skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 48255 Find in a Library
Title: REMARKS OF C WILLIAM O'NEILL, CHIEF JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT OF OHIO (FROM CRIME PREVENTION - STRATEGIES OF THE 70'S, 1974 - SEE NCJ-48253)
Author(s): C W O'NEILL
Corporate Author: Ohio State University
Program for the Study of Crime and Delinquency
United States of America
Date Published: 1974
Page Count: 7
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
Ohio State University
Columbus, OH 43212
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: IDENTIFICATION OF THE CAUSES OF DELAYS IN OHIO COURTS, DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF COURT RULES DESIGNED TO DECREASE DELAYS, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THESE EFFORTS, AND OTHER REFORM ACTIVITIES BY OHIO JUDGES ARE DISCUSSED.
Abstract: THE OHIO SUPREME COURT IDENTIFIED THE CAUSES OF COURT DELAYS BY HOLDING PRIVATE CONFERENCES WITH TRIAL JUDGES, MOST OF WHOM WERE AWARE OF THE CAUSES OF DELAYS IN THEIR COURTS. THE COURT IDENTIFIED 10 MAJOR CAUSES OF DELAY AND ADOPTED RULES DESIGNED TO ELIMINATE EACH CAUSE. THE GREATEST CAUSE OF DELAY IN BOTH CRIMINAL CASES AND PERSONAL INJURY CASES PROVED TO BE MOVES BY DEFENSE AND PROSECUTION ATTORNEYS TO DELAY TRIALS. TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM, THE COURT PASSD A RULE STATING THAT, IF A LAWYER HAS AGREED TO A TRIAL DATE BUT IS NOT READY TO TRY THE CASE ON THAT DATE, THEN HE OR SHE MUST PROVIDE ANOTHER LAWYER TO TRY THE CASE. THE SECOND GREATEST CAUSE OF DELAY WAS THE UNAVAILABILITY OF PHYSICIANS TO TESTIFY IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES. THE COURT INTRODUCED THE USE OF VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITIONS TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM. CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE RESTRAINTS AND REQUIREMENTS WERE ALSO PLACED ON JUDGES. WHEN THE RULES WENT INTO EFFECT ON JANUARY 1, 1972, THERE WERE OVER 1,800 CRIMINAL CASES IN OHIO THAT WERE MORE THAN 6 MONTHS OLD. AFTER 1 YEAR, THAT BACKLOG HAD BEEN REDUCED TO 705 CASES. OTHER REFORM ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN OR PLANNED WITH A VIEW TOWARD IMPROVING THE QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY OF OHIO'S JUDICIAL SYSTEM ARE NOTED. (LKM)
Index Term(s): Court delays; Court management; Court rules; Ohio; Reform
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=48255

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.