more comprehensive training and can be
utilized in agency operations in the most effective manner. These units will
also coordinate with in-state and out-of-state training programs available to
prosecutors and public defenders.
There are 13 offices (excluding Los Angeles District Attorney) with 25 or more
attorneys and 40 or more total employees. Each training unit would consist of
one professional staff, one secretary and necessary operating expenses for a
cost per unit of $30,000, and $390,000 for 13 units.
52. Uniform Sentencing Practices and Alternatives
A study will be undertaken to assess current policies and practices regarding
sentencing. Standards and uniform sentencing practices will be developed as a
result of this study. A conference will be held for the judiciary during which
these standards and uniform sentencing practices will be presented. The
materials prepared for the conference will be published and widely distributed.
A part of the study and conference will be devoted to developing uniform sentencing
alternatives.
Approximately $80,000 will be needed to support this project. A portion of the
funds will cover staff salaries and operating expenses. The remaining funds
will be used to fund the conference and to distribute materials produced.
53. Improved Juror Selection Procedures
A study will be conducted to examine juror selection practices and recommend
improved procedures. Improved procedures should increase the efficiency of
the selection process and reduce the cost of obtaining jurors. Three
suggested improvements are:
a) Reduce the number of exemptions available to an absolute minimum;
b) Develop standardized and improved juror questionnaires; and
c) Improve techniques to allow for earlier notification of jurors.
It is estimated that the study will cost $60,000.
54. Regional Public Defender
A study will be conducted to determine the feasibility of creating a regional
public defender office capable of serving a number of rural counties.
Such a study would cost approximately $45,000.
- 88 -
55. Judicial Agencies Clerk Training Programs
Training programs for clerical personnel of courts, prosecutors and public defenders'
offices should be developed and conducted. No such programs exist presently. They
will aid in the development of qualifications and standards for these personnel.
These programs should also increase uniformity of clerical practices throughout
state judicial agencies.
It is estimated that $100,000 will be necessary to organize and conduct such
programs.
56. Court Administrators for Superior and Municipal Courts of Five or More Judicial
Positions
This solution would provide administrators for the remaining 16 courts which
qualify. The cost would be $480,000.
57. Create a Commission to Develop Improved Selection Procedures for Appointment of
Judges
A "Blue Ribbon" commission should be created to develop improved selection
procedures for the appointment of judges. The operating costs of the commission
are estimated at $100,000.
58. Provide Financial Assistance to the Operations of the Commission on Judicial
Qualifications
The California Commission on Judicial Qualifications has served as a model for a
number of other states. Because of the importance of the Commission's work and
the limited resources available to it, some assistance should be provided. A
program to assist the Commission on Judicial Qualifications would require
approximately $100,000.
59. Expanded Motion for New Trial
An expanded motion for a new trial should be required prior to appeal in order to
allow the trial judge to consider all the claimed bases of trial error. The trial
judge will deny or grant the new trial after fully considering the merits of the
claimed errors. This procedure will reduce the workload of the appellate courts
by creating a form of appellate review at the trial level.
Legislation will be required to implement this procedure. No grant funds are
required for this project.
60. Paralegal Assistance for Judicial Agencies
This solution will encourage a greater use of paralegal assistance, including law
student internship programs, for courts, prosecutors, public defenders, clerks,
court administrators and probation departments.
This solution will not require funding.
- 89 -
61. Common Jury Pools and Adoption of "On-Call" Juror Techniques
The number of jurors called for service can be substantially reduced and the
effective use of jurors increased by instituting a central jury administration
for all municipal and superior courts within a county. The juror needs of all
the courts would be met from this centrally administered pool. This procedure
has proven successful in New York County. 44
Adoption of "on-call" techniques of prospective jurors will also ensure a more
effective use of jurors. Prospective jurors would not be required to wait at
the courthouse, but could be called to the courthouse on short notice.
It is estimated that $60,000 will be necessary to establish these programs in
one county. The funds would be used to support the centralized jury administration
and to develop the procedures for an "on-call" system of summoning prospective
jurors.
62. Improved Statistical Collection and Analysis
This project will develop improved statistical collection and analysis procedures
for judicial agencies at state and local levels. There is presently insufficient
data to perform meaningful planning for judicial agencies. Improved collection
and analysis procedures will provide the quality information that is necessary
for planning and evaluation.
It is estimated that this undertaking will cost about $200,000. This sum is
needed to assess what types of additional data should be collected, to develop
the procedures for all judicial agencies to follow in gathering data, and to
create comprehensive guidelines for analysis of the data on both state and
local levels. Staff with expertise in courts, prosecution, and defense at
all levels is needed to adequately perform this task.
63. Court Management Information Systems
Court management information systems will be implemented in selected counties.
These information systems will be able to provide output in the form of
immediately accessible data, reports, statistics and notices for utilization
by court management personnel. The information systems will be particularly
valuable in the areas of allocation of resources, scheduling court appearances,
calendaring, jury management (selection, notices, fees), records, probation,
corrections and juvenile programs, timetables for case progress, evaluation
of current procedures and the effect of procedural changes and experimentation.
Approximately $200,000 would be required to implement this solution in three
to five courts.
64. Implementation of Management Information Systems for Prosecutor and Defender
Offices
Management information systems will be implemented in four prosecutor or
public defender offices. These information systems will provide data, re-
ports and case following capabilities.
44 President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice--Task
Force Report: The Courts, p. 91.
-90-
65. Prosecutor and Defender Training Programs
Prosecutor and defender training programs should be expanded and improved. In
many instances, such training programs must be established. Training should be
provided for beginning deputies, experienced deputies and managerial level
deputies. A minimum of $170,000 is required to conduct these programs.
66. Statewide Training Coordinators
Statewide training coordinators for prosecutor and defender training programs
should be established. The statewide training coordinators will compile and
disseminate training materials and generally act as a training resource office.
The training coordinators will also travel to offices throughout the state to
conduct training seminars and to aid agency training units. They will
coordinate in-state prosecutor and defender training programs and will provide
information on out-of-state programs. Specific programs will be developed and
conducted for beginning, intermediate, and advanced deputies.
Separate coordinating offices for prosecutor training and public defender training
should be created. Each office will cost about $70,000 and will include three
professional staff, secretarial and operating expenses.
67. Special Drug Abuse Unit
A special drug abuse unit should be established in a prosecutor's office that
handles a significant number of drug cases. The unit should be well acquainted
with diversionary projects and will emphasize diversion of drug cases from the
criminal system. The unit will be particularly valuable in civil addiction
proceedings.
It is estimated that $60,000 will be necessary to place such a unit in a large
prosecutor's office.
68. Judge Conducted Voir Dire
An experiment should be conducted with the voir dire questioning of prospective
jurors by the trial judge in criminal jury trials. This practice is employed
in civil cases in California and in the Federal Courts. Such a procedure
would eliminate certain voir dire excesses and thereby expedite the judicial
process. The procedure would encourage more efficient methods of jury
selection.
