New York Court Consolidation Doesn't Go Far Enough
In 'North v. Russell' Supreme Court Justice Stewart opined that the right to counsel becomes meaningless if the person hearing the case is incapable of understanding the arguments being made—a 'hollow mockery' is how he put it.
December 06, 2019 at 03:27 PM
3 minute read
It is not surprising that Justice Tanya Sirago, Executive Director of the NYS Magistrate's Association would oppose any attempt to consolidate the justice courts. That is what the SMA has done every time there is any discussion of consolidating or replacing the justice court system. There are more than 1,200 local criminal courts, referred to as 'justice' courts, presided over by more than 1,800 town and village judges. More than two third of those judges are not lawyers.
In 1983, in People v. Charles F. then associate Judge Kaye wrote, in dissent, that "…a lay person regardless of his educational qualifications or experience is not a constitutionally acceptable substitute for a member of the Bar." In North v. Russell Supreme Court Justice Stewart opined that the right to counsel becomes meaningless if the person hearing the case is incapable of understanding the arguments being made—a 'hollow mockery' is how he put it.
The complexities and technical understanding of criminal procedure, evidence and substantive law that Judge Kaye observed in 1983 that prevented a lay judge from providing an accused with due process have, in the last 36 years, only become far more complex and technical. The new bail amendments will now, for the first time, require a judge to justify in writing, or on the record, every bail decision. They will have to explain, in legal detail, why they imposed bail or restrictive conditions. In the past, their decisions could be explained simply as accepting the recommendations of the DA. These town and village judges will now have to monitor and enforce discovery compliance. They have to deal with family offenses and orders of protection, DWIs that have consequences for the next 25 years, landlord-tenant matters, bail and discovery—all with 12 hours of training annually.
In 2008 the Dunne Commission issued its report, "Justice Most Local" which essentially found the current system constitutionally unacceptable. It would have preferred a district court system with lawyer-judges presiding. Unfortunately, the Dunne Commission also found there was no political will or ability to enact meaningful reforms. Faced with that reality, it offered modest changes to improve the existing system, many which the SMA opposed from within (there were several SMA officers added to the commission) and from without, disavowing the report as soon as it was published.
In 2019-2020 there is a new political reality. While the attorney general suggests court consolidation, NYSACDL believes that consolidation does not go far enough. The only constitutionally acceptable system of providing due process in local criminal courts is to create municipal courts, county by county, presided over by lawyer-judges.
Gregory Lubow
Chair, Justice Courts Committee New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAttorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
3 minute readLetter to the Editor: Law Journal Used Misleading Photo for Article on Election Observers
1 minute readNYC's Administrative Court's to Publish Some Rulings in the New York Law Journal Is Welcomed. But It Should Go Further
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250