L.A. Supervisors Face Juvenile Justice Issue

February 4, 2014 By
 
A juvenile policy attorney and former public defender has an opinion piece making the rounds that makes a great argument for increasing funding to the Los Angeles juvenile justice system, but for once the issue is up to county officials instead of the wise ones in Sacramento. Carol Chodroff explains how the current attorney appointment scheme relies on a flat-fee contract that seems nearly designed for poor outcomes.
 
In her piece, which has appeared in both the Huffington Post and CityWatch, she reports that “… Los Angeles has one of the largest juvenile justice systems in the world, processing approximately 20,000 youths annually. About 11,000 of these youths are ineligible for representation by the public defender because of a conflict of interest. They are represented instead by appointed panel attorneys who receive a flat fee of approximately $350 for the life of a case, regardless of its complexity.
 
The bad news from this is that “… this perverse compensative scheme penalizes panel attorneys for doing the work required to zealously represent youthful clients. The resulting arbitrary and disparate treatment of children in the Los Angeles juvenile delinquency system is destructive, expensive, and unconstitutional.” But she also notes  that the good news is “… next week, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors will hear an important motion introduced by Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas to examine and recommend improvements to the delinquency representation system. The Board of Supervisors should pass this critical motion.”
 
You can read her argument in support of the county motion, via CityWatch, here.
 
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Some Teens Get A Special Court

January 31, 2014 By
 
One more alternative to California’s traditional justice system: Santa Monica High School has become the latest Los Angeles County school to adopt a “teen court” approach that lets fellow students judge their peers. The Santa Monica Daily Press reports that the program, launched in 1992, offers teenagers a voluntary alternative to delinquency court and the crime can be removed from their record.
 
The first court featured a visit from the police chief and several judges, but the teenagers handled the actual case themselves, according to a story by David Mark Simpson. The story follows a case of middle school computer hacking and how it gets handled. Citing a program official, the newspaper says the program has grown to include 23 schools.
 
The defendants, who are from other schools, opted to be tried by a jury of their peers rather than go to delinquency court. The incentive to be tried by a group of adolescents: The crime is expunged from their record.
See the story here.
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Civil Court Delays Lead To ‘Private’ Divorce Judges

January 30, 2014 By
 
California’s court delays may be frustrating many, but for some the solution might be “private judges” and opting into an alternative system. At “divorcehelp.com,” the private website warns that “.. although California law states that a couple can be divorced in six months and one day from the time one spouse is correctly served with proper divorce documents by the other, the reality is that it can take much, much longer.  One of the biggest culprits is the massive delays in the California court system.”
 
In some counties, the website contends, “… this means that it can take months or years to make it through the system, even in uncontested divorce cases. For example, initial divorce documents filed in Los Angeles County in April of 2013 were not being processed until December.

The service offers “mediation and private judge services” built upon 25 years of working with the court system. In other words, if you can afford the service you have a chance to bypass the gridlock. This is clearly something we’ll be seeing more of as the state dismantles its civil courts system. 
 
Check out the website here.
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , ,

Plaintiff, Defense Attorneys Agree On Court Funding Need

January 29, 2014 By
 
You just don’t find much common ground among plaintiffs attorneys, who tend to sue corporate entities, and the tort reformers, who tend to seek ways to make it harder to sue corporate entities. But both groups agree with California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye’s “Blueprint for Access to Justice” that she unveiled this month. Along with a spate of press outreach events, it represents this year’s budget offensive for the courts system.
 
The plaintiff attorney group Consumer Attorneys of California group’s president, John M. Feder, said in a press statement that “… we strongly support the restoration of adequate funding to California’s court system. For the past six years, as court funding has shriveled, California consumers and businesses have faced increasing obstacles to resolving disputes that can be fairly handled only by the courts. The long waits and travel inconveniences that have been created by closing courthouses, cutting staff and  reducing service hours must end. The Chief Justice’s proposal addresses the reality of what it will take to have a fully functioning judicial branch, and we think it is a step in the right direction toward restoring the access to justice that California citizens deserve in a society of laws.” 
 
