|
|
|
A
Newsletter for the Court Community from the
National Center for State Courts
Spring 2004 - Vol. 7, No. 2
We Welcome Your Feedback - Please
Forward this Newsletter to Your Colleagues in the Courts
New
President Brings Experience and Vision to NCSC
It’s not the 30 some years of court experience that
first comes to court leaders’ minds when they reflect
on Mary McQueen’s recent selection as the new
president of the National Center for State Courts.
It’s her energy, her vision,
and her dedication that makes her stand apart, they say.
“Mary’s very energetic, in a very positive and
controlled way. She’s very motivating,” says Chief
Justice of the Washington State Courts Gerry Alexander,
who has worked closely with McQueen for years.
While McQueen’s energy level
puts her in a class of her own, it doesn’t overshadow
her experience and accomplishments. They speak for
themselves, Alexander says. For the 25 years McQueen has
worked with the Administrative Office of the Washington
State Courts (AOC), changes - lots of them - have taken
place. Today, the Washington State Court system serves
as a model to others in several areas, and McQueen’s
appointment as NCSC president is a testament to that,
Alexander says.
As state court administrator
for the past 16 years, McQueen has elevated and
broadened the level of services provided by the AOC,
Alexander says, which has significantly increased the
trial courts’ respect for and cooperation with the AOC.
“We don’t have a unified system,” Alexander
explains. “Cooperation of the trial courts wouldn’t
be easy if they didn’t like and respect Mary and her
staff.”
Some of McQueen’s most
significant accomplishments have taken place in the
areas of judicial education, jury reform, media
relations, and court interpretation. For example, she
initiated a program that reduced appellate court delay,
which trimmed backlog by more than 50 percent in one
year; created a court consulting unit that provides
courts professional management evaluations, including
recommendations to improve efficiency, reduce or control
costs, and maintain the quality of justice; played an
instrumental role in the passage of five constitutional
amendments to improve the administration of justice,
including forming and coordinating legislative and media
strategies; and successfully secured increased funding
for the judiciary during the economic recession when
other agency budgets were drastically reduced.
It’s that kind of proven
track record that the National Center’s Board was
looking to find in its next leader to meet the
nation’s state court's growing and evolving needs.
“Mary’s education,
experience, expertise, energy, and excitement about
joining the Center made her an outstanding candidate and
will serve her very well as the incoming president,”
said Chief Justice of Wisconsin Shirley Abrahamson, who
chaired the national search committee that helped select
the new president. Abrahamson is chair-elect of the
National Center’s Board.
As president, McQueen plans to
reach all levels of courts, working closely with court
leaders, court associations, and members of Congress.
“One of the biggest challenges facing state courts is
that social issues are being decided in the state
courts, such as gay marriage,” McQueen says. While
such delicate issues attract widespread public attention
to the courts, a general lack of public understanding
remains about how courts actually work. And that’s
something McQueen wants to turn around.
One way of accomplishing this
is to develop a strong partnership with members of
Congress, she says. “I want to help them understand
the importance their policies have on the courts.” She
also wants to help state courts develop community
outreach programs to educate the public about the inner
workings of the courts.
Education in all forms has
always been a priority to McQueen. She earned her law
degree from Seattle University in 1986 while working
full-time at the AOC, and in recent years she has served
as an associate professor at the Seattle Law School.
McQueen draws tremendous inspiration, she says, from
some of the country’s greatest legal minds, often
quoting Alexander Hamilton and Roscoe Pound. Among the
most inspiring, she says, comes from Alexander Hamilton
in the Federalist Papers, which she paraphrases:
“Nothing contributes more to the public’s esteem and
respect for government than the effective administration
of justice.”
McQueen is also motivated by
her belief that the National Center stands as a symbol
to courts around the country of the great work that can
be accomplished through the justice system. She
developed that belief through years of working closely
with the Center. In addition to serving as vice chair of
its Board of Directors in 1996, McQueen has been
involved with various NCSC committees and projects. In
addition, she’s worked closely with the National
Center through her participation and leadership in the
Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA), of
which the National Center serves as executive staff.
