Courts Today Feb/March 2014 by Criminal Justice Media Inc.

CT Cover F-M 14_CT Cover 11/04 3/2/14 6:13 PM Page 1

SERVING AMERICA’S COURTS AND THE PROFESSIONALS THAT RUN THEM

CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED

Courts Today 69 Lyme Road, Hanover, NH 03755

February/March 2014 Vol. 12 No. 1

E-Solutions that Work

Drug Court’s Proven Record

CT Cover F-M 14_CT Cover 11/04 3/2/14 6:13 PM Page 2

F-M 14 p3 TOC_CT 2/05 p004 TOC 3/1/14 7:24 AM Page 3

F E B R U A R Y / M A R C H 2 014 VOLU M E 12 N U M B E R 1

DE PARTM E NTS

6 Courts in the Media

F EATU R E S

12 Pushing Paper...Away E-solutions that Work

30 Ad Index

19 PACER, e-Filing Solution: A 25-Year Retrospective

22 Audio, Visual, Teleconferencing and Presentation Products

27 Drug Courtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Proven Record

CT F-M 14 p04 PP_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 3/1/14 7:30 AM Page 4

A Reminder from the Publisher

WE want YOU! Dear Valued Reader,

You have been with us on our journey to find the best ideas in keeping the wheels of justice running smoothly. However, we have noticed that we have not heard from some of you in a long while. You don’t call…. You don’t write…. We’re a little disappointed that we haven’t heard from you in three years. You know who you are. One assumption is that you no

Assistant Publisher Jennifer Kapinos Editor Donna Rogers Contributing Editors Michael Grohs Bill Schiffner Kelly Mason Art Director Jamie Stroud

It’s

b e e n twelve (12) years since the launch of Courts Today and reader response continues to be outstanding. We have covered topical issues from drug courts to e-courts and from innovative justice programs to operational excellence. In our recent past we have covered top technologists and ways to take charge of your paper chase.

Publisher & Executive Editor Thomas S. Kapinos

Marketing Representatives Bonnie Dodson (828) 479-7472 Ben Skidmore (972) 587-9064 Art Sylvie (480) 816-3448 Peggy Virgadamo (718) 456-7329

is published bi-monthly by: Criminal Justice Media, Inc 116 South Catalina Ave. • #116 Redondo Beach, CA 90277 310.374.2700

longer wish to receive Courts Today. If this is correct, do nothing and you will certainly be removed from the list of qualified subscribers. This will be your last issue. But, if you wish to continue to receive Courts Today in your mailbox (or online) for no cost please go to www.court s today.com and click the “subscribe button.” Please act now. Thank You!

Circulation Manager

Send address changes to: COURTS TODAY 69 Lyme Road Hanover, NH 03755 or fax (603) 643-6551 To receive a FREE subscription to COURTS TODAY submit, on court letterhead, your request with qualifying title; date, sign and mail to COURTS TODAY 69 Lyme Road Hanover, NH 03755 or you may fax your subscription request to (603) 643-6551 Subscriptions: Annual subscriptions for non-qualified personnel, United States only, is $60.00. Single copy or back issues-$10.00 All Canada and Foreign subscriptions are $90.00 per year. Printed in the United States of America, Copyright © 2013 Criminal Justice Media, Inc.

February/March 2014 4

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

CT F-M 14 p04 PP_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 3/1/14 7:30 AM Page 5

F-M 14 p06-11 Minis_CT 2/05 p006-13 NEWS 3/1/14 7:39 AM Page 6

CO U RT S I N T H E M E D IA Jessica M. Salerno, PhD, joins forces to present findings showing moral outrage affects confidence in a guilty verdict.

When emotions of anger and disgust collide, the end result is a more confident guilty verdict, according to recent studies by Jessica M. Salerno, Arizona State University New College of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences Assistant Professor and collaborator Liana C. Peter-Hagene at the University of Illinois at Chicago. And in a world where cell phones and security cameras are increasingly recording horrible— even heinous—crimes, notes Salerno, the studies focus on their influence on jurors and the resulting outcome. “We found that the higher mock jurors rated their anger, the more moral outrage they felt, and in turn the more confident they were that the defendant was guilty—but this was only true when the mock jurors

MORAL OUTRAGE EQUALS GUILTY?

