Most
of what I want to tell you about today concerns programs to build
better courts, but I should begin by giving you the news about what
judges do most: decide the disputes that bring people to court.
When I first spoke to you four years ago, the backlog at the Indiana
Supreme Court stood at an all-time high. I asked you and the people
of Indiana to give us the tools to attack this problem. I promised
you that we would eliminate the backlog of cases, which was two
years long. Today, I am finally able to report victory. Despite
a growing caseload now at record levels, we have whipped the backlog
at the Indiana Supreme Court.
I also want to tell you about the incredible record set this year
by the Indiana Court of Appeals. The men and women who serve on
that court disposed of 30% more cases than ever before. They cut
the backlog in the Court of Appeals by 55% in twelve months. That
performance deserves applause from all of us.
Important Projects with Small Tickets
We all knew that 1991 would be a year when you couldn’t solve
problems in government by spending money. Last January I promised
you that no one would be better at “Doing More With Less”
than Indiana’s judges. The best public servants will not just
throw up their hands and say, “There’s a recession on,
we can’t do anything.” Hard times force us to do some
heavy thinking about how we can make progress without spending new
money. It is an interesting challenge to run a government that way.
I suppose a very healthy challenge.
I want to tell you about what the judiciary has accomplished this
past year through projects which do a lot of good but really turned
out to be small ticket items or no-ticket items.
Several hundred thousand people a year find themselves in our city
and town courts. To improve the quality of the justice they receive
there, we have adopted a rule requiring the non-lawyer judges in
those courts to take the same amount of continuing legal education
which lawyers and other judges are required to take. We have staged
these courses for many years. Now we will be sure that those who
need it the most show up to take advantage of it.
We made Indiana one of the first states in the country to adopt
minimum standards for lawyers who represent defendants in capital
cases. The most cost of this guarantee will be paid from criminal
court costs you adopted two years ago.
We took steps which we believe will strengthen ethical standards
in Indiana’s legal profession. First, we decided to expand
the ethics requirements in the Indiana bar examination by requiring
law students to pass a national test, the Multistate Professional
Responsibility Examination, which is several times more comprehensive
than the one we have been using. Second, we will now require that
lawyers who have been suspended from the bar for violating ethical
rules must pass the same ethics exam before being readmitted. No
cost to the taxpayers.
We launched a new program to address the two most common complaints
people have about modern litigation: it costs too much and it takes
too long. With the help of the State Bar we developed a new rule
for what is called Alternative Dispute Resolution. It authorizes
layers and local courts to use arbitration, mediation, mini-trials,
summary jury trials, and private judges as alternatives to traditional
litigation. We hope this will help people resolve their disputes
without the time and expense of traditional litigation. A net savings
all the way around. And no new public dollars.
We became one of the first states in the nation where a party in
federal trial court can ask the federal judge to certify a question
of state law to the state supreme court. The old system required
the federal judge to estimate what state law might mean. Only the
federal appeals court in Chicago could ask us what Indiana law meant.
Our new procedure will save people the cost and delay of that round-trip
to Chicago. A no-ticket item.
We also adopted a new rule authorizing trial judges to permit lawyers
to use FAX machines as a way of filing documents in court. We think
it is cheaper, and we know it is faster, than making people drive
to the courthouse or use the mails. As for using technology here
in the State House, we recently authorized the Clerk of our court,
Dwayne Brown, to send copies of opinions by FAX.
I think we made progress this year on an issue I know you hear
about, the Child Support Guidelines which the federal government
required Indiana to adopt. A committee of trial judges who hear
divorces day in and day out just finished a year-long study of Indiana’s
guidelines. As a result of their work and extensive public hearings,
we have approved changes in the Child Support Guidelines which we
think will make them both easier to work with and fairer to mothers,
fathers, and children. One area of recurring difficulty under Indiana
law is the so-called “second-family” issue. It goes
something like this: “When a father remarries and creates
a new family, should his support for his first child be reduced?”
This is really a substantive question of social policy, and current
statutes do not answer it very clearly. We hope you will provide
us better guidance on it.
Juveniles in Jails
The greatest success story of the year also concerns children.
What to do with errant teenagers who need secure detention has been
a subject of debate in Indiana for more than a century. When the
delegates to the constitutional convention of 1850 met in the house
chamber, speaker after speaker decried the use of jails as places
to store young people who were runaways, or generally incorrigible,
or just kids in need of more help than a family could give or would
give.