 The Civil Justice Association of California, or CJAC, is among the state’s “tort reform” pro-business groups favoring the proposal.  The group’s website cites CJAC President Kim Stone saying that “… businesses in California need a fully functioning, appropriately funded judicial system. Court delays can turn a one year case into a three-year case, with greatly increased costs for both sides. CJAC applauds the $100M increase in judicial branch funding in the 2014 Governor’s proposed budget, but believes that the courts need and deserve more.”
 
There you have it. One of the few times you’ll read any report where those people are singing the same tune.
 
Find more on court funding from the plaintiff attorney point of view here.
 
And find more on court funding from the tort reform point of view here.
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , ,

Presiding Juvenile Court Judge who blasted system is calling it quits

January 28, 2014 By

Los Angeles is losing one of its more respected judges. And while Superior Court Judge Michael Nash, presiding judge of the county’s sprawling juvenile court system, is doing the old “new opportunities” dance, a column from the L.A. Times might offer insight into his frustrations amid budget cuts and after 29 years on the court.

Judge Michael Nash (photo from California Courts, www.courts.ca.gov)

Judge Michael Nash (photo from California Courts, www.courts.ca.gov)

The judge told the Metropolitan News that he has not decided if he will retire soon or serve out his term, which tuns through 2014. The MetNews also reported that Deputy District Attorney Dayan Mathai Thursday became the first candidate to take out papers to run for Nash’s seat. You can find that story (and if you’re interested in court election news, go ahead and bookmark it) here.

 
Judge Nash’s comments were a bit more reflective, and downright dismal, in Jim Newton’s L.A. Times column in June, 2013: “I feel as crappy about things as I have in a long time,” he says in the column. “It’s just very difficult to do the job in a meaningful way.” Newton explains that “… the source of Nash’s discontent is the swelling caseload that his judges are being asked to carry — a burden that reduces the amount of time they have to focus on the needs of the children whose futures they decide. As of today, he said, each of the court’s 20 full-time judges handles roughly 1,350 cases at any given time, well above the recommended maximum. Often, matters of grave consequence must be heard and decided in minutes, even when they call for careful deliberation.”
 
And (spoiler alert!) the Newton column ends with this: “… near the end of our conversation the other day, I asked whether he saw anything on the horizon that would make the work of his court easier and improve the lives of the children in its care. His answer: ‘No.'”
 
Read the telling column here.
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Media Effort For Court Budget Increase Continues

January 27, 2014 By
 
“Justice doesn’t come cheap,” begins the editorial in The Sacramento Bee, adding that “California’s top court official has put out a price tag for the Legislature and public to ponder – $1.2 billion. That’s how much more the judicial branch needs annually by 2016-17 to recover from four years of steep budget cuts and restore a fully functioning court system.”
 
Say what you will of California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, you have to admit she’s working the state’s mainstream media in hopes of getting more cash for the courts. The SacBee is the latest to note that she is rejecting the governor’s “$105 million” increase, saying it will mean more layoffs. The state capitol newspaper writes that “… Cantil-Sakauye asserts – and the Legislative Analyst’s Office agrees – that because the courts can’t dip into reserves as they did the last two years, that would be a net reduction….” She says another $161.5 million will just “tread water” and keep the current level of services, plus cover an increase in employee health and retirement costs.
 
The paper also notes that “… the Judicial Council must accept some responsibility. Before pulling the plug in 2012, it wasted hundreds of millions of dollars on a badly botched statewide computer system designed to bring the courts into the 21st century. Administrative offices got fat. There’s more work to do to make the courts more efficient.” Truly, the budget games have begun.
 
Read more here.
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , ,

Chino Newspaper Calls For Court Changes

January 24, 2014 By
 
The Chino Champion newspaper is among the local media organizations taking notice of civil justice rationing, and it has a proposal: Return the statewide courts system to local control. The paper writes that “… the court system is being squeezed to where it no longer serves the public as it should. Chino Valley residents have experienced the effects of its superior court closure, a move that adds costly hours or days to participants, whether they are plaintiffs, defendants, witnesses or jurors.”
 