also rated themselves as having at least moderate disgust,” Salerno points out. “So, it appears that arousing more anger and disgust together might lead to more moral outrage, and in turn more confidence in a guilty verdict.” She adds, “So, even though the mock jurors all saw the same evidence, the more they happened to react with a combination of anger and disgust, the more morally outraged they were, and ultimately, the more confident they were in a guilty verdict.” The work completed by the duo is chronicled in the Psychological Science journal: “The Interactive Effect of Anger and Disgust on Moral Outrage and Judgments.” “The impetus for this study was really a combination of factors,” says Salerno. “We had read several news

articles about jurors being exposed to more and more emotionally disturbing evidence in court, such as horrific crimes caught on video, gruesome photographs of child murder victims, etc.,” she says. “We had also read a lot of stories about jurors having extreme emotional reactions to evidence in court.” And, “Finally, I have been an avid follower of the West Memphis 3 case. The documentaries about this case highlighted the barrage of terrible photographs of the dead children that the jurors had to endure. Repeatedly hearing about this issue, led us to wonder what influence these kinds of emotions, specifically anger, disgust, and moral outrage, might have on jurors' verdicts holding all evidence constant.” In the studies the participants

February/March 2014 6

W W W .C OURTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p06-11 Minis_CT 2/05 p006-13 NEWS 3/1/14 7:39 AM Page 7

F-M 14 p06-11 Minis_CT 2/05 p006-13 NEWS 3/1/14 7:39 AM Page 8

CO U RT S I N T H E M E D IA were asked to either read a vignette where one dealt with sexual assault, or watch a presentation of evidence adapted from a murder case. Results of the first study showed that anger was a predictor of moral outrage when it occurred with at least a moderately high level of disgust and disgust predicted moral outrage when it occurred with at least a moderately high level of anger. The second study revealed that anger was a stronger predictor of moral outrage as disgust increased and disgust significantly predicted moral outrage at all levels of anger. Anger and disgust increased confidence in a guilty verdict through moral outrage, but disgust predicted moral outrage more consistently. “There is no previous research, to our knowledge, that has tested whether moral outrage mediates the effect of disgust on subsequent judgments,” she says. “Humans intuitively understand what moral outrage is. However, researchers debate its emotional components. We wanted to investigate the relationships between anger and disgust since emotions tend to co-occur with each other.” Based on these findings, says Salerno, “This may not be in the jurors’ control and they may not be aware that their emotions are influencing their decisions.” —G. F. Guercio

EXCESSIVE SENTENCES FOR LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE, EXTREME RACIAL DISPARITIES, SAYS ACLU REPORT At the end of 2013, President Obama commuted the sentences of three prisoners serving life without parole (LWOP) for nonviolent offenses. Clarence Aaron, Stephanie George, and Reynolds Wintersmith, Jr., who all received commutations, were profiled in the ACLU’s recent report on people serving life without parole for nonviolent offenses. In the first-ever study of people serving life without parole for nonviolent offenses in the U.S., the American Civil Liberties Union found that at least 3,278 prisoners fit this category in federal and state prisons combined. The November 2013 report, "A Living Death: Life Without Parole for Nonviolent Offenses," features key statistics about these prisoners, an analysis of the laws that produced their sentences, and case studies of 110 men and women serving these sentences (Read the full report at https://www.aclu.org/criminal-law-reform/living-death-life-without-parole-nonviolent-offenses-0). It states that of these prisoners, 79 percent were convicted of nonviolent, drug-related crimes such as possession

February/March 2014 8

W W W .C OURTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p06-11 Minis_CT 2/05 p006-13 NEWS 3/1/14 7:39 AM Page 9

F-M 14 p06-11 Minis_CT 2/05 p006-13 NEWS 3/1/14 7:39 AM Page 10

CO U RT S I N T H E M E D IA or distribution, and 20 percent of nonviolent property crimes like theft. "The people profiled in our report are an extreme example of the millions of lives ruined by the persistent ratcheting up of our sentencing laws over the last forty years," said Vanita Gupta, deputy legal director of the ACLU, in a press release. The ACLU estimates that federal and state taxpayers spend $1.8 billion keeping these people in prison for life instead of more appropriate terms. Federal courts account for 63 percent of the 3,278 life-without-parole sentences for nonviolent offenses. The remaining prisoners are in Louisiana (429 prisoners), Florida (270), Alabama (244), Mississippi (93), South Carolina (88), Oklahoma (49), Georgia (20), Illinois (10), and Missouri (1). These are largely due to three-strikes and other kinds of habitual offender laws that mandate an LWOP sentence for the commission of a nonviolent crime. 110 CASE STUDIES OF LIFERS The report documents detailed case studies of 110 people serving LWOP for nonviolent crimes, which include crimes such as stealing tools from a tool shed, borrowing a coworker’s truck, and taking a wallet from a hotel room. In the documented cases, the prisoners are generally first-time drug offenders or nonviolent repeat offenders. These nonviolent lifers also include drug couriers; drug addicts who sold small amounts of drugs in order to support their addictions; petty thieves; and girlfriends or wives who were caught up in the mass arrests of members of drug conspiracies and, because they knew little about their partners’ or ex-partners’ drug activities, were unable to trade information for more lenient sentences. The vast majority come from poor families and did not graduate from high school. Most are Black, and in some cases the circum-