“My daughters grew up as
COSCA kids,” she says, explaining that her college-age
twin daughter began attending the annual CCJ/COSCA
conferences at age 6. “They have a strong sense of
respect for the courts and people I work with.” Her
family has been extremely supportive and excited about
her appointment as NCSC president, she says. They know
her experience has prepared her well – and they know
she’s got the energy to tackle new challenges.
When her husband asked her what
she wanted as a celebration present for her new
position, she replied, “A new pair of Nikes.”
The NCSC Board of Directors selected Mary Campbell
McQueen (second from left), court administrator of the
Washington State Courts, as the National Center's next
president. McQueen was introduced to NCSC's staff by Dan
Becker, Utah State Court Administrator; Roger Warren,
current NCSC President; and Shirley Abrahamson, Chief
Justice, Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
|
|
|
In April,
NCSC’s Board of Directors selected Mary Campbell
McQueen, court administrator of the Washington State
Courts, as the National Center’s next president.
McQueen’s appointment, effective in August, was a
unanimous decision, said Chief Justice of California
Ronald M. George, NCSC Board chair. McQueen replaces
Roger K. Warren who has served as NCSC president since
1996. McQueen is seen her talking to NCSC staffers Brian
Ostrom and Richard Schauffler.
|
|
|
Brown
v. Board Curriculum Brings Judges into the Classroom
When members of the National Center’s Race and Ethnic
Fairness Initiative considered ways to commemorate this
year’s 50th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s
decision in Brown v. the Board of Education, one idea
was developing a “judge in the classroom” curriculum
on the decision. With the expertise of Margaret Fisher
from the Washington State Administrative Office of the
Courts, the curriculum has gone from idea to reality.
“Members of the initiative
felt it was important that judges be directly involved
in explaining the continuing significance of the
landmark civil rights decision to younger
generations,” said David Rottman, the Initiative’s
chairman and a principal court research consultant at
NCSC. “A curriculum that would engage high school
students and draw them into a dialogue on the subject of
racial fairness and the role of the courts seemed like
an excellent way to accomplish that.”
Written by Fisher for students
in grades 9-12, the curriculum takes approximately 50
minutes to present — about one class period. Written
to be presented by judges, the curriculum identifies the
role played by courts in changing social policy and
examines the impact of court decisions in today’s
world, as well as helps students understand the
historical development in race discrimination and civil
rights in the United States. The interactive curriculum
includes role playing, probing questions, candid
discussion, and the opportunity for students to stand up
for their opinions.
“The unfulfilled promise of
the Brown case escalates this historically significant
case to a pressing social issue faced by public school
students today,” said Fisher. “Students still
grapple with the competing values presented by
neighborhood schools, busing, school-assignment plans,
the importance of integration, and minority-focused
public schools.”
The Brown v. Board of Education
curriculum was introduced by Fisher at the annual
meeting of the National Consortium on Racial and Ethnic
Fairness in the Courts held in Washington, D.C., this
April. “The participants at the Consortium meeting
were highly receptive to the curriculum,” said Fisher.
“They forcefully expressed the same diversity of
viewpoints on how to address the legacy of Brown as
students in today’s high schools. By the time the
session ended, one judge in the audience had already
committed to getting his statewide law-related education
program to use this curriculum.”
The curriculum is available for
free download at www.courts.wa.gov/education/lessons/BrownvBoard.doc.
National Consortium Continues
Dialogue on Racial
and Ethnic Fairness in the Courts
“There is no greater challenge confronting the courts
today than the challenge of equal justice.” These
first words from Jonathan Smith’s keynote address at
the 16th annual meeting of the National Consortium on
Racial and Ethnic Fairness in the Courts set the stage
for two days of dialogue with a focus on the 50th
anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision.