The result, the Champion argues, is that relatively simple issues like code enforcement or traffic citations become more trouble than they are worth, both for government and residents. The suggestion: “we have advocated before that the courts return to the less expensive locally-based system to handle up to 90 percent of the matters such as traffic, small claims and custody orders which now clog the superior court system. This would be one step in restoring a sense of justice to the people.”
 
Read the editorial here.
 
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , ,

Court Delays Hitting Mentally Ill Defendants

January 21, 2014 By
 
Nobody has to tell civil courts advocates that some court functions enjoy more political attention and funding priority than others. But there’s increasing concern that mentally incompetent defendants are being stuck in county jails because there are just not enough hospital beds available, at least not ones designed for treating the mentally ill. Of course, the system is creating a revolving door as the lack of treatment leads people right back to local jails.
 
The San Luis Obispo Tribune has one of the better local stories about the trend, which is shaping up as a key issue for the upcoming state budget battle. Recent federal court rulings have increased focus on mental health under Obamacare, and these cases are sure to gain priority. The Tribune explains the situation: “The problem is particularly notable for defendants declared incompetent to stand trial. Competent defendants understand the charges against them and can assist their attorneys in their defense. If an attorney doesn’t think a client can do that, he declares a doubt in court. At that point, psychiatric evaluations are ordered. If a judge deems the defendant incompetent, the case is suspended, and the defendant is ordered to undergo treatment until competency is restored.” Except backlogs and cutbacks make that process nearly impossible,
 
Read the report here.
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

U.S. Chief Justice Pleads For More Funding, Warns Of Constitutional Issues

January 6, 2014 By
The new year began with a New Year’s Eve warning from U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts that sounds a lot like a federal version of what California has been going through for several years. In effect, the Chief Justice is warning that court cutbacks are threatening access to justice, especially when it comes to public defenders and other rights guaranteed by the constitution.
 
This is not exactly new. Chief Justice Roberts has repeatedly warned of funding problems, especially those caused by the so-called sequestration cuts. But this warning comes a few weeks after two top officials from the nation’s Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts issued similar warnings.
 
As usual, the debate focuses on criminal courts but civil court delays were also noted. The Chief Justice wrote that “… in the civil and bankruptcy venues, further consequences would include commercial uncertainty, lost opportunities, and unvindicated rights. In the criminal venues, those consequences pose a genuine threat to public safety.”
 
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Judicial Reporter Offers Stark 2013 Recap

December 31, 2013 By

For anyone dealing with rationed justice in 2013, it felt like a nearly constant barrage of bad news. Now Bill Girdner at The Courthouse News offers a year-in-review piece that quickly reminds us why – because it was a barrage of bad news. The story begins with “… it was a news-filled year for the courts in California, as they survived huge budget cuts and walked backwards on transparency and slightly forward on reform as the Legislature told them to open a warren of closed committees.”

He notes the budget cutting and that it was considered a “reprieve” when the governor decided not to cut the budget even more. He even recalls when In “… an old scandal returned as the council over-rode objections from judges and allowed telecommutingby the highly paid mandarins of the Administrative Office of the Courts… in a companion decision, the council voted to take a look at the salaries of those same bureaucrats but later decided that the inquiry should be conducted by the bureaucrats themselves. As the year winds down, the inquiry seems to have stalled.”

And maybe this slipped by in the holiday rush, but Girdner recalls that “… in December, the council elevated its technology committee to the status of internal committee, igniting a blast from judges who said the leaders of the tech committee and its task force had “proven themselves incompetent” and should be replaced.”

In terms of the legal community, it reads less like the summary of a year-in-review and more like an indictment. See the story here.

(Program Note: The CCM will not update tomorrow as we observe the New Year’s holiday)

Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
«Older Posts
Newer Posts»