Approximately $50,000 would be needed to conduct the experiment.
69. Making Jury Service More Attractive
Programs to make jury service more attractive should be encouraged to increase the
number of citizens willing to participate as jurors and to improve the public's
view of the judicial system. Four such programs have been suggested:
- 91 -
a) Increase juror compensation;
b) Improve juror facilities and parking;
c) Provide a tax deduction for jury time served with limits on the deliberation
time that will be eligible for this special tax treatment; and
e) Award jury service certificates.
Legislation will be necessary to institute some programs to improve the
attractiveness of jury service (e.g., increased compensation). Improving juror
facilities would be a massive and expensive undertaking, as far as grant funds
are concerned, but should be encouraged as a local undertaking.
Grant funds will not be required to implement any of these suggestions.
70. Investigator Training Programs
Training programs for prosecutor and defender investigators should be developed
and conducted. Based on existing CCCJ projects, it is estimated that this
project will cost $45,000.
71. Timeliness and Extensions in Appellate Courts
Appellate courts should adopt rules that will authorize sanctions on attorneys
or reporters to insure the timely preparation of briefs and the timely
preparation of the trial court record. Rules should also be adopted which
allow the administrative presiding justice exclusive power to grant
extensions. These rules will reduce delay in the appellate courts.
Grant funds will not be required to implement this solution.
72. Training Programs in Juvenile Law and Procedure
Judges, prosecutors and defenders should receive training in juvenile law and
procedure. Major developments in juvenile law and procedure have occurred in
the last decade and judicial agencies must be kept aware of those developments.
Approximately $50,000 will be needed to conduct two such training programs.
73. Examination of Problems of Branch Courts
This project will examine the problems associated with branch courts and propose
recommendations for dealing with these unique problems in order to utilize branch
court personnel and facilities more effectively. Solving the problems associated
with branch courts may also provide insight on some of the problems associated
with establishing a unified lower court system.
It is estimated that this study will cost $40,000.
- 92 -
74. Juror Education and Pre-Service Training
Uniform and improved procedures and aids for juror education and pre-service
training should be developed and implemented.
The project will involve development of uniform juror handbooks, films, as well
as the active encouragement of the education of jurors.
It is estimated that $75,000 will be needed to produce juror education materials
that will also be suitable for use by court clerical employees and members of
the public.
75. Technical Assistance for EDP Programs
Technical assistance should be available for judicial agencies that have existing
EDP programs and for all judicial agencies considering the implementation of EDP
programs. The assistance will improve the programs and operating procedures
of the individual agencies and would also be instrumental in establishing uniform
practices which will eventually facilitate the integration of such systems
throughout the state.
It is estimated that $60,000 will be needed to provide a team of EDP experts to
operate throughout the state.
76. Costs/Benefits Analysis of Equipment
A costs/benefits analysis of certain types of equipment appropriate for judicial
agencies will be conducted. Some of this equipment (e.g., dictation equipment,
automated typewriters) might greatly improve the efficiency of judicial
agencies.
Approximately $50,000 will be needed to conduct this analysis.
77. Evaluation of Impact where CCCJ Grants have Increased the Workloads of Judicial
Agencies
CCCJ grants to other elements of the criminal justice system have frequently
caused additional problems, especially where the grant activities have resulted
in increased arrests. This project will identify the extent of the increases and
the remedial steps necessary.
It is estimated that this evaluation will require $150,000 in grant funds.
78. Evaluation of Problems and Duplication Resulting from a Dual System of Prosecution
An evaluation of the problems and duplication resulting from a dual system of
prosecution would be of tremendous assistance in determining how best to correct
those problems. Such a study will require approximately $90,000.
79. Standards for Juror Security
Existing juror security provisions should be studied and recommended standards for
juror security be developed. In view of public demonstrations, possible threats
- 93 -
from parties, and attempts to bribe or illegally influence jurors, improved
security measures are needed to ensure juror safety and impartiality. Adoption
of the recommended standards will improve justice and decrease the reluctance
of citizens to serve as jurors.
Approximately $120,000 is needed to study the security provisions and develop
recommended standards of security.
80. Multi-County Traffic Court Referee
Four multi-county traffic court referees should be provided on an experimental
basis to relieve the judiciary of traffic duties. Traffic cases do not require
the expertise of a judge, and relieving judges of these minor cases will make
more efficient use of judicial resources. The projects will be implemented in
areas where the traffic caseloads of a single county do not warrant a full time
traffic court referee.
A referee and support will require approximately $30,000 or $120,000 for four
such referees and support.
81. Certification of Appellate Counsel
A commission will be created to establish certification standards and procedures
for appellate counsel in criminal appeals. The program will insure a high level
of professional competence among appellate counsel. Competent counsel will
relieve law clerks from much of the research work they must undertake to insure
that all issues have been raised.
82. Computerized Legal Research
Legal research materials should be programmed and stored in a computer for access
by judicial agencies throughout the state. This program will be up-dated to
include the most recent judicial decisions, new statutes and amended statutes.
This computerized information will provide valuable research assistance for all
judicial agencies and would improve the quality of research while reducing
research time.
It is estimated that $300,000 will be needed to implement this program.
83. Provide Assistance/Develop Standards for Improving
Assistance will be provided in developing standards for improving physical
facilities and equipment of judicial agencies. Many judicial agencies have
inadequate facilities and equipment.
It is estimated that $80,000 will be necessary to develop these standards.
84. Implement Court EDP Systems
This project will implement an EDP system in a major metropolitan court. The
EDP system will greatly improve the capability of the court to collect, compare
and display court management and scheduling information. This improved
capability will enable the court to deal more effectively with its caseload.
The EDP system will be valuable in improving case flow through the court.
- 94 -
Approximately $200,000 will be necessary to implement an EDP system in a
major metropolitan court.
85. Drafting a "Judicial Code"
Financial assistance will be provided for the drafting of a "Judicial Code".
Code sections affecting the judiciary are presently scattered throughout the
California Codes. This project will gather these scattered sections and
compile them into a comprehensive "Judicial Code".
Approximately $45,000 will be needed to provide two professional staff,
secretarial and operating expenses.
86. Improved Court Financing
A joint state/local commission should be created to recommend improved court
financing approaches. Responsibility for financing the courts is unevenly
distributed between state and county governments. The commission will develop
a rationale for proper distribution of the financing responsibility between state
and county government.
It is estimated that the project will cost $80,000.
87. Multi-County Court Coordinator/Administrator
A position of court coordinator/administrator should be created for a multi-county
area. The court coordinator/administrator will provide technical support in
court management to the presiding judges or court administrators of the counties
and counsel on the utilization of court facilities and automated data processing
systems within the area to identify opprtunities for improvement and coordinated
usage. This project should increase uniformity of practices in the multi-
county area and aid the improvement of management practices within the area.