A hundred and twenty-five years later, Hoosier children were still
spending thousands of nights every year in local jails with adult
offenders. This situation persisted notwithstanding the commands
of both state and federal statutes. Congress had set a national
goal of removing children from jails by passing the Juvenile Justice
Delinquency and Prevention Act of 1974, authored by Senator Birch
Bayh. The Indiana General Assembly established the same policy in
a variety of statutes.
Given the persistent and long-standing nature of this problem,
it is all he more remarkable that there has finally been enormous
progress in solving it during the last year, a year when money was
scarcer than ever.
Here’s how it all used to work. A runaway teenager in Clark
County who needed to e detained for his or her own good –
or for the protection of others – was until this year put
in a sheriff’s car and taken hundreds of miles in search of
an available bed in a secure facility. The sheriff might take the
kid to Fort Wayne if there was a bed available there, at least until
that bed was needed by somebody from Fort Wayne. At that point,
the sheriff would pick up the kid and take him to South Bend for
a week. Then on to Lafayette, or as far as Valparaiso. And occasionally
back to Jeffersonville for hearings. It seems impossible, but, believe
me, it was very common. And very inconvenient. And very expensive.
Finally, in 1991 things changed. Now Clark County families with
children in distress wil find that their children are placed in
Jeffersonville, because in September of last yea Clerk County opened
a 14-bed juvenile facility with help from the Department of Correction.
This story is now changing in many places. Johnson County will
open a 48-bed facility next month which will operate as a regional
center. Howard County is operating a temporary 8-bed facility until
a new one can be constructed.
Detention centers are also being planned in Dearborn, Henry, LaPorte,
Monroe, Tippecanoe, and Warrick counties. Bartholomew County has
plans to convert its former children’s home into a juvenile
center. And in Cass County, the first state-run juvenile facility
to open since 1976 will come on line this spring with room for 56.
In Fort Wayne, the Department of Correction is converting a work
release center to a 90-bed juvenile facility.
Many of these facilities have been opened without constructing
expensive new buildings, but they have all cost something. Local
judges, county commissioners and councilmen, and private agencies
have been ingenious in finding state, county, and private dollars
(and, yes, even Lottery profits) to finance start-up costs. You
may have seen on television the enormous crowd which turned out
in New Castle to support doing something in Henry County so that
teenagers could be helped close to home rather than carted around
the state in squad cars. The long-term cost should be less than
what we were spending under the old and terrible system.
The result is that the number of Hoosier children spending the
night in jail with adult convicts has dropped dramatically. In the
last thirty months, the number of juveniles housed in adult jails
has dropped from 7000 to just over 400.
The heroes of this story are many. They include Commissioner James
Aiken and his deputy Chris DeBruyn. They include judges like Clementine
Barthold and Jeff Eggers and Alan Brubaker and John Kellam. They
include the State Public Defender Susan Carpenter. And they include
members of the legislature who helped find state and local funds
in difficult times. And the Indiana Supreme Court played a role,
by requiring people to get serious about enforcing the laws you
passed. Those people and hundreds of others are the heroes. The
winners are Indiana’s children.
I do not want to be misunderstood to say that we have this problem
licked. I do want to say that progress in building a better judiciary
and a better society here in this place we call Indiana does not
need to stop because there is no idle money sitting out on the table
for appropriation.
Rules of Evidence
There are all kinds of things that Indiana can do which do not
require new appropriations and the story I have just told you is
but one example of how Hoosiers can make progress in hard times.
I’ll tell you about one we plan for 1992. Most states and
the federal courts have adopted rules of evidence to cover problems
like how you get a document admitted in court, or how to treat hearsay,
or how you can impeach a witness. Indiana has always dealt with
these matters through the common law method, meaning that lawyers
and trial judges have to find the answers by searching the hundreds
of appellate court opinions setting out acceptable practice. The
Supreme Court has reached the conclusion that Indiana would be better
off if all these practices were available in a single set of published
rules. This mostly affects how people try lawsuits and thus it is
really our job to solve this problem. We believe that this project
would turn out better if all three branches do it together. So,
we ask you to be our partners in this work. It is the perfect project
for hard times, practically a no-ticket item and one we probably
will not find time to do when the recession is over.
Finally, as many of you know, I was recently reappointed to a new
term as Chief Justice. Being Chief Justice is not something I ever
imagined would be part of my life. Most of the time it is all you
could ever ask for. Much of what we have done these last few years
is due to the good will and support of my colleagues on the bench,
here and in the county courthouses. We owe a lot to the Governor
and the other officers of the executive branch. And I owe a great
deal to the members of the legislature. There is no way I can repay
you for your countless acts of kindness and cooperation and simple
friendship. I can only stand in this public place and say thank
you. And to promise to stand in this place twelve months from now
and answer the question, “What have you done for us lately?”
|