Judiciary Endorses Emergency Court Procedures Amid Virus Pandemic
The Judicial Council received more than 50 letters—many of them critical of proposed delays to criminal proceedings—prior to Saturday's meeting.
March 28, 2020 at 06:37 PM
4 minute read
A day after Gov. Gavin Newsom granted California's chief justice expansive powers to change court rules across the state, the Judicial Council on Saturday urged Tani Cantil-Sakauye to temporarily extend criminal procedural deadlines to help courts deal with pandemic-related closures and limited calendars.
The council, meeting in an emergency session, unanimously endorsed extending the time for a defendant to be arraigned from 48 hours to seven days. Courts will also be allowed to delay preliminary hearings and criminal trials under the proposal approved by the council.
The changes, if mandated by the chief justice as expected, will be in force until 90 days after the governor lifts the state of emergency declared to deal with the COVID-19 outbreak.
"These extensions are not a license to wait," said appellate Justice Marsha Slough, chair of the council's executive and planning committee. "They are intended for relief to the trial courts who've asked for relief to assist them in accomplishing their core business."
The council also asked the chief justice to direct courts to use technology in proceedings as much as possible to enable remote appearances, interpreting and court reporting. Before the pandemic, court reporters and interpreters had opposed using technology to replace in-person translating and transcribing.
"People in the courts, many of them are first responders, they are law enforcement, they are firefighters, they are a variety of first responders," Cantil-Sakauye said Saturday. "And we need judges who are healthy and able to be on the bench."
The chief justice said she has "received no assurances" that jails are imposing social distancing rules, either within their facilities or while transferring inmates to courts.
"This is also an avenue to protect the public," Cantil-Sakauye said. "This is to protect inmates as well. This is about protecting the public, flattening the curve, making sure that courts are not vectors."
The Judicial Council received more than 50 letters prior to Saturday's meeting—conducted by a faulty telephone system without public comment—many of them critical of proposed delays to criminal proceedings.
The delayed arraignment proposal "will disproportionately impact low income people who cannot afford the amount of bail provided for in the bail schedule," wrote Kathleen Guneratne, senior staff attorney for the ACLU Foundation of Northern California. "While people with means will presumably still be able to bail out of jail quickly, low income people will have to wait for a week for any meaningful consideration of release either on lower bail or on their own recognizance."
Cantil-Sakauye emphasized that the measures are temporary and will be used only as a means "to get over this hump."
Newsom on Friday signed an executive order freeing Cantil-Sakauye from statutory restrictions limiting her ability to order changes through California's courts to address the pandemic.
Asked about the order Saturday, Newsom said he has "deep respect" for the chief justice and the Judicial Council.
"I have incredible confidence not only in her leadership but the Judicial Council's leadership to meet this moment with the kind of alacrity that's required of it, where they're not waiting for a formal executive order for every specific protocol to come from my desk with my signature," Newsom said at an event in San Jose.
"This will allow them the ability in real time to meet the needs of the criminal and civil justice systems," Newsom said.
Judicial branch leaders said Saturday that they will likely hold more meetings to address operations during the pandemic, including handling eviction proceedings and other civil issues.
Read more:
'The Same, But Different': Learning to Litigate During a Public Health Crisis
How the COVID-19 Crisis Is Reshaping Alternative Dispute Resolution
Governor Gives Chief Justice 'Unprecedented' Authority to Address Pandemic
Lawyers Watch for Consumer Class Actions as COVID-19 Hits Pocketbooks
How COVID-19 Is Impacting California Courts: Roundup of Services
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
© 2025 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 AllInvoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
4 minute readCalifornia's Chief Justice Starts Third Year With Questions About Fires, Trump and AI
4 minute readWillkie Farr & Gallagher Drives Legal Challenge for Uber Against State's Rideshare Laws
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How ‘Bilateral Tapping’ Can Help with Stress and Anxiety
- 2How Law Firms Can Make Business Services a Performance Champion
- 3'Digital Mindset': Hogan Lovells' New Global Managing Partner for Digitalization
- 4Silk Road Founder Ross Ulbricht Has New York Sentence Pardoned by Trump
- 5Settlement Allows Spouses of U.S. Citizens to Reopen Removal Proceedings
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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