Approximately $40,000 will be needed.
- 95 -
88. Development of Standards and Certification for Court Executives
Standards and procedures for certification should be developed for court
executives to insure a high level of professional competence in the admin-
istration of courts.
It is estimated that $50,000 will be needed for this project.
89. Development of Standards and Certification for Prosecutors and Defenders
A commission should be created to establish certification standards and
procedures for prosecutors and public defenders. The program will insure
a high level of professional competence and aid in insuring that the criminal
justice system operates in an efficient and just manner. When competent
criminal counsel participate in criminal proceedings, time-consuming procedures
should be sharply curtailed.
This project will cost approximately $60,000.
90. Certification for Petitions for Hearing in the Supreme Court
A study should be conducted to determine the feasibility of and develop
procedures for an experimental certification program for Petitions for
Hearing in the Supreme Court. Cases that are to be heard by the Supreme
Court would be certified by the lower appellate courts. This screening
process would remove a considerable burden from the Supreme Court, which
must presently screen all appeals before deciding to hear them. This
process would be similar to that required by Penal Code Section 1237.5
which provides for certification of appeals from a conviction on a plea
of guilty or nolo contendre.
It is estimated that the study will cost $75,000.
91. Court Security Standards
Court security standards and procedures for physical facilities, equipment
and personnel should be developed for use throughout the state. These standards
and procedures will be designed to prevent tragic events of the sort that
have recently occurred in courtrooms. Measures would also be developed for
handling public demonstrations at court facilities.
It is estimated that $80,000 will be needed to develop these standards and
procedures.
92. Development of Standards and Certification of Judicial Agency Support Personnel
Standards and procedures for certification will be developed for judicial agency
support personnel (clerks, bailiffs, reporters, investigators, etc.) to increase
their respective levels of competence and to encourage greater uniformity in the
performance of their responsibilities.
It is estimated that $70,000 will be needed for this study, considering the
varied nature of the duties involved.
- 96 -
93. Encourage Court Consolidation and Court Reorganization
Experiments with court consolidation and court reorganization should be
encouraged to determine the most efficient lower court structure. The
results of these experiments should provide data on the feasibility of
court consolidation or court reorganization.
Grant funds will not be required for this program.
94. Integrated Criminal Justice Information System
Assistance should be provided for the creation of integrated criminal justice
information system throughout the state. This would involve integration of
information systems within jurisdictions and ultimately the integration of
all jurisdictions into a statewide criminal justice information system. Such
an integrated system would greatly facilitate the operation of judicial
agencies and the coordination of judicial agencies with other elements of
the criminal justice system.
Such a project would be expensive in view of the diverse nature of information
systems of different agencies within a jurisdiction and the diverse nature
of information systems in jurisdictions throughout the state.
95. Improved Use of Witnesses
Methods should be developed for arriving at better estimates of when witnesses
will be required for court appearances. Improved and increased use of "on-
call" techniques for utilizing witness will be encouraged. Subpoenas for
witnesses should be issued for the specific time that the witness will be
required in court.
It is estimated that $80,000 will be needed to develop the methods and disseminate
the methods throughout the state.
96. Area Court Administration Project
An area court administration project composed of an area administrative judge
and an area court administrator could be established. Presently, there is
an administrative void between the trial courts and the State Administrative
Office of the Courts. The area administrative judge will aid in implementing
statewide judicial policies embodied in statutes, Rules of Court and Standards
of Judicial Administration. The area administrator will assist local trial
courts with problems of planning, organization and management. The area admin-
istrator will also provide staff and technical support to the area administrative
judge.
This project will cost about $90,000.
97. Consolidation of Services and Administration of Superior and Municipal Courts
This project will consolidate the services and administration of all the municipal
and superior courts of a county. It will eliminate the unnecessary duplication
of services and administration that presently exists.
Approximately $120,000 will be needed to hire temporary staff, develop the procedures
and regulations and to implement the new administrative structure.
- 97 -
98. Uniform Local Rules of Court and Judicial Council Approval of Local Rules
Uniform local rules of court should be developed and be subject to the
approval by the Judicial Council before they become effective. The nine
superior courts in the Fifth Appellate District developed a uniform set
of local rules which became effective in 1968. Comments from members
of the bar and other California courts and various national organizations
indicate that these uniform local rules have been well received and have
eliminated in large part the research problems and confusion that resulted
from varying court practices.
It is estimated that $50,000 will be required to provide the staff necessary
to develop uniform local rules in the Appellate Districts that do not
presently have uniform local rules.
99. State Public Defender System
Legislation should be considered to implement a defender system to handle
indigent criminal appeals. The establishment of this system will greatly
improve the quality of legal appellate work by replacing the young, inexperienced
attorneys who handle the majority of criminal appeals with a full-time pro-
fessional staff of criminal appellate lawyers. Alternatives such as the
Appellate Defender Inc. Program in San Diego should also be examined.
Grant funds will not be needed for this project.
100. Dissemination of Information About Changes
Information about the nature and effect of changes should be disseminated
promptly to all judicial agencies which may be affected by the changes or
who should be aware of them. This will improve agency response to changes
and provide for an easier implementation of the changes.
Grant funds are not required.
101. Multi-Court/Multi-County Court Administrator for Trial Courts
A court administrator, supporting staff and operating expenses should be pro-
vided for large multi-court counties or for a number of contiguous counties
with only a few courts. The administrators would be able to improve adminis-
tration and coordination among these courts. They would be particularly
valuable in instituting common calendaring systems among them.
This project will cost approximately $400,000.
102. Standards and Certification for Judicial Positions
A project should be implemented to develop standards and procedures of certifi-
cation for judicial positions. Adoption of these standards and procedures will
assist in the appointment of qualified personnel to the bench.
It is estimated that this project will cost $60,000.
- 98 -
103. Specialized Prosecution Teams
A specialized prosecution team will be provided to a district attorney's
office. The team would control all investigation and prosecution in a
specified criminal area such as drugs, consumer fraud, burglary, etc.
The team would become well-acquainted with the law and problems in its
area of specialization and thereby improve the quality of prosecution in
this area.
It is estimated that $100,000 will be necessary to provide such a team to
a district attorney's office of sufficient size to realize the benefits of
such a team.
104. Evaluation of Probation Subsidy Program
A study should be conducted to evaluate the probation subsidy program to
determine what effects the program has on sentencing patterns, whether or
not it contributes to a lack of uniformity in sentencing.
It is estimated that the study will cost $60,000.