stances of their stop, search, and subsequent arrests appear to have involved racial profiling. These cases are not outliers or flukes, states the report. Sentencing nonviolent offenders to die in prison is the direct outcome of harsher sentencing laws. From 1930 to 1975, the average incarceration rate was 106 people per 100,000 adults in the population. Between 1975 and 2011, the incarceration rate rose to 743 per 100,000 adults—the highest incarceration rate in the world. This growth cannot be explained away by increasing crime rates; although crime rose in the late 1960s, it did not rise enough to explain the extreme spike in the incarceration rate, and in the 1990s crime began to drop. Instead, there is now near-universal consensus among experts that the United States became the world’s largest incarcerator as the direct result of deliberately punitive laws and policies—many of which arose in the context of the 40-year failed War on Drugs—aimed at some of the country’s most vulnerable populations. In the end, the ACLU states: In far too many cases, imprisonment until death does not serve these goals and constitutes disproportionately severe punishment that violates human rights law, which has long recognized that the punishment must fit the crime. Such sentences violate fundamental human rights to humane treatment, proportionate sentencing, and rehabilitation. In order to serve justice, they recommend: ending nonviolent LWOP sentences and making elimination of all federal sentencing retroactive and requiring resentencing. The report also suggests Congress should direct the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review Sentencing Guidelines to eliminate LWOP sentences for nonviolent offenses. In addition, the President and state governors should use clemency power to commute the sentences of

all individuals serving LWOP for nonviolent offenses. State legislatures should likewise repeal all existing laws allow for or mandate a sentence of LWOP for a nonviolent offense. Any changes to sentencing laws should be retroactive and require a resentencing. —D. Rogers

DEATH PENALTY CLUSTERED IN MINORITY OF COUNTIES; THE TWO PERCENT’S SOLUTION Currently 32 states have the death penalty as an option, but since 1976—the year the death penalty was reinstated—the majority of cases (56%) that led to the death penalty have been clustered in only 2% of the nation’s counties. All executions conducted by states were from cases in just 15% of the nation’s counties. All inmates on death row as of January 1, 2013 came from just 20% of the nation’s counties. That means 80% of counties in the nation have no one on death row, and 85% of counties have not had a convict executed in over 45 years, yet they are still tasked with covering the costs. According to the BJS, in 2012, only nine states carried out an execution. Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, which in October 2013 published the study “The 2% Death Penalty: How a Minority of Counties Produce Most Death Penalty Cases at Enormous Costs to All,” points out that the clustering is the result of a handful of district attorneys responsible only to the voters of their own counties, but the financial and moral burden falls on all counties. As Dieter notes, the D.A. makes the decisions, not the people of the state, and this results in quirky variations. Some D.A.s believe strongly in the death penalty and others do not, or they do not have the resources. Getting a capital conviction could take a county’s entire budget. This,

February/March 2014 10

W W W .C OURTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p06-11 Minis_CT 2/05 p006-13 NEWS 3/1/14 7:39 AM Page 11

C O U RT S I N T H E M E D I A says Dieter, shows dependence on individuals and not elections. For example, only Harris County, Texas, elects their D.A., but the costs of an execution are shouldered by all since most of the costs are paid on a state level and most people live in counties that have not had an execution since 1976 and have little or no control over counties that use it aggressively. According to the Urban Institute, the gross cost of a single death sentence is $3 million over the course of the case, which is about three times the cost of a non-capital trial. Between 1973 and 2011, there were 8,300 death sentences. Based on those figures, taxpayers will be responsible for $25 billion in costs, and 85% of those counties have not had a single case that resulted in an execution. While socioeconomic status and race have long been considered factors in the arbitrary distribution of capital crime

