U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Symposium - State Court Reform

NCJ Number
82495
Journal
American University Law Review Volume: 31 Issue: 2 Dated: (Winter 1982) Pages: 207-289
Editor(s)
M S Bergman
Date Published
1982
Length
81 pages
Annotation
Scholars in the field of judicial administration discuss recent and current State court reforms. Papers focus on research and demonstration projects regarding State trial court delay, improvement of caseflow management in appellate courts, rural courts operations, and court system unification.
Abstract
The movement for reduction of court delays was initiated following recommendations of the Court Management Study conducted during 1968-1969 in the District of Columbia, which included court-established time standards, calendar control, and performance evaluation. One paper discusses the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration's (LEAA) Court Delay Reduction Program of 1976, which found that inadequate court information systems often inhibit case processing. The willingness of courts to try improved management techniques is an important factor in reducing delays. Another paper points out that the inundation of appellate courts nationwide has resulted in calls for additional appellate tribunals as well as better caseflow management. Appellate remedies developed by the American Bar Association Action Commission involve delivering trial records by computer-assisted transcription of testimony and substituting short statements by counsel and authorities for extensive briefs. These measures could cut the appeals period to as little as 120 days. Furthermore, appellate judges and court administrators should enforce scheduling, channel different types of appeals to different dispositional tracks, and expand monitoring and review processes. A paper addresses the unique conditions of rural courts, which necessitate State involvement in the reform process, as well as increased use of volunteers and advanced technology in consolidating court functions. The final paper notes that only 10 State court jurisdictions have achieved a significant degree of structural unification (consolidation of all trial courts in that jurisdiction into 1 court). Accelerated State funding of trial courts is likely to result in more administrative unification. Concerns over lack of local initiative and flexibility are often unfounded but should be addressed to provide perspective for future studies. Footnotes are included. For individual papers, see NCJ 82495-99.