105. Informing the Public About the Judicial System
A massive effort to disseminate accurate information about the judicial
system to the public should be undertaken. Greater use of modern media
techniques will probably be most effective in educating the public about
the nature and role of the judicial system. It has been suggested that possible
projects might include: 1) Weekly news reports on conviction statistics to
demonstrate the actual performance of the courts; 2) Use of cartoons
(e.g., "Believe it or not") to relay information on accomplishments or
statistics concerning judicial agencies; 3) Televised or written "tests" on
the nature and functions of the judicial system.
It would also be necessary to develop educational information for dissemination
on local levels to civic organizations, school groups, professional and fraternal
organizations.
It is estimated that $500,000 would be needed to initiate this massive educational
effort on a statewide basis. This would include development of educational
material and techniques and media time or space. Many of the educational programs
could probably be carried by the media on a public service basis.
106. Articulation of Functions and Responsibilities of Judicial Agencies
The respective functions and responsibilities of the various judicial agencies
should be articulated. This project will identify problem areas where various
agency roles are not clearly identified. This articulation of functions and
responsibilities will facilitate increased cooperation and coordination among
the various agencies.
It is estimated that $90,000 will be needed to identify and articulate the
functions and responsibilities of the various agencies throughout the state.
- 99 -
107. Educating the Media About the Judicial and Legal System
A statewide effort to educate representatives of the media about California's
judicial and legal system should be conducted. The program will cover the
nature, duties, functions and role of the judicial system. Problems of media
inaccuracies concerning the judicial system, media coverage of criminal cases,
and the role within the media can play in educating the public will be emphasized.
Conducting these programs and providing educational and informational materials
to the media representatives may secure public service presentations by the media
for education of the public. It might be desirable to coordinate this program
with programs and materials directed at informing the public about the judicial
system (see Solution 105.)
Approximately $250,000 will be needed to initiate this statewide educational
program. This would include development of the program and materials.
- 100 -
EVALUATION
EVALUATION
Timetable for submitting System Development Program Evaluation to the
CCCJ:
1. January and June 1973 -- Initial Reports
2. January 1974 - - Final Report on Portions of the Program
3. June 1974 - Final Report
Evaluation of the System Development Program and its constituent projects
is of prime importance. A thorough and accurate evaluation of the program
is necessary in order to determine the success of the program itself and
of the systems methodology used in developing the program. The following section
will describe the approach selected for conducting the evaluation of projects
and the entire program, the elements of that evaluation and the responsibilities
for conducting the evaluation.
Each project will articulate a clear statement of objectives for the project.
The objectives of the System Development Program as stated in the section
of this document entitled, "General Policies, Constraints and Objectives for
System Development Funds" will be referred to in determining project objectives.
As each project is implemented, periodic reports will be required from the
project which document the initiation or operation of the project, activities
undertaken since the previous report and problems or accomplishments in conducting
the project. In addition, copies of all project publications or reports will be
submitted.
Each project will provide a brief description of existing conditions prior to
initiation of the project and any changes brought about by the project. Where
possible, those descriptions should be supported by relevant data. Each project
should also report on the prospect for continuation or incorporation of the
project into the existing system. The project (especially demonstration projects)
should indicate whether and to what extent other jurisdictions are adopting
project methods or findings. Reports should also include assessments of the
project by participants or users. Finally, project evaluation reports should
describe the effect the project has had on other elements of the criminal justice
system.
All project evaluations should be designed in such a way as to allow incorporation
into an overall evaluation of the entire System Development Program. Evaluation
measures should begin not later than halfway through the project period and should
be almost completed not less than one month prior to the final date of the project.
- 101 -
A sub-committee of the Courts Task Force will be given the responsibility
for supervising project evaluations and for submitting periodic reports to
the CCCJ. The sub-committee will meet monthly and may be divided into
sub-units with responsibility for all projects within given problem areas.
This will enable evaluation of the System Development Program by problem
area. The sub-committee will prepare a report on the full System Development
Program.
Initial evaluation reports describing inter alia, the results of the initiation
of projects will be submitted to the CCCJ in January and June, 1973. Another
report will be made in January, 1974. The final report will be submitted in
June, 1974 since some projects may be of 18 months duration and since some
projects might not begin until January, 1973.
- 102 -
APPENDIX
1973 PROGRAM GUIDELINES
CATEGORY E -
IMPROVEMENT OF PROSECUTION, COURTS AND LAW REFORM
PRIORITIES AND PROGRAM STATEMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
This statement is designed to articulate the goals, priorities and policies
of the Improvement of Prosecution, Courts and Law Reform Task Force. It
also serves as an accounting of the activities of the Courts Task Force
and the directions the Task Force has given to statewide planning for the
judicial area. This statement is intended to provide direction and
guidance to local, regional and statewide criminal justice agencies in
planning judicial programs.
Courts are the organizations formed for the express purpose of administer-
ing justice. Largely because of a rapid population expansion and the
development of a litigious society, the workload of our judicial system
has increased tremendously over the course of the past few years. Unfor-
tunately, developments and improvements in the day-to-day administrative
functions of the courts have not kept pace with the rapid increase in
workload. In concise terms, California needs study, overhaul, and reform
of its judicial structure.
The California court system has evolved over a period of years. The
methods employed to deal with problems have largely been piecemeal. There
has been little systematic planning and development on a statewide basis.
Innovations and efforts have been put to work locally for a variety of
reasons, and in many jurisdictions, problems have not been dealt with
effectively or even identified.
Adjudication is an integral and essential element of a criminal justice
system. Attempts to improve the quality of criminal justice which ignore
the courts, prosecutors and defenders will fall short of their objectives.
A comprehensive criminal justice plan must consider a balanced systemwide
approach to meet the challenge of crime in a free society.
II. CATEGORY SCOPE
The scope of the Courts Program is the adjudication process. That
process includes actions from the decision to file criminal charges
through the sentencing process.
III. CATEGORY GOALS
The goal of the Courts Program is to improve the administration of
justice throughout California.
(Approved 6/22/72)
F-1
IV. PRIORITIES
1. Reduction of undesirable delay at all levels of the judicial system
by: examination and identification of the causes and elements of
delay, establishment of improved procedures and practices, and
efficient utilization of the judiciary and related professional
disciplines.
2. Training of judges in the conduct of trials and administration of
the courts.
3. Providing material and operational assistance for courts, prosecutors
and defenders.
4. Examination of possible alternatives to judicial action.
5. Development of a systematic program of crime charging by prosecutors.
V. PROGRAMS
A. Reduction of Undesirable Delay at all Levels of the Judicial System
1. The Courts Task Force considers the reduction of undesirable
delay its most important priority. Congestion and delay are
subjects of concern to everyone from the Chief Justice of the
United States to the man in the street.
Delays in the administration of justice involve all levels of
the judicial system, prosecutors, defenders and all other
personnel and agencies which affect the adjudicatory system.
Further, since the courts must hear both civil and criminal
litigation, problems of civil delay are inextricably bound to
problems of criminal delay.