convictions, the study found that only when looking at the matter on a county level shows the significant role geography plays. One might think that those involved in so many capital cases would be quite proficient, but the study found the opposite to be true. Says Dieter, counties with the most executions also tend to have the most egregious violations. There is a strong correlation between “the prolific application of the death penalty” and the high percentage of cases being reversed on appeal. Harry Connick, Sr. was the D.A. of Orleans County, La., for 30 years. In his tenure, four death row inmates were exonerated due to prosecutorial misconduct. Harris County, Texas, the county that leads the nation in capital crime convictions, has a well documented history of racial injustice and flawed science. Almost half of Pennsylvania’s

death row population comes from Philadelphia County, and, according to a Philadelphia Inquirer study, 69 cases have been reversed as a result of inadequate representation. The sentences in almost all of those sentences were reduced in retrial. Some defendants were completely acquitted. Maricopa County ranks fourth in the nation of number of inmates on death row. Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, at the height of his term, had deluged the courts with 149 death penalty cases, which was far more than the courts and the bar were prepared to handle. Thomas later resigned as County Attorney, and in 2012 he was disbarred by the Arizona Supreme Court for abuse of power (though not directly tied to his death row crusade). He has since announced his intention to run for governor in 2014. —M. Grohs

February/March 2014 W W W . C O U R T S T O D A Y . CO M

F-M 14 p12-18 scan/workflow 2_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:49 PM Page 12

B Y M I C H A EL G R O H S , CO N T R I B U T I N G E D ITOR

Pushing Paper…Away The Internet age has spawned a series of trends regarding integration, mobility, and reflection on inefficiencies.

y its very nature, justice comes with a lot of paperwork. It can be overwhelming. It can be expensive. It can get misplaced or lost. It can be exasperating. As HBO TV series star Corrado “Uncle Junior” Soprano said, “An entire forest in the northwest must’ve given its life in Xerox paper for this one [expletive] trial.” What courts have been finding is that the technology explosion that occurred with the Internet age has created a light at the end of the tunnel, and more and more courts are walking towards that light. It has also spawned a series of trends regarding integration, mobility, and even reflection. Not surprisingly, economics has been a driving force in the adoption of scanning and document management and integrated workflow technology. It has also been a driving

force for courts to look introspectively at their efficiencies and inefficiencies and analyze where change is needed. Scott Bade, president of ImageSoft, Inc., the Southfield, Michigan-based maker of JusticeTech software products says, “The great recession has a silver lining in that it’s forcing people to rethink the status quo, not an easy thing for organizations who are so steeped in precedent and tradition.” Courts, he says, are learning that managing documents is not enough; they need to manage the process, “and that requires workflow technology.” Judge Philip Rodgers is one of those Courts. The Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in Traverse City, Mich., started the transition with a program that began in 2008 and ended in 2013, and he agrees. He views the process as having had an unintended conse-

quence that occurs once in a generation: the opportunity to reflect and question how and why things were done the way they were. The Court was able to create a mapping process in which they mapped how they routed every single one of thousands of documents. One of the results is that he has not had any paper on the bench since April 2013, and now all documents are a click away and can be opened, signed and distributed to attorneys before they leave the room. “There is not a single open file on our circuit today that is not entirely digital.” The system self-amortized in two years. More and more mobility has been trending since the technology explosion that led to the Internet and, Bade points out, is simply a byproduct of the on-demand and selfservice age, and it will continue to be so. He furthers that “it will have a huge influence on Courts.” Judge Rodgers is already a proponent of the fact that information can be obtained while on the move. When judges go on vacation, he points out, no one fills in for them. Each county keeps their own records, and now accessing those records is seamless. It can be done from anywhere in the world, so when on vacation, Judge Rodgers can take an hour out of the

February/March 2014 12

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p12-18 scan/workflow 2_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:49 PM Page 13

day to keep up, sign documents and work case loads. It is, he says, “a very powerful and efficient tool.” Integration is trending everywhere. Michael Kleiman, director of marketing, Courts & Justice Division of Plano, Texas-based Tyler Technologies, has noticed that customers are driving towards end-toend processes optimized for electronic workflow. Courts are integrating as many systems as possible in order to make the entire process paperless. “In particular we are seeing case management and document systems being tightly integrated.” He furthers, “In addition, there is trend toward integration with other departments’ or agencies’ systems so that the whole process— from case initiation to disposition becomes electronic, and has an efficient workflow.”