Smith, executive director of
the Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia, spoke
to the gathering on the promise of equal justice. He was
one of several presenters at the April meeting in
Washington, D.C. Charles Ogletree, recently named
director of Harvard Law School’s new Charles Hamilton
Houston Institute for Race and Justice, presented a
session on “All Deliberate Speed: A Personal View of
the Importance of Brown.” Chief Justices Robert Bell
(Maryland), Petra Maes (New Mexico), Ronald Moon
(Hawaii), and Annice Wagner (District of Columbia)
shared their visions as chief justices in “Ensuring
Access to and Fairness in the Courts.”
Other sessions tackled topics
such as “Managing Diversity in the Judicial
Workforce,” “Achieving Diversity in Law Schools,”
“The Impact of Arrest, Prosecution, and Incarceration
on the Under-Represented,” and “Access to
Alternative Dispute Resolution.”
A new curriculum on the Brown
v. Board of Education decision was presented by Margaret
Fisher of the Washington State Administrative Office of
the Courts. “Teaching Brown to a New Generation: A
How-To Approach” provided participants with a first
look at this curriculum, which was written for high
school-age students by Fisher in partnership with the
Race and Ethnic Fairness Initiative of the National
Center for State Courts.
Dean
Schmoke of Howard University School of Law and Annice
Wagner, chief judge of the District of Columbia Court of
Appeals, presented at the consortium.
|
|
|
The
Municipal Court Dilemma: Upholding the Rule of Law
v. Bringing in the Revenue
Although unintended, one outcome of a performance audit
of the Municipal Court of the Town of Hilton Head
Island, S.C. conducted by National Center consultants
brings to light the tensions faced by municipal courts
to produce revenue while remaining independent bodies of
judicial deliberation.
“The purpose of the court is
to enforce the rule of law, not to produce revenue”
said NCSC consultant Penelope Wentland. “We’re often
asked how much revenue should a court produce. The only
answer we can give is that a court is not in the
business of producing revenue, but monies paid to a
court are a by-product of legislatively determined
sanctions imposed to punish behavior. At the same time,
Trial Court Performance Standards require courts to
operate efficiently as well as effectively and to use
public money wisely.”
The National Center was hired
by the Town of Hilton Head Island to perform the audit,
which focused on:
• Administrative
processes, systems, policies, and procedures
• Use of technology
• Service levels, workload, and staffing
• Allocation of personnel and equipment
• Adequacy of facilities and equipment
• Effectiveness of internal and external
communications
• Effectiveness of management funds
• Examination of operating budget and revenue
sources
The audit found that expenditures to maintain the court
have steadily increased while revenues remained stable,
until the last fiscal year where expenditures exceeded
revenues by $95,000. This drop was partly brought on by
a decrease in the number of traffic tickets being issued
by the Beaufort County Sheriff’s Office. In addition,
the court’s revenue predictions were made by people
unfamiliar with the court’s operations, which led to
inflated expectations. Compounding the problem, officers
who issue traffic tickets also schedule the offender’s
court date, causing wide variations in the court’s
workload. “This is difficult because the court is
unable to control its schedule,” Wentland said.
The NCSC report makes several
recommendations, which include urging the court to take
a more active role in its budget process, improve its
communication with law enforcement agencies to develop
more efficient court scheduling, and define formal
communication policies that will support improved
internal controls.
The performance audit also
found that the town has a competent court led by a
presiding judge who gives each case individual attention
and leads a dedicated staff.
NCSC
Doctors Have the Cure
Be sure to schedule an appointment with NCSC court
doctors during “The Doctor Is In” hours at these
upcoming conferences:
NACM July 11-15 Dallas
NCACC Aug. 8-13 Anchorage
NAWJ Oct. 7-10 Pittsburgh
MAACM Oct. 3-6 Delaware
AJA Oct. 24-29 San Francisco
NCPJ Nov. 10-13 Colorado Springs
To register, call 800-466-3063, or stop by the NCSC
booth or conference registration desk.