2. The dual guarantees of a fair and speedy trial are more than a
constitutional mandate, they are essential to an effective
criminal justice system. Therefore, the Courts Task Force is
concerned with the development of projects which will define
and remedy the causes of undesirable delay, increase the
efficient operation of the courts, develop improved procedures
and practices, and study the manpower needs of the judicial
system.
a. The problem of undesirable delay is a complex one and
encompasses many areas of the judicial process. Perhaps
the greatest problem included under this topic is a lack
of knowledge as to what the elements and causes of delay
are and how they operate to prevent the timely adjudication
of civil and criminal cases.
E-2
i. The Select Committee on Trial Court Delay, a "Blue
Ribbon" panel composed of three judges, three lawyers,
three laymen and liaison members from the Governor's
Office and both houses of the California Legislature,
assisted by a highly competent staff, has examined the
problem of delay. The Committee has made a number of
recommendations for change in court rules and practices
and statutes.
b. Effective management of existing resources is essential to
reduction of delay.
i. Calendar management teams composed of personnel trained
in judicial administration have been placed with the
superior courts of two metropolitan counties. These
teams will assist in the improvement and adoption of
calendaring techniques for the two courts. The ultimate
goal of these projects is the development of a calendar
management manual suitable for use in courts throughout
the State.
ii. Court executive positions have been created and financed
in two superior courts not having such positions. The
implementation of legislation authorizing the employment
of court executive officers is one of the recommendations
of the Select Committee on Trial Court Delay.
iii. An experiment with the use of traffic court commissioners
is also being conducted.
C. An exhaustive study of judicial caseloads is being conducted
to validate the weighted caseload system. The weighted
caseload system is designed to measure judicial workloads and
the need for additional judicial manpower. Use of this system
is preferable to use of unweighted caseload figures since the
latter makes no allowance for differences in types of cases
filed.
d. A study of witness scheduling practices has been completed.
Scheduling problems are a major contributing factor to delays.
The implementation of the suggestions proposed by that study
in conjunction with the results of a computer simulation of
scheduling problems will assist in the development of improved
scheduling techniques.
B. Training of Judges in the Conduct of Trials and Administration of the
Courts
1. Continuing education of the California judiciary is of critical
importance to the improvement of courts, prosecution and law
reform.
2. Projects which provide for the upgrading of judicial and pro-
fessional skills, the teaching of new developments in criminal
law and procedure and the teaching of management principles
and techniques are included in this program.
E-3
a. Support has been given to the California College of Trial
Court Judges and a workshop for justice court judges.
b. The Courts Task Force seeks to avoid duplicative efforts
and therefore has generally attempted to assist in improving
the quality and coverage of existing programs.
3. The Courts Task Force will cooperate with the Upgrade Law
Enforcement Personnel Task Force in the development and
implementation of training programs for prosecutors, defenders
and clerical and support personnel.
C. Material and Operational Assistance for Courts Prosecutors and
Defenders
1. The judicial system has been somewhat slow to adopt technological
advances. For example, a significant amount of time is wasted
in processing large amounts of paper through traditional methods.
This program is intended to assist the judicial system in its
day-to-day operations.
a. A study of the application of electronic data processing
techniques in the operation of the courts is now being
conducted. That study will produce a modular integrated
court information system adaptable to use in small,
medium and large courts. The results of that study should
materially affect the direction of future E.D.P. projects.
b. The Courts Task Force has also approved projects designed
to implement court information systems.
C. Material assistance to superior court judges in the form of
distribution a criminal benchbook has been provided by the
Courts Task Force. The benchbooks are comprehensive and
practical reference manuals on criminal law and procedure
designed for use at trial. These books will greatly assist
superior court judges in the conduct of criminal trials.
D. Examination of Possible Alternatives to Judicial Action
1. Courts, prosecutors and defenders must deal with a massive caseload
which may not be amenable to judicial treatment. Various drug and
alcohol violations are often cited as best treated outside the
criminal justice system.
a. The Courts Task Force considers this problem important
enough to warrant investigation into possible alternative
treatment for certain offenses. However, the Task Force
also recognizes that any such alternatives must receive
legislative approval before implementation. Therefore,
while the examination of alternatives is a worthwhile
endeavor, greater emphasis should be placed upon developing
better judicial understanding of these problems.
i. The Courts Task Force has approved a drug abuse
institute for judicial and other criminal justice
personnel.
E-4
E. Development of a Systematic Program of Crime Charging by Prosecutors
1. The decision to file criminal charges is a basic and important
step in the criminal process, but even more crucial are the
questions of what specific charges and how many should be filed.
Another underlying query is how many counts are to be charged as
well. At present, practices in prosecutorial agencies through
the state vary widely. Further, there is a tendency in many
counties to file multiple charges describing a number of offenses
as well as several counts under individual crimes.
2. To date, there is a definite paucity of descriptive information
regarding the policies and practices of crime charging throughout
the state. There is a feeling on the part of many lawyers that
prosecutors file multiple charges knowing that most of them will
be dismissed. Multiple charging is thought to facilitate plea
bargaining. In short, there is no scientific study which validly
documents the crime charging process in California. However, the
distinct variation between California counties and the wide
variances that exist have been documented. Comparative data
reveals that a significant percentage of felony complaints are
dismissed or reduced to misdemeanor charges. The true rationale
behind the variance has yet to be explained.
VI. GENERAL POLICIES OF THE IMPROVEMENT OF PROSECUTION, COURTS AND LAW REFORM
TASK FORCE
A. Statewide Impact
1. The California judicial system is essentially a statewide one.
Therefore projects approved by the Courts Task Force generally
possess a potential for statewide application. The Courts
Task Force will not reject projects designed strictly for local
effect but it will give preference to those projects which
will further the development of the judicial system throughout
the state.
2. Special emphasis is given to programs which require statewide
efforts and for which no other source of funding is available.
3. Preference is also given to programs which will further the
goals developed as part of the statewide planning process.
B. Innovation
1. A project need not be innovative to gain the approval of the
Courts Task Force. However, the Task Force will give preference
to programs designed to bring about significant improvement
where, because of experimental nature, no other possible source
of funding exists.
2. The Courts Task Force has developed a policy against support
of programs whose merit and value have been conclusively proven
and in view of the substantial savings such programs bring to
local agencies, are quite properly a legitimate concern of that
local agency.
E-5
3. Where a project adds to or modifies an on-going operation, there
must be a showing of coordination between that project and the
on-going operation.
C. Local Commitment
1. The Courts Task Force requires evidence of a commitment on the
part of local agencies to continue a program which was designed,
if successful, to be incorporated as a part of the local
criminal justice system.
2. Similarly, the Task Force requires some assurance that the studies
it supports will be implemented.
D. Public Information and Education Concerning the Functions of the
Judicial and Legal System
1. Public understanding and support of the judicial and legal
system is essential.
