fresno elections 2008

Jurors are summoned from a Master Jury List. This list is comprised of registered voters and people with driver’s licenses or ID cards issued by the DMV. While this list may include a core segment of our community it certainly does not encompass a statistically accurate cross section of all people residing in Fresno County. Ideally, every eligible member of the community should be on the Master Jury list. That should be our goal. Our challenge is to find ways to dig deeper into our community and include those that are currently disenfranchised from serving as jurors because they are not registered to vote or don’t have a driver’s license.

Having a more representative and expansive Master Jury list benefits the community as a whole. Not only would such an expanded list include those that are currently excluded from this civic process, it would also provide some relief to those that are on the list and asked to serve so frequently. It would also provide all litigants, whether criminal or civil, a pool of jurors to which they entitled under the law – one that represents a fair and accurate cross section of their community, a true jury of their peers.

Of course our responsibility as a Community does not end there. The next challenge is to ensure that once summoned from the Master Jury list, those prospective jurors, from whatever demographic, respond and participate in the process. Most people realize and accept that jury service is part of their civic responsibility. However, we need to make sure that this awareness continues to be fostered among all members of our community and that our youth receive this understanding as part of their civic education.

The “one-trial or one-day” system currently used in Fresno County to bring in prospective jurors to the courthouse for the actual jury selection process is certainly a vast improvement over the former system that required prospective jurors to return to the courthouse day after day for sometimes as much as a week or more. However, we should not be content with a view that this process is beyond further improvement. The courts should continue to examine ways to assist prospective jurors in carrying out their civic responsibility of jury service with the least disruption to their daily lives as possible. This should include dealing with such issues as availability of downtown parking for summoned jurors, the frequency of receiving a jury service summons, and the length of time that a prospective juror must remain “on-call” once summoned. As a judge I will be committed to improving the juror selection process whenever and wherever possible.

I will approach my role as a judge with confidence, hard work, fairness, and respect for all individuals with whom I interact. I believe it is the responsibility of a judge to treat all participants in the court process with dignity, respect, and patience. There is no question that a busy courtroom and the daily responsibilities of a judge can combine to make many stressful situations. But there is nothing that reflects more poorly on the judiciary than a judge that looses his or her temper or treats defendants, attorneys, witnesses, or audience members with rudeness, disrespect, anger or disdain. There is also no excuse for a judge once elected or appointed to the bench to become pompous, arrogant, or dismissive of others.

In my role as a Chief Attorney in the Public Defenders Office I am used to working in high tension, stressful, situations and making quick decisions and judgment calls on a daily basis that impact a large number of people. As a judge, I will have the fortitude and patience to treat others with dignity and respect and to listen to them with an open mind even under the most trying circumstances.

Judges, and the bench as a whole, seem to remain largely out of touch with, or at least don’t seem to give much consideration to, the amount of resources and finances it takes on a county-wide level to efficiently and effectively operate the Superior Courts. It is well known that the vast majority of the court’s business involves the processing of criminal cases. Between juvenile delinquency and adult criminal cases, these criminal matters consume easily two-thirds or more of the court’s resources. However, each and every criminal case that the court processes requires County-funded resources from all of the Public Safety Departments: The Sheriff, the District Attorney, the Public Defender, and Probation. Without the necessary funding for these Public Safety Departments, criminal cases will simply not be processed efficiently, effectively, or at all, regardless of what resources the court has available to itself.

The courts go to great lengths to prevail upon our legislators and the Governor to provide more Superior Court judges and more space to handle increasing court caseloads. And in the last few years they have been successful, receiving a number of new judicial positions for Fresno County. Yet no consideration is given to linking these new judicial positions to funding for the public safety departments that are essential to make the entire public safety system work efficiently and effectively. The judiciary needs to take an active role at the state level in making sure that each new judicial position is accompanied by, or linked to, sufficient funding for all public safety departments. The bench needs to take a leadership role in working with the County at the local level as well as at the state level, to ensure that all necessary resources for the efficient and effective operation of the judicial system are in place.

In terms of the day-to-day operations of the court, the creation early last year of the Local Justice Coordinating Council was a step in the right direction to at least start a dialogue among the justice departments and the courts as to how the daily operations of the court and justice system might be improved. However, the court leadership of the Justice Council needs to take the committee beyond identifying known existing problems to the stage of solving them. And to be effective in actually accomplishing anything significant with such issues as jail overcrowding, the Justice Council will have to include in its membership other law enforcement agencies, such as the Fresno City Police Department and outlying city law enforcement agencies that contribute inmates to the jail population.

It is also essential that the Justice Council become a catalyst for opening a dialogue between the City and the County as to how the costs for the justice system can be shared, how resources can be combined, and how simple cooperation and communication between the City and the County will go far in helping to solve many of the difficult issues now confronting the justice system. The Justice Council may prove to be a good vehicle for positive change if it is steered with leadership and does not become mired in its own bureaucracy.

The courts exist for the benefit of the community. It is of paramount importance that the courts remain in tune with the needs of the community which they serve and evolve so that they can continue to provide meaningful and cost effective services not just to those that enter into the court system but to the community as a whole. The Community Court Model as applied to low level criminal offenses is but one example of a more creative approach to the administration of justice that the Superior court bench needs to explore. Community Courts have been used with great success in a number of other states and California counties and have benefited the community by decreasing recidivism and targeting specific sections of a community most in need of the court’s attention.

Many of the court’s records are public records and the courts should make access to these records as user friendly as possible. Today’s technology provides a great opportunity for improvement in this area. Much of this information can be made available to the public on line. Efficiency in the court system should be a priority for the Superior Court bench. Facilitating the expeditious handling of minor criminal and traffic offenses by providing easy access to necessary information and a means by which to resolve these cases quickly is certainly a worthy goal for the courts and in the long run also provides a direct cost benefit to the County.

The court system and the day-to-day business of all judges should be open and transparent to the public. The Superior Court bench should be accountable to the community which it serves, no differently than any other elected officials. While the independence of the judiciary and the privacy rights of litigants and others that play a role in the court system must be safeguarded, this must be done with an eye towards the communities right to know what their judicial system is doing and how it is being done. The media plays an important and essential role in disseminating this information to the public.

For this reason, communication and understanding between the media and the courts is essential. The courts need to keep the media educated and updated as to how and why the court conducts its business the way it does. An open dialogue between the media and the courts is something that the community as a whole would benefit from and should expect from its elected officials.

The nature of our court system often casts jurors, defendants, litigants, victims and witnesses into public view whether willingly or not. Each case and each situation requires a judge to carefully balance the interests of all participants in the court system with the public’s right to know. As a judge I will be committed to doing this in a fair, thoughtful, and conscientious manner.