At a recent conference, Leigh
Eastty of the Burlinton, N.J., courts said she received
the help her court needed as the result of a “Doctor
Is In” session. Eastty met with NCSC’s Laura
Klaversma to discuss how to set up a pro se area. That
meeting was followed up by technical assistance to
define program objectives, tasks, and outreach
activities.
“We’ve been chasing our
tails on these issues for months,” Eastty said. “We
now have a clear plan and a clear direction.”
NCSC consultants offer assistance in several areas
including:
• Management Evaluations
• Technology Evaluation
• Court Organization
Studies
• Family and Juvenile
Court Studies
• Caseflow and Calendar
Management
• Process
Improvements/Workflow
• Human Resources
• Strategic Planning
• Workload/Staffing
Analysis
• Probation Department
Studies
• Judicial Resources
• Appellate Courts
• Records Management
• Drug Court Evaluations
• Court Security
Assessments
NCSC
Consultants, including Chris Shelton and Penney
Wentland, seen here at CTC8, provide free
consulting service to courts at the "Doctor Is
In" sessions at conferences.
|
|
|
Court
Technology Bulletin:
Transitions
Are Tough
By Jim McMillan, NCSC
principal court management consultant
The Court Technology Bulletin is no longer being
published as an individual printed publication. It’s
being separated into two formats: In-depth articles will
run in Center Court, and cutting-edge news and
information will be published in a new electronic Court
Technology Bulletin. This new format for the Bulletin
will provide court and technology-related information
more quickly, and it will allow readers to customize the
Bulletin, filtering out topics that aren’t of
interest. The new Bulletin will be available in numerous
formats, from e-mail to Web pages to RSS news feeds. And
it’s free. Sign up for the new Bulletin after May 28
at: http://www.ncsconline.org/d_tech/courttechbulletin/
It’s happened to all of
us. Turn on computer. Check e-mail. At first glance,
there are 70 e-mails – a second later 20 more. What
happened? Spam!
Everyone who uses e-mail is now
a victim of this plague. The constant stream of e-mail
adds to the problem. Spam can carry programs called
worms, viruses, and other troublesome links and
attachments to infect and take control of your computer.
In order to deal with this transition in our new world
of electronic connectivity I would like to share some of
my techniques on how to make this tough transition a
little easier.
Disposable Addresses
My first line
of defense is to set up a second e-mail account on a
free Web-based service like Yahoo, Hotmail, or
Google’s new e-mail service, G-mail. Whenever an
electronic service or Web site (like for hot airfares
and hotel deals) asks for an e-mail address, I give them
that one. This provides a first level of filtering that
you can control. Another advantage of having a
commercial Web e-mail account is that you can access it
from public computers, such as in hotels, which may be
infected with viruses and keystroke recording software.
When I travel and don’t think I will have safe e-mail
service, I set my work e-mail to forward a copy of my
messages to the Web-based e-mail service. The advantage:
This doesn’t compromise your office’s e-mail
service, and you still get your messages. The downside:
Be diligent about keeping the Web-based message box
clean because since the free service usually has a small
storage limit, often as little as one megabyte.
Anti-Virus
Software
Second, you
must have active and updated (automatically if possible)
anti-virus software running at all times on your
computer. This watches for those troublesome attachments
that contain computer worms and virus programs.
Dangerous
Defaults
Third, many
e-mail packages automatically open or preview e-mail
messages. Turn those defaults off. Just opening an
e-mail message can sometimes trigger a worm or virus
program. You don’t always need to actually click on an
attachment to trigger a virus. If a message looks
suspicious, don’t open it.