2. The Courts Task Force is cooperating with other task forces
concerned with the problems of community relations and public
education regarding the criminal justice system.
E. Projects Dealing Primarily with Civil Law Problems
1. The Courts Task Force has generally discouraged projects
designed to remedy problems which are primarily civil law
in nature and have no appreciable impact upon the criminal
justice system.
F. Pre-Trial Release Programs
1. The Courts Task Force wholeheartedly endorses pre-trial release
programs such as misdemeanant citations and release on own
recognizance and recommends their adoption. These programs have
done much to alleviate inequities in the bail system. However,
the Courts Task Force has concluded that pre-trial release
programs have conclusively proven their success, effectiveness
and value; result in substantial human and monetary savings to
the public and to local agencies; and therefore, should not
require funding from the California Council on Criminal Justice.
G. Construction and Equipment
1. Construction of additional facilities (courtrooms, office space,
etc.) is an almost universal need. However, due primarily to the
limited amount of funds available, the Courts Task Force has
been forced to discourage these projects. Construction programs
and programs which require large amounts of costly equipment
(computers, etc.) have generally been discouraged on this basis.
E-6
H. Augmentation of Existing Agency Staffs
1. The need for additional skilled personnel is another commonly
articulated problem of the judicial area. Since there are
simply not enough funds to meet staffing needs of all agencies
throughout the state, and since selection of those few agencies
whose staffs could be augmented with available federal funds
poses. an impossible problem, the Courts Task Force has avoided
programs designed to augment existing agency staffs.
VII. CONCLUSION
The Courts Task Force does not intend to present this statement as the
final word in comprehensive planning for the judicial area. Indeed,
this is only the beginning.
The Courts Task Force has and will continue to engage in investigation,
analysis, and planning of judicial improvement. As new developments
occur and as a more comprehensive understanding of judicial problems
becomes available, the Task Force hopes to actively encourage projects
designed to remedy the problems thus identified.
E-7
JUDICIAL PROCESS PROJECTS
1969
(0068)
L.A. REGIONAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEM
Two Year Project
Total Cost: $726,622
First Year Grant Funds: $146,351
Summary: Analysis of L.A. County Criminal Justice Information Systems,
suggested improvements and plan for implementation.
(0101)
SAN BERNARDINO SYSTEM STUDY OF MUNICIPAL COURT CALENDAR AND WITNESS SCHEDULING
One Year Project
Total Cost: $22,500
Grant Funds: $13,500
Summary: Study of calendaring and notification of witness procedures in
the Municipal Court.
1970
(0122)
MUNICIPAL COURT AUTOMATED PROCEDURES PROJECT (Central Orange Municipal Court)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $241,700
Grant Funds: $145,000
Summary: Would computerize traffic and related cases information in
Orange County Municipal Court Districts.
(0151)
CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION CONTROL (Santa Clara County) (In Conjunction with
Science and Technology and Corrections Task Forces)
Four Year Project
Total Cost: $1,330,000
First Year Grant Funds: $106,770
Summary: Creation of system for gathering retrieval and interchange of
information on criminal activities, custody status and judicial
process.
Object: To provide the data base and tools for planning and testing of
alternative strategies.
-1-
(0189)
CALIFORNIA COLLEGE OF TRIAL JUDGES (Regents of U.C.)
Two Year Project
Total Cost: $128,800
Second Year (1971) Grant Funds: $38,500
Summary: Assistance in conducting a two week education program for
approximately 70 California Judges, most of whom are recent
appointees to the Bench.
(0395)
A STUDY TO EVALUATE, VALIDATE AND IMPROVE THE WEIGHTED CASELOAD SYSTEM
(Judicial Council)
16 Month Project
Total Cost: $151,750
Grant Funds: $79,250
Summary: In depth study by professional consulting firm of the "Weighted
Caseload System" used by the Judicial Council in determining the
need for additional Judicial manpower. Will look into procedures
and criteria for establishing weights. Will also examine
allocation of judicial time.
(0397)
PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR MODULAR CONSTRUCTION OF THE MODEL CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER
(Ventura County) (In Conjunction with Corrections Task Force)
One Year Project
Total Cost: $158,900
Grant Funds: $84,280
Summary: Development of preliminary planning for a "Model Criminal Justice
Center". Study of facilities for corrections law enforcement and
hall of justice, containing modern automated information systems.
1971
(0461)
CALENDAR MANAGEMENT TEAM DEMONSTRATION PROJECT (Judicial Council)
Two Year Project
Total Cost: $117,800
First Year Grant Funds: $34,500
Summary: Placement of specially trained two-man calendar management team
in the Sacramento County Superior Court.
Goal:
Development of model procedures for handling court calendars.
-2-
(0455)
SELECT COMMITTEE ON TRIAL COURT DELAY
One Yeal Project
Total Cost: $130,500
Grant Funds: $116,000
Summary: Convenes "blue ribbon" committee with staff support financed
by grant funds to study the problem of trial court delay.
(0468)
MAXIMIZING THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT IN THE CALIFORNIA
COURTS (Judicial Council)
17 Month Project
Total Cost: $331,400
Grant Funds: $198,800
Summary: Employment of consulting firm to design automation of routine
clerical and administrative functions for Superior and Municipal
Courts.
( 0496)
SAN MATEO COUNTY DEFENDER INTERNSHIP PROGRAM (San Mateo County Bar Association)
One Year Project
Total Cost: $36,700
Grantee Funds: $21,500
Summary: Places law students (under student practice act) with San Mateo
private defender program.
May 5,
1971
(0544)
DEVELOPMENT OF GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM IN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION (USC)
Two Year Project
Total Project Cost: $503,900
First Year Grant Funds: $112,973
(Note: This project was approved pending satisfactory budget revisions)
Summary: Would create graduate degree program in judicial administration
similar to the Institute for Court Management in Denver.
(0555)
CRIMINAL JUSTICE CLINIC (Hastings College of the Law)
Two Year Project
Total Project Cost: $135,600
First Year Grant Funds: $46,384
Summary: Will finance program to provide classroom training for 60 students
yearly who will be placed in Bay Area criminal justice agency
offices (prosecutors and public defenders).
-3-
(0556)
PROBLEMS OF NARCOTICS AND DRUG ABUSE INSTITUTE (Judicial Council)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $42,600
Grant Funds: $25,000
Summary: Would set up seminar on drug abuse laws, treatment and
procedures relying on background materials prepared by project
staff. The conclusions and recommendations of the seminar
would be widely distributed.
(0586)
CALENDAR MANAGEMENT TEAM DEMONSTRATION PROJECT (Judicial Council)
Two Year Project
Total Project Cost: $131,318
First Year Grant Funds: $38,500
Summary: Project identical to Sacramento Calendat Team but will be placed
in San Francisco Superior Court.
