Blaming the judges for the backlog of cases in Hinds County is a common excuse made for the dysfunctional Hinds County criminal justice system. However, the Mississippi Supreme Court cast blame last year on the prosecutors and said the judges should take control of the docket away from the District Attorney's office.
Senior Circuit Judge Tomie Green tried to reassign all criminal cases to her self and Judge Bill Gowan and all civil cases to Judges Jeff Weill and Winston Kidd several years ago. Judge Weill fought back in court and the dispute wound up at the Mississippi Supreme Court. Judge Green withdrew her order and the court considered the dispute to be moot. However, Justice George Carlson had a few things to say about the backlog of criminal cases in Hinds County and blasted the Hinds County District Attorney in a concurring opinion in the dispute between Circuit Judges Tomie Green and Jeff Weill:
What has become abundantly clear to me through the pleadings, motions, and our discussions with the judges is that the problem is not that the circuit judges need more flexibility in scheduling trials; the problem is that the judges have been far too lenient with litigants and with the district attorney’s office. Litigants have been permitted to dictate the movement of cases through the judicial system, and those in the district attorney’s office have been allowed to control the dockets.
In our meeting with the circuit judges, it was disclosed that Hinds County has been accused of “not trying cases.” (This comment was not made by anyone in the meeting, but was a reference to something said in the media.) To defend against that allegation, one circuit judge explained that the reason more criminal cases are not set for trial is because assistant district attorneys can prepare for only a few cases each week. Judge Gowan made a similar statement in his response brief: “[T]rials are not had every week. The assistant district attorneys and public defenders can only prepare for two to four trials per week[,] and it is routine for defendants to plea[d] either the week prior to or the week of trial.” From these comments, it is apparent that the assistant district attorneys are controlling the docket. That is not the job of anyone in the district attorney’s office. The responsibilities of the district attorney are set forth in Mississippi Code Section 25-31-11. Sections 25-31-5 and 25-31-6 pertain to assistant district attorneys. Nowhere in those sections are they given responsibility for setting the docket. Rather, judges are responsible for maintaining their dockets
It is my opinion that the fact the assistant district attorneys apparently have decided that they will prepare for only two to four trials per week is unacceptable. Other districts set the docket ten to fifteen cases deep, anticipating that defendants will offer pleas prior to trial, or that continuances may be necessary in some cases for any number of valid reasons. The district attorney and assistant district attorneys should always be ready for trial, and trial dockets should be set without regard to their preferences. If two judges set trials at the same time involving the same assistant district attorney, it is the assistant district attorney’s responsibility to have an attorney in the courtroom to prosecute those cases. That is not the circuit court’s problem. The circuit judges should implement rules and enter orders, if necessary, to control their dockets...
If the assistant district attorneys violate the rules, they should be sanctioned. I strongly advise the circuit judges to start setting more cases for trial, and to stop letting the district attorney’s office control their dockets.
Two other justices joined the opinion while four others joined in part.
10 comments:
Elections have consequences Hinds County.
I would have respected the opinion more if he'd been equally hard on the lawyers in civil disputes.
What it still comes down to, however, is the judges not exercising their judicial power to demand better performance from the attorneys before them!
9:23, civil suits are not subject to the Speedy Trial Clause.
In one of his dissents, Justice Dickinson also took note of the Legislature's apparent indifference:
As this case demonstrates, this Court assumes—as a matter of law with no proof required—that Hinds County Circuit Court dockets are perpetually crowded. This has not gone unnoticed by the State, which has learned that, in Hinds County, it will win the "reason for the delay" Barker factor without bothering to offer any proof or argument. In light of the seemingly desperate condition of the Hinds County trial docket, I find it interesting that, of the seven new trial-judge positions the Legislature created around the State this year, not a single one was created in Hinds County.
Taylor v. State, 162 So. 3d 780, 793 n.33 (Miss. 2015) (Dickinson, P.J., dissenting).
I seem to remember Judge Weill getting his hands slapped for trying to take control of cases.
But, this slowness, regardless of the cause, is effecting the jail situation, the crime situation and life in general in Hinds County. Our Courts must increase the number of cases heard.
One of the stats quoted in last nights forum was that only 5 criminal cases per judge were heard all of last year. Wish someone would publish the whole truth on all of this.
Would any of this fall under the State Auditor's office, if we got a new one. Is there any hint of money changing hands to stop cases?
Hinds should have received an additional Circuit Court Judge who's primary duty is to handle criminal cases 12 months a year.
No. State auditor has no authority to compel judges and or prosecutors to try cases.
And maybe we could have a smart, hardworking judge or is that just not possible?
@10:15 - it is interesting to me that they "averaged" the number of cases at 5 "per judge" - I bet the truth is that Weill tried the vast majority of those cases but nobody in that forum was willing to call out the other judges - very sad. What needs to happen is Green assign all the criminal cases to Weill, then we'd see some backlog disappearance. Stanley needs to be the DA - he's a solid, hard-working guy that I really think will rise above politics and just get the job done - I've known him for years and I really believe he would bring the ADAs in line and get those cases tried. Good luck tomorrow Stanley - Hinds County needs you!
9:57 am I'm aware civil cases are not subjected to the speedy trial clause.
However, when someone's ability to make a living is put on hold for 5-7 years or a divorce takes over 5 years, that is not justice. And, of course, the legal fees racked up during such long periods makes justice available only to those who can afford it or who find law firms with the resources to take a client without getting paid until they win the case.
Judges put up with absolutely unwarranted delay requests or requests for discovery documents that have no purpose other than to starve the other side into submission or settlement.
Parties are not being held in contempt for failure to comply with court orders for support for spouses and children.
Judges do not sanction attorneys for shenanigans that the court knows or should know have no basis in the law but are only for purpose of delay.
If you are a lawyer , you damn well know that there are more than a few lawyers in town that run up billable hours needlessly and who try to " paper" the other side into submission.
And, somehow, when it comes to criminal defense, " reasonable doubt" , which should be based on reason, becomes any far fetched fantasy that a defense lawyer can dream up.
The legal system is supposed to be about justice, or did you forget that in the fun of playing a game with people's lives?
Post a Comment