skip navigation

CrimeSolutions.gov

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar

PUBLICATIONS

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
 
NCJ Number: NCJ 079498     Find in a Library
Title: Measurement of Judge-Time and the Evaluation of Judicial Performance - Reducing the Discrepancies
Author(s): S Krislov
Date Published: Unknown
Page Count: 45
Sponsoring Agency: Guggenheim Criminal Justice Foundation
United States of America

National Institute of Justice
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America

US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
United States of America
Grant Number: 79-NI-AX-0077
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Document: PDF 
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Discrepancies between the quantitative evaluations of judges' use of time and qualitative evaluations of judicial performance are examined.
Abstract: A fundamental understanding of what is happening to American courts depends in large part on knowledge of patterns of judges' time use. Overall, studies tend to show that judges spend about 4 hours daily on the bench, although the variation is considerable from judge to judge and system to system. Factors contributing to such differences are judicial attitudes toward what is desired and emphasized by the system, court size, type of court (appellate judges have less bench time than lower court judges), and type of case (criminal cases generally involve more bench time than civil cases). Differences in judges' use of time also depend to a great extent on the degree of specialization among personnel in court systems. In many courts, for example, various administrative functions may be handled by court officers acting in the name of judges. Evaluations of the quality of judicial performance are still in their infancy, with most of such evaluations consisting of semi-official or unofficial polls of the bar. An obvious discrepancy between determinations of the use of judge-time and measures of the quality of judicial performance exists. Measures of judicial performance tend to focus on courtroom performance. This fails to give attention to the 25 to 50 percent of time judges devote to non-bench duties. Evaluations of judicial performance should give more attention to the full range of duties performed by judges. Thirty-eight references are listed, and data from various studies cited in the study are provided.
Index Term(s): Job analysis ; Personnel evaluation ; Attorney judge evaluation ; Peer assessment
   
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=79498

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.