(0615)
DEFENDER ORIENTATION PROGRAM (California Public Defenders Association)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $43,300
Grant Funds: $20,700
Summary: Would provide assistance in staging a weeklong seminar for new
public defenders. Held at Boalt Hall, in August 1971, room
and board and speaker financed by Council funds.
(0630)
PROSECUTION TRAINING FOR DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
(District Attorney and County Counsel Association)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $26,700
Grant Funds: $20,000
Summary: Would finance attendance of 20 California prosecutors at the
National District Attorney's College in Houston, Texas, in
July and August 1971. Travel, tuition, room and board and
expenses of participants provided by Council.
July 7,
1971
(0168)
LAW IN A FREE SOCIETY (STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA)
Second
Year
Three Year Project
Funding
Total Project Cost: $667,000
Grant Funds: $400,000
-4-
Summary: Will finance the implementation of a statewide educational program
for students and teachers devoted to the development of support for
the legal and political institutions of our state and nation and to
provide students with an understanding of the law, the purposes of the
law, and the problems with which the law must deal.
0635
REPRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF SUPERIOR COURT CRIMINAL TRIAL BENCH BOOK
(Judicial Council)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $38,014
Grant Funds: $20,136
Summary: Will finance reproduction and distribution of the Los Angeles
Superior Court Bench Book to all California Superior Court
Judges. The Bench Book is a comprehensive manual suitable for use
during trial on the practical application at trial of criminal law
and procedure.
0720
UNIFICATION OF STATE TRIAL COURTS - FEASIBILITY STUDY (Judicial Council)
Five Month Project
Total Project Cost:
$51,445
Grand Funds: $38,480
Summary: Will finance an in-depth feasibility study of a unified trial court
system in California. The study, conducted by a highly qualified
consulting firm, will recommend a plan for implementing such
unification as proposed in measures now pending before the
California legislature.
0729
JUDICIAL TRAINING FOR JUSTICE COURT JUDGES (Judges, Marshalls and
Constables Association)
Four Month Project
Total Project Cost:
$8,330
Grant Funds: $4,730
Summary: Will finance attendance (travel, tuition and expenses) of six
California Justice Court Judges at the American Academy of
Judicial Education.
0731
SAN FRANCISCO OWN RECOGNIZANCE RELEASE PROJECT (San Francisco Institute
for Criminal Justice)
Three Year Project
Total Project Cost:
$212,914
Grant Funds: $159,684
Summary: Will finance the continuation of a highly successful O.R. Program
in San Francisco and add to that program: misdemeanant citation,
station house release, release of defendants in hospital custody
and a consultative secretariat to assist other jurisdictions in
creating pre-trial release programs.
-5-
0733
JUDICIAL TRAINING FOR JUSTICE COURT JUDGES (Judges, Marshalls and
Constables Association)
Four Month Project
Total Project Cost: $20,605
Grant Funds: $14,605
Summary: Will finance securing the services of six qualified consultants to
improve the quality of presentations made at the annual Justice
Court Workshop. Will also finance travel and living expenses of
an additional 50 Justice Court Judges who would otherwise be
unable to attend the two-day workshop.
0744
COURT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER-DEMONSTRATION PROJECT (Santa Barbara County)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $34,939
Grant Funds: $23,000
Summary: Will finance placement of an executive officer, skilled in court
management techniques, with the Santa Barbara County Superior
Court. The project will attempt to demonstrate the economy
and efficiency which can be realized in utilizing a court
administrative officer.
Sept. 1,
1971
(0769)
CONSUMER FRAUD TASK FORCE (Department of Consumer Affairs)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $37,370
Grant Funds: $24,070
Summary: Grant funds will finance staff research for the Consumer
Fraud Task Force. That research will study various types
of fraud and their impact, list and evaluate present
consumer laws, determine whether enforcement agencies are
equipped to deal with the problem and recommend remedial
legislation.
(0783)
SIMULATION TEST OF MUNICIPAL COURT CASE SCHEDULING METHODS (San Bernardino Co.)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $103,100
Grant Funds: $61,000
Summary: Will use computer simulation techniques to test court case
scheduling methods recommended by a 1970 CCCJ study. Will
also examine various scheduling approaches. Object: the
development of improved court calendaring methods.
-6-
(0813)
PUBLIC DEFENDER INVESTIGATOR TRAINING SEMINAR (Defense Investigators)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $55,122
Grant Funds: $20,450
Summary: Will finance training seminars for public defender investigators.
Emphasis will be upon development of defense investigative skills
and insight into the entire ceiminal justice system. Grant funds
will be used for travel and living expenses of participants.
Nov. 4,
1971
(0189)
CALIFORNIA COLLEGE OF TRIAL JUDGES (Regents of U.C.) - Third Year Funding
Three Year Project
Total Cost (3rd Year): $156,441
Grant Funds: $54,586
Summary: Will finance a two week education program for approximately
70 California judges, most of whom are recent appointees to
the bench. Will also distribute copies of a Juvenile Court
Benchbook produced at the College to all California Superior
Court Judges, referees and commissioners.
Feb. 1,
1972
(0941)
PILOT PROGRAM IN LEGAL SPECIALIZATION (State Bar of California)
One Year Project
Total Project Cost: $86,787
Grant Funds: $61,783
Summary: Will finance development of standards and procedures for
certification of attorneys in criminal law practice.
(0957)
OPERATION BENCHMARK (Conference of California Judges)
Three Year Project
Total Project Cost (First Year): $57,756
Grant Funds: $33,756
Summary: Will finance staff to assist local courts in identifying
public concerns with the judicial system and assist in
fostering cooperation and communication among the bench,
bar and public. Will help to develop public information
program for the judiciary.
-7-
April 4,
1972
(0461)
CALENDAR MANAGEMENT TEAM DEMONSTRATION PROJECT (Judicial Council) -
Second Year Funding
Three Year Project
Total Cost (Second Year): $69,092
Grant Funds: $45,143
Summary: Will continue operation in the Sacramento Superior Court
of a specially trained two man calendar management team
to describe and catalog effective calendaring procedures,
compile a calendar management manual, and assist in the
implementation of improved calendaring practices.
(0555)
CRIMINAL JUSTICE CLINIC (Hastings College of the Law) Second Year
Funding
Two Year Project
Total Cost (Second Year): $54,150
Grant Funds: $40,600
Summary: Will finance continuation of program to place 60 senior law
students in criminal justice agencies in an attempt to provide
practical training supplemented by seminars and classroom
discussions.
(0586)
CALENDAR MANAGEMENT TEAM (City and County of San Francisco) - Second
Year Funding
Two Year Project
Total Cost (Second Year): $67,845
Grant Funds: $38,500
Summary: Will continue operation of team similar to Sacramento Calendar
Management Team in the San Francisco Superior Court. The two
teams will cooperate in the development of model calendar
management procedures. In addition, the San Francisco team
will also provide direct operational assistance to the
San Francisco Superior Court.
