ADDRESSING THE PROBLEMS AND CRAFTING SOLUTIONS

 Lingering and historical issues  Unique time period issues  Non-exhaustive list

 Resources limit justice administration  3 primary needs  Sufficient number of trained and qualified judges  Adequate support staff  Acceptable physical plants (offices and courtrooms)  23% of criminal justice budget for judicial and legal services  Compare with police and corrections budgets  21% of justice system personnel in judicial/legal services  Raises issues about coequality of government branches

 Priority of the American Judicature Society  Creation of the Center for Judicial Independence  Issues associated with judicial independence  Budgets  Courts do not control their own budgets  Legislature determines the budget  Legislature determines the number of judgeships authorized  Court Jurisdictions  Courts do not have complete jurisdictional authority  Can be expanded or contracted by the legislature  Elections  State judicial changes due to unpopular decisions  Aware of public sentiment  Obligation to campaign contributors  Not applicable to federal judges

 Increase in court management positions  Concern about increasing bureaucracy  All state and federal courts have administrative arm  Administrative office of courts  Professionally trained management personnel  Appointed by judges  Functions  Budgeting  Personnel management  Jury management  Case scheduling

 Individuals act as their own attorney in a legal matter  Focus of the American Judicature Society  May upset the goals of courtroom work groups  Group cohesion  Disposition of cases  Reducing uncertainty

 Expansion began in the 1970s  Alternative to lengthy and expensive adjudication  Is institutionalized and mandatory in many courts  Reasons for utilizing ADR  Quicker disposition of routine cases  Lower expenses to the parties involved  Reduction in the need for outside parties  Less congestion and expense for the court system  Types of ADR  Negotiation  Mediation  Arbitration  Hybrid ADR

 Both parties want to settle the dispute  Parties engage in discussion to try to resolve differences  No third party involvement  Often results in a compromise where each party gains something  Less likely to be successful if viewed as a zero-sum game

 Utilizes a third party to intervene between the parties  Mediator’s role is to help the parties reach a resolution that is acceptable to both sides  Non-adversarial process that relies on cooperation  Mediators may or may not have formal training  Mediator meets separately with each side, then brings them together to reach a solution  Commonly used in divorce disputes  Dependent upon compromise

 More formal method of ADR  May be governed by state law  Arbitrator makes a final decision to settle the dispute  Parties agree beforehand that the arbitrator’s decision is final  Common arbitration matters  Labor and management disputes  Contract negotiations  Credit disputes

 Rent-a-Judge Programs  Disputing parties hire an attorney or retired judge  Dispute is resolved through a bench trial  Concerns about secrecy and cost  Med-Arb  Combination of mediation and arbitration  Dispute is first taken to a mediator  If an agreement cannot be reached, the case is taken to arbitration  Minitrials  Similar to rent-a-judge  Disputes are distilled to basic elements  Parties have limited motions and time to argue the case  Judge advises parties about a likely outcome if the case proceeds

 Double victimization in sexual assault cases  Solutions  Female officers used for sexual assault investigations  Officer sensitivity training  Victims’ advocates in prosecutors’ offices  Enactment of rape shield laws to prevent questions or comments about the victim’s prior sexual history

 Women are convicted of far fewer crimes than men  Possible explanations  Women are less criminally inclined than men  Justice system is more forgiving toward women (chivalry hypothesis)  Justice system may also be more punitive toward women (paternalism perspective)  Unequal adjudication  More sympathy from judges and juries  This has lessened through the use of sentencing guidelines

 Historical underrepresentation of women in law and the judiciary  Substantial increase in female law students, attorneys, and judges  Historical exclusion from jury service has been eliminated

 Minorities comprise a disproportionate percentage of those arrested and prosecuted  Possible explanations  Minorities may commit more crimes  Criminal justice policies may disproportionately affect minorities  Minorities are overrepresented in the prison population

 Underrepresentation of minorities in law practice and the judiciary  Numbers are increasing at a very slow rate

 Used to identify and apprehend criminal suspects  Originated in France with the Bertillon method  Use of science and technology has increased substantially  Primary method is DNA testing  First employed in a murder and rape case in England  Has received tremendous publicity  Illustrates court procedures for establishing scientific validity and reliability  Accepted as a reliable indicator of criminal involvement

 Focus from DNA testing and well-publicized cases  Significant concerns  The guilty party is still in the community  Due process  Reasons for wrongful convictions  Eyewitness identification  False confessions  Jailhouse snitch testimony  Misleading forensic science  Prosecutorial misconduct  Ineffective assistance of counsel

 Prosecution of enemy combatants has presented new issues  The Supreme Court has ruled that it has jurisdiction to hear the cases of enemy combatants  Military tribunals violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Convention