Social
Engineering
Fourth, if an e-mail message
looks too good to be true, it’s not. There’s a new
threat called Phishing (a combination of phony and
fishing, and homage to the popular jam group). By
sending phony messages such as “please update your
E-bay or credit card accounts,” thousands of credit
card and bank account numbers have been stolen. Also,
e-mail messages are being produced that look like they
contain legitimate document links embedded in the
message.
If this happens, what you need
to do is right-click on the URL link and then copy the
URL and paste it into Notepad, where you will see that
the web address is a lie. It doesn’t lead to where it
says it does. The URL on the e-mail is not the same as
the real URL, which turns out to be a redirection to a
malicious virus. Very clever.
PICNIC is a new acronym in the
computer technical field, meaning “Problem In Chair,
Not In Computer.” It’s not meant as an insult to
users. Rather it’s an acknowledgment that people make
mistakes and can be fooled in ways that computers
can’t. Think first, click second.
Spam
Filters
Fifth is
spam-filtering software. This has been a particular
problem for me recently when I tried to send messages
with requested attachments, PDF files, to a legislative
analyst. Their spam-filtering software would not
deliver it. I am somewhat biased against a “one
size fits all” spam filter approach. For spam filters
to work correctly they have to be “trained” by the
user. The user can be your system administrator who can
try to guess what’s spam and what’s not spam. But,
how can a general spam filter know that you wish to
receive the “Domestic Violence Prevention E-newsletter
from Tasmania” or that you wish to receive document
attachments from the law student you are tutoring?
I currently use the SpamBayes plug-in for Microsoft
Outlook at http://spambayes.sourceforge.net. I
have trained and maintained it to learn which messages I
consider spam and which I don’t. It rarely, if ever,
classifies legitimate e-mail as spam.
Unfortunately, all the tips
given above are simply ways to deal with the current
problem of spam. None of them actually help solve
the underlying problem.
What is the final answer that
will help us transition to e-mail becoming a more
powerful communication tool? I believe that a
combination of digital signatures and trusted electronic
references can take us part of the way to a solution.
The S/MIME digital signature standard allows you to set
up your e-mail system to send messages with a digital
certificate that certifies that the e-mail came from the
person it says it comes from. Years ago, John Davenport
of the Pennsylvania AOC argued that courts need to set
up their own certificate servers to provide digital
signatures for courts and authorized court participants.
Similarly, Toby Brown, communications director at the
Utah State Bar, reported at the 2002 E-Courts Conference
that the Bar has sent a CD-ROM disk with digital
signatures certificates to all of its members. This
tough transition may be forced upon us by, who would
have guessed, spam.
Workshop on Establishing and
Operating Successful Judicial Campaign Conduct
Committees
Consider this scenario: An incumbent trial court
judge calls you — chairman of a judicial campaign
conduct committee — and says, with some panic in his
voice:
“Our local volunteer fire
department is a popular and political organization. This
year they have decided to raise money for the fire
department by sponsoring 'The Ugliest Woman in the
County Contest.' They are asking all candidates for
public office, including judges, to dress in drag
(obviously there are no women candidates) and compete in
a contest to be judged by the fire chief and some other
community leaders for the prize of being selected as the
'Ugliest Woman in the County.'”
It’s obvious the person who
has called you is distressed about how to handle this
invitation. What is your advice or recommendation about
participating and what do you say if you and the
committee decide that participation is inappropriate?
This real-life situation was
one of many that participants discussed in April at the
Workshop on Establishing and Operating Successful
Judicial Campaign Conduct Committees in Dallas.
Participants gathered to create plans to establish such
a committee in their state or locality before the next
round of judicial elections.
Judicial campaign oversight
committees have helped various states and localities
moderate the trend toward judicial elections that have
become “nastier, noisier, and costlier.” Such
oversight committees resolve issues of improper conduct
during judicial campaigns. Conduct committees also
participate in setting the tone of judicial elections in
their jurisdiction.