Akbar Farook, director of Integrated Justice Products and Services at Integrated Software Specialists has also noticed the drive for integration as courts have been asked to do more with less. “A trend we have been seeing involves courts increasingly looking for an integrated, web-based, enterprise-level document management system that seamlessly talks with the courts’ case management system, eFiling systems, and is not just a standalone DMS.” He has also noticed that features that were once optional have started to become mandatory, such as optical character recognition technology to determine the case type and extract meta data, auto redaction of sensitive information, and auto docketing of documents. “There is more and more emphasis on integrated workflows with these docu-

ment management systems.” Furthermore, with scanning technology taking center stage in many courts “there is a growing need to have portable scanners installed in each courtroom to scan paper documents brought forth by parties during their court sessions.” Bade agrees. “Mobile computing and selfservice will be demanded by current and future generations of consumers.” Paperwork might be getting filed away, forever freeing up courts’ time, adapting to their budgets and making the justice process as efficient and error free as possible, and court personnel are happy with the result. Judge Rodgers says that they started the process because they thought that it would be good for the attorneys. It has been. “No one would go back to the way we used to do things.”

February/March 2014x W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p12-18 scan/workflow 2_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:49 PM Page 14

C OMP I L ED B Y B ILL S CH IF F N E R , CO N T R I B UTI NG E DI TOR

SCANNING, DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT Electronic Document Management System

New Dawn Technologies’ JustWare Solution Suite includes a mature electronic document management system (EDMS) featuring file management, document scanning, and routing. Users easily navigate through Windows Explorer-like file structures to find case files, create document packets to share with involved parties, upload video and photos, and organize any electronic file types in a name or case record. JustWare also features a workflow editor and business rules engine, automating repetitive tasks, reducing data entry, and eliminating forgotten steps or tasks. www.newdawn.com, 1.877.587.8927

Scanning Document Solution

OmniScan is an advanced document scanning solution which helps users accelerate processes. It lets legal organizations scan, digitize and deliver relevant and process ready information to enterprise applications such as ERP, BPM and ECM. OmniScan is integrated with applications such as SAP ECC 6.0 and Microsoft SharePoint 2007 and 2010. It enhances an organization’s effectiveness by accelerating the document transformation process by automatically extracting, indexing and classifying content into actionable business information. OmniScan through intelligent features such as Automatic Image Enhancements, OCR Extraction and Simplified Re-scanning is said to improve the overall accuracy of information being delivered to enterprise applications. www.newgensoft.com, 1.202.800.7783

NEW DAWN

High Speed Document Scanner Whenever the need the speed and accuracy of OMR along with the productivity and flexibility of document imaging arises, the iNSIGHT 30’s advanced technology is said to offer genuine versatility at a lower cost of ownership than owning separate hardware. Due to its unique blend of capabilities, the iNSIGHT 30 is well positioned to address demanding applications such as documents, surveys, attendance, personnel records, archival, and general back file conversions. The iNSIGHT 30 accurately scans the form for data while our Scantools Plus software controls the scanning process and stores the data that is read. The scanner and software work together reading up to 3,600 sheets per hour. www.scantron.com, 1.800.SCANTRON

SCANTRON

Electronic Sharing JusticeTech enables the justice community—courts, prosecutors, law enforcement and other related agencies—to share a common electronic case file to create a digital “paper-on-demand” environment where paper is no longer the norm. The solution provides automated workflow to seamlessly move information through the process, ensuring collaboration, efficiency and a better justice system. Workflow is a key differentiator of JusticeTech and the most significant component to a digital court because of the process effiFebruary/March 2014 14

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p12-18 scan/workflow 2_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:49 PM Page 15

AND WORKFLOW PRODUCTS ciencies it creates. JusticeTech contains pre-configured workflow foundations for all courts, as well as for eFiling, eSignature and eCertification functionality. www.imagesoftinc.com, 1.248.948.8100

Appellate Court Case Management

APPELLATE COURT CASE MANAGEMENT

C-Track is a Web-based case management solution developed specifically for appellate courts to capture, track, process, and report on the court’s cases. C-Track manages day-to-day tasks while capturing information that allows courts to track and monitor their performance. C-Track’s data and processes are easily configurable by court users, allowing the court to keep up with changes in business procedures, rules, and legislation. http://legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/ law-products/solutions/lt-court-tech, 1.877.923.7800

Electronic Filing Solution

ELECTRONIC FILING SOLUTION

Odyssey File & Serve is an end-to-end electronic filing solution that is integrated with Odyssey Case Manager, Judge Edition, Attorney Manager and Jail Manager. Documents that are e-filed are automatically populated into the case management system once accepted by the court, and can be viewed on the bench and elsewhere. Recently implemented statewide in Texas, it is already eliminating a pallet of paper per week. www.tylertech.com, 1.800.431.5776