(0615)
DEFENDER ORIENTATION PROGRAM (California Public Defenders Association) -
Second Year Funding
Three Year Project
Total Project Cost (Second Year): $48,661
Grant Funds: $18,480
Summary: Provides funding for a week-long orientation session for
newly appointed deputy public defenders.
(0630)
PROSECUTION TRAINING FOR DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS (District Attorney and County Counsel Association) -
Second Year Funding
Three Year Project
Total Project Cost (Second Year): $29,700
Grant Funds: $20,000
-8-
Summary: Will send 20 experienced California prosecutors to a month-
long Career Prosecutor's Course in Houston. Operated by
the National College of District Attorneys, the course covers
subjects such as administration and office management,
budgeting, automatic data processing, recent changes in law
and procedure and advanced trial practice. The attendees will
serve as a nucleas for a California Prosecutors Institute.
(0733)
JUDICIAL TRAINING FOR JUSTICE COURT JUDGES AND CONSTABLES (Judges,
Marshals and Constables Association) one Second Year Funding
Total Project Cost (Second Year): $35,600
Grant Funds: $25,000
Summary: Will provide professional assistance in conducting two
identical workshops (held at different times and different
places) for most of California's justice court judges and
constables. Financial assistance will also be provided for
those otherwise unable to attend. Major presentations will
be published and widely distributed.
(0829)
ORANGE COUNTY JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEM (Orange County)
Two Year Project
Total Project Cost (First Year): $265,336
Grant Funds: $159,201
Summary: Will expand present traffic warrant system to criminal and
bench warrants, set up central warrant system and create
subject in process case monitoring system.
(0873)
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DEFENDER PROJECT (Judicial Council)
Three Year Project
Total Project Cost (First Year): $166,500
Grant Funds: $124,000
Summary: Will provide counsel in 140 indigent criminal appeals.
Project staff attorneys will act as counsel in one-half
of the cases and assist private attorneys in handling the
remainder.
(0949)
ATTENDANCE AT DRUG ABUSE INSTITUTE (Judicial Council)
Total Project Cost: $32,500
Grant Funds: $19,500
Summary: Will provide financial assistance (travel, room and board)
for 130 leading judges and officials in attending a three-
day seminar on the administration of narcotics statutes
and problems stemming from drug abuse.
(1002)
PROGRAM FOR EXPERIMENTATION WITH A MODEL CRIMINAL TRIAL COURT
(McGeorge School of Law)
Total Project Cost: $104,000
Grant Funds: $52,000
Summary: Will provide funds necessary to build a flexible program
into a trial courtroom which will be constructed.
-9-
(1047)
SAN JOSE MUNICIPAL COURT TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER (Santa Clara County)
Total Project Cost: $71,188
Grant Funds: $27,000
Summary: Will place commissioner and support staff in metropolitan
municipal court to hear minor traffic violations. The
placement of such violations in an informal setting will allow
greater individualized treatment of traffic violations and
will free court time for other matters.
(1092)
SUPERIOR COURT EXECUTIVE OFFICER (Ventura County)
Total Project Cost: $40,620
Grant Funds: $23,000
Summary: Will place an executive officer in the Ventura County
Superior Court.
(1115)
ATTENDANCE AT THE INSTITUTE FOR COURT MANAGEMENT (Judicial Council)
Total Project Cost: $48,450
Grant Funds: $32,700
Summary: Will provide financial assistance (travel, tuition, room
and board) for seven Californians to attend the Institute for
Court Management training program for court administrators.
(0168)
LAW IN A FREE SOCIETY (State Bar of California) - Third Year Funding
Three Year Project
Total Project Cost (Third Year Funding): $642,000
Grant Funds: $374,000
Summary: Will finance the implementation of a statewide educational
program for students and teachers designed to develop support
and understanding of the legal and political institutions
of our state and nation and to provide students with an
understanding of the law, the purposes of the law and the
problems with which the law must deal.
July,
1972
(0544)
GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM IN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION Second Year
Three-Year Project
Total Project Cost: $153,728
Grant Funds: $111,321
Summary: Will expand the graduate program in judicial administration
begun during the first year of the project.
(1161)
ADVANCED CRIMINAL LAW PROGRAM (California Public Defender's Assn.)
Three-Year Project
Total Project Cost: $99,445
Grant Funds: $33,485
-10-
Summary: Training seminar for 150 attorneys from defender offices through-
out the state. Presentations will be geared to attorneys with at
least two years of practical experience.
(1223)
CALIFORNIA REVIEW OF ABA STANDARDS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE (Judicial Council)
One-Year Project
Total Cost: $16,800
Project Cost: $12,600
Summary: Will study the feasibility of implementing in California the
recently approved standards and procedures adopted by both the
American Bar Association and the Institute of Judicial Adminis-
tration.
(1234)
MANAGEMENT TRAINING PROGRAM (Southern California Counties District Attorney's
Association)
One-Year Project
Total Cost: $71,410
Project Cost: $30,678
Summary: Will provide three seminars over a 12-month period concentrating
on skills necessary to improve the management and operation of
prosecutor offices.
Sept.,
1972
(1186)
COURT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (San Francisco)
One-Year Project
Total Cost: $212,201
Grant Funds: $103,538
Summary: Will install computerized record systems (calendaring, case
histories) in San Francisco courts. Will purchase equipment,
supplies and staff services, and will begin work on an informa-
tion system involving all criminal justice agencies. (Point
in fact: System is in preliminary stages of operation in
anticipation of funding.)
(1190)
SAN FRANCISCO JUVENILE COURT INFORMATION SERVICES
Three-Year Project
Total Cost: $534,300
First Year Grant Funds: $73,400
Summary: Designed to modernize the record keeping and information systems
of the San Francisco Juvenile Court by installation of Electronic
Data Processing methods and equipment. Computer services, record
storage and retrieval equipment will be rented. The proponent
plans a project duration of three years.
-11-
(1241)
ALTERNATIVE TO THE USE OF COURT REPORTERS IN THE MUNICIPAL COURTS (Judicial
Council)
One-Year Project
Total Project Cost: $66,719
Grant Funds: $50,080
Summary: Will locate recording devices in a minimum of 30 municipal court-
rooms, thereby testing the feasibility of using such equipment
to record court proceedings.
(1267)
CRIMINAL COURT COORDINATORS (Judicial Council)
Two-Year Project
Total Project Cost: $131,086
First Year Grant Funds: $48,642
Summary: Would finance the placement of a criminal Court Coordinator in
each of two Superior Courts. The Judicial Council would oversee
the project and select the two courts. The Presiding Judge of
each court would be in charge of direct supervision of his
respective court coordinator.
-12-