To assist states and localities
establish effective conduct committees, the Ad Hoc
National Advisory Committee on Judicial Campaign Conduct
held the workshop, funded by a grant to the National
Center for State Courts from the Open Society Institute.
Six states – Idaho, Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
Kentucky, and Maryland – sent a team of lawyers and
other community leaders, including the League of Women
Voters, to the workshop. Representatives of Alabama and
North Carolina also attended.
National experts, with hands-on
experience in creating judicial campaign conduct
committees, served as faculty. This team of leaders
included the Ad Hoc Committee’s co-chairs, Barbara
Reed, senior consultant to the Constitution Project’s
Courts Initiative, and Mark White, former chair of the
Alabama Supreme Court Judicial Campaign Oversight
Committee. Other team members: Seth Anderson, American
Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Judicial
Independence; Bert Brandenberg, Justice at Stake’s
director of Communications; Anthony Champagne, professor
of Government and Politics at the University of
Texas, Dallas; Michael Klein, chair of New York State
Bar Association Committee on Judicial Campaign Conduct;
William Quinlan, chair of the Judicial Advisory
Taskforce on Illinois Judicial Elections; and William
Weisenberg, assistant executive director for Public
Affairs and Governmental Relations for the Ohio State
Bar Association.
Some workshop sessions were
plenary and dealt with core ideas and concerns common to
campaign conduct committees, such as how to form a
committee and manage controversy during elections. A
handbook based on the workshop will soon be available.
To learn more about judicial
campaign conduct committees, visit www.judicialcampaignconduct.org.
Loyal NCSC Supporter
Dr. Ronald J. Stupak, senior consultant and executive
vice president of Emerging Associates, recently made
another significant statement of support to the National
Center for State Courts through the Ronald J. Stupak
Charitable Remainder Unitrust. His donation is currently
valued at more than $165,000.
Named as one of the
beneficiaries of the trust, the National Center is
recognized for sharing the commitment to the values and
ideals shared by the Stupak family, including a
commitment to the fundamentals of the American
democratic system and the concept of life and liberty.
“It is the National Center
that has given me the opportunity to be interactively
involved in the ongoing dialogue about the improvements
needed in the leadership and management of the
courts,” Dr. Stupak says.
“The National Center deeply
values Dr. Stupak’s continuing friendship and
support,” says NCSC director of development Barbara
Kelly.
How Many, How Much?
Everything you ever wanted to know about civil jury
trials but were afraid to ask is now available!
The Bureau of Justice
Statistics has published Civil Trial Cases and Verdicts
in Large Counties, 2001, based on civil trial data
collected and analyzed by the National Center for State
Courts.
Did you know...:
• During 2001, a
jury decided almost 75 percent of the 12,000 tort,
contract, and real property trials in the 75 largest
U.S. counties.
• In jury trials, the median award decreased
from $65,000 in 1992 to $37,000 in 2001 in these
counties.
• Two-thirds of trials in 2001 involved tort
claims and about a third involved contractual issues.
The report is available online at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/ctcvlc01.htm.
|
|
|
EPA
Announces ENERGY STAR Courthouse Campaign
On March 1, 2004, Mike Leavitt, administrator for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, announced the
ENERGY STAR Courthouse Campaign at a meeting of the
National Association of Counties Legislative Conference
in Washington, D.C.
“Environmentalism is not a
fad,” he said while promoting the campaign aimed at
helping government agencies grapple with tightening
budgets. ENERGY STAR offers straightforward management
tools to achieve cost savings through energy management.
At the ENERGY STAR Web site (www.energystar.gov)
program participants can access lists of energy
efficient products and read about best management
practices to save taxpayer dollars while earning the
ENERGY STAR building designation. According to the EPA,
government agencies spend more than $10 billion a year
on energy to provide public services and meet
constituent needs. Buildings that earn the ENERGY STAR
for superior energy performance can cut costs by using
about 40 percent less energy than average buildings.
The EPA program promotes a
strategy that starts with top leadership, engages the
appropriate employees throughout the organization, uses
standardized measurement tools, and helps an
organization prioritize to get the most from its energy
efficiency investments.
“This new partnership will
not only help the environment, but will save dollars in
tough economic times,” Leavitt said. By illustrating
his presentations with personal and family stories, he
proposed that the country has still been “too slow”
and needs to “accelerate the velocity and find better
ways” to protect the environment through technology,
collaboration, management of results and existing market
forces. The courthouse campaign will be a good start,
Leavitt concluded.
When county facilities earn ENERGY
STAR efficiency status, officials will receive an ENERGY
STAR label to display on the building entranceways to
demonstrate commitment to environmental leadership,
while also saving money on monthly energy bills.
Court
Professionals Graduate From Rigorous Court Management
Program
Twelve court professionals from around the country
recently become fellows of the Institute for Court
Management (ICM), which is the educational arm of the
National Center for State Courts. The graduates appeared
before the U.S. Supreme Court May 14 as part of
graduation ceremonies from the National Center’s
prestigious Court Executive Development Program (CEDP).
This year’s graduates
include:
• Susan M. Byrnes,
court administrator for the St. Louis County Courts in
Minnesota
• Patricia Garcia Duggan, court administrator for
the Third Judicial Circuit in South Dakota
• Terry F. Holtrop, case management manager for the
Kent County Michigan Courts and the 17th Circuit
• Jerome M.P. Kole, trial court administrator for
Midland County Courts in Michigan
• Gary L. Krcmarik, court administrator for Coconino
County, Superior Court in Arizona
• Kevin Lane of the San Diego Court of Appeals
• Kellye Mashburn, research analyst for the
Administrative Office of the Courts in Little Rock,
Arkansas
• Stacy Parke, deputy court administrator for the
47th District Court in Michigan
• Dawn Marie Rubio, court management consultant for
the National Center for State Courts in Denver
• Deborah Schaefer, court administrator, Yavapai
County Superior Court in Arizona
• Henry Stacey, assignment commissioner for Hamilton
County’s Court of Common Pleas in Ohio
• Mark Stodola, deputy court manager for the
Criminal Division of the Tempe Municipal Court in
Arizona.
CEDP is the only program of its kind in the United
States and was established more than 30 years ago, in
part, by U.S. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger in his call
for improving the management of state court
administration. The intensive educational program
consists of four phases, and those who successfully
complete all four phases become fellows of ICM, which
better prepares them for management and leadership
positions in the courts. Since the first class of CEDP
graduates in 1970, more than 1,000 court professionals
from 48 states, the District of Columbia, Guam and 12
foreign countries have become fellows.
NCSC
New Publications Now Available
The
National Center recently released four of its most
widely read annual publications. The Court
Statistics Project of the National Center completed the
State Court Guide to Statistical Reporting, 2003,
Examining the Work of the State Courts, and State Court
Caseload Statistics. NCSC’s Knowledge and Information
Services Division has published its biannual Survey of
Judicial Salaries. Each publication is available
electronically at www.ncsconline.org.
Hard copies also are available from NCSC’s bookstore.
Please refer to reverse side for ordering information.
Here’s a brief look at each publication.
The
State Court Guide to Statistical Reporting, 2003
sets data standards for counting and reporting of court
statistics. The Guide,
sponsored by the State Justice Institute (SJI) was a
joint project of the Conference of State Court
Administrators (COSCA) and NCSC with collaboration from
trial court administrators, state and trial court
statisticians, and various experts throughout the court
and academic communities.
The
Guide, which is a tool for improving
court administration, recommends a model approach for
counting, defining, and classifying cases at both the
filing and resolution stages, and provides a framework
for developing a more accurate picture of court
caseloads and workloads for trial and appellate courts,
as well as state court administrators. In addition, The
Guide supports the ongoing development
of court case management and information systems by
clarifying the definition, scope, and interrelationship
of critical data elements.
The
Guide is expected to increase a
court’s understanding of its caseload, answer
questions about its workload more quickly, and allow
greater communication with other courts. For
example, a court that is capable of gathering most or
all of the data recommended by the Guide
will be able to:
• Track filing and
disposition trends and compare those trends with
similar courts
• Measure the age of pending caseload more
accurately, allowing for the determination of more
meaningful case-processing times
• Generate the types of reports critical in
conducting studies of the need for judges and judicial
officer support staff
Examining
the Work of State Courts, 2003
provides accurate, objective, and comparable data that
allow states to consider their performance, identify
emerging trends, and measure the possible impact of
legislation. This edition has been redesigned to
incorporate more graphics and features a new section
entitled “State Profiles,” where comparable baseline
data for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and
Puerto Rico are displayed in a clear and
easy-to-understand graphical format.
Among this year’s findings:
• 96.2 million cases
were filed in state trial courts in 2002, the most
since 1989
• 29,500 judicial officers are distributed among
15,600 state courts, nationally
• The frequency of civil and felony trials is down
for the last 10 years
• Tort filings decreased 5 percent while contract
filings increased 21 percent since 1993
• Felony filings showed an average state increase of
9 percent since 2000
• Delinquency cases dominate state court juvenile
caseloads at 60 percent
• Felony filings rose for the third straight year in
2002 following a small decline in 1999
• Driving while intoxicated (DWI) filings increased
for a fifth consecutive year
• Total appellate court filings increased by 9
percent since 1993
State
Court Caseload Statistics, 2003 is a
basic reference containing detailed caseload data
reported by each state court system, and is often
considered a companion piece to Examining
the Work. Individuals requiring more
complete information on the organization of state
courts, total filings and dispositions, the number of
judges, factors affecting comparability between states,
and other jurisdictional and structural issues, will
find this volume most useful.
The annual Survey
of Judicial Salaries has been
published for more than 20 years. Over the course of
years, changes have taken place in how salary data has
been reported in the Survey.
Currently, salary data are presented for the: Associate
Justices of Court of Last Resort; Associate Judges of
Intermediate Appellate Courts; State Court
Administrators; and the Judges of the General and the
Limited Jurisdiction Trial Courts.
Two major changes took place in
the Survey’s
most recent issue. First, average judicial salaries were
presented over time from 1991 to 2002, and second,
analysis allowed a comparison across states when taking
into account the cost-of-living difference.
NCJFCJ
Looking for New Executive Director
The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges
(NCJFCJ) is seeking candidates for Executive Director.
Candidates need to possess strong management skills and
a demonstrated capacity to lead a national organization.
The job description and position requirements are
available at www.ncjfcj.org/dept/hr/employment.
Telephone inquires can be made to Cindy Davis, human
resources director, at (775) 784-6870. Closing date is
June 1, 2004.
We
Welcome Your Feedback!
Tell us
what you liked or didn't like about this newsletter. Do
you have suggestions for future editions? Tell us what
your court needs to know from the National
Center! Please send your comments, questions, and
suggestions to Sara Lewis, Communications Director,
National Center for State Courts at slewis@ncsc.dni.us.
|
|
|
National
Center for State Courts
300 Newport
Avenue Williamsburg, VA 23185
1331 17th St., Ste. 402 Denver, CO
80202-1554
2425 Wilson Blvd., Ste. 350 Arlington, VA 22201
Association Services (800) 616-6165
Consulting (800) 466-3063
Education (800) 616-6206
Government Relations (800) 532-0204
International Programs (800) 797-2545
Publications (888) 228-6272
Research (800) 616-6109
Technology (888) 846-6746
Information
(800) 616-6164
webmaster@ncsc.dni.us
Copyright © 2004 The National Center for State
Courts. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
|
|