Digital Signatures DIGITAL SIGNATURES

ARX (Algorithmic Research) is a global provider of cost-efficient digital signature solutions for industries such as legal and government. ARX CoSign is the market leading digital signature solution that fully automates signature-dependent processes affordably and compliantly, allowing organizations to go paperless and save time and money. Compatible with major document types including Word, Excel, PDF, PDF/A, and IBM Forms, CoSign signatures are globally verifiable without requiring proprietary validation software. CoSign is also centrally managed by the organization for reliable control over signature privileges. www.arx.com, 1.415.839.8161

Dynamic Caseflow Management

CourtView’s JWorks, with its Dynamic Caseflow Management (DCM) engine, creates a case and workflow blueprint that informs users about processes, events, tasks, resources, and deadlines and their impact on the case guidelines and plans even before they happen. JWorks is said to save time, resources, and rework by having the DCM deliver vital information at the earliest point possible to the right people so that informed decisions can be made. www.courtview.com, 1.800.406.4333 February/March 2014x W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p12-18 scan/workflow 2_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:49 PM Page 16

Paperless Court Case System

Pioneer Records Management, the developer of Landmark software, specializes in the conversion of court, county, and government records. Its parent company, Pioneer Technology Group, is the developer of the innovative Benchmark paperless court case system, and its court expertise allows the firm to convert historical records of any type and format, with an exacting process that emphasizes image clarity, accuracy, and historical preservation while working within your budget, says the company. Conversion to any existing system is available, either on-site or at our facility, and can provide references from the many courts and counties who have entrusted us with the conversion of their records. www.pioneerrecordsmanagement.com, 1.800.280.5281

Workflow Management Xerox AgileCourt’s rule driven workflow empowers users by seamlessly creating documents automatically as data is entered into the system. As an example, when a hearing is scheduled a notice can be automatically generated, emailed to attendees, and attached to the case. This avoids the need for printing, scanning, and eliminates extra steps related to document production. http://services.xerox.com/state-and-local-government/public-safetyservices/court-management-software/enus.html, 1.859.277.1500

Workflow Management System AMCAD announces the integration of business process and workflow management within AMCAD’s integrated Case Management System (AiCMS) as part of its expansive Justice Platform solution. By combining workflow and document management the AiCMS solutions reduce the courts dependency on handling case file folders and routing documents to offices. AiCMS supports the latest and most widely accepted scanning capabilities. The scanning and document management function allow users to manage their forms and documents directly in the AiCMS system. The flexibility of the AiCMS system makes this a perfect solution for courts of all sizes. www.amcad.com, 1. 866.793.6505

XEROX AGILECOURT

Cloud Storage

Thomson Reuters Concourse was designed to help government law departments organize all of the information in one place, collaborate easily with internal teams and outside agencies, and manage legal matters and litigation holds efficiently. It connects documents, colleagues, research, communications, and relevant news—anytime, from anywhere. Thomson Reuters Concourse is a matter-based suite of products that makes managing a legal department easier. Concourse seamlessly integrates with the tools court professionals utilize everyday such as Microsoft Outlook and Microsoft Windows. www.thomsonreuters.com/concourse, 1.800.344.5008

AMCAD’S INTEGRATED CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Content Management Tyler’s Incode Municipal Court Case Management can provide a truly paperless environment. The process starts with input though multiple capture methods, then digitally adding metadata, secure signatures, fingerprints and media without ever touching paper. Courts are also eliminating paper output all together: dockets are delivered to judges electronically; receipts and dispositions are disFebruary/March 2014 16

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p12-18 scan/workflow 2_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:49 PM Page 17

played on monitors for defendants and copies are emailed; warrants and court letters are delivered electronically or through automatic call notifications. And all workflow actions are captured for audit and reporting. www.tylertech.com, 1.800.646.2633

Document Scanner TYLERTECH’S ODYSSEY

INSIGHT 20 FROM SCANTRON

The iNSIGHT 20 from Scantron is a compact desktop model scanner that combines document imaging technology along with the proven data collection capabilities and accuracy of optical mark recognition (OMR). Data Collection is the process of reading marks from a printed form (e.g. tests, surveys, ballots, etc.) and converting it to ASCII data. The iNSIGHT 20 accurately scans the form for data while the ScanTools Plus software controls the scanning process and stores the data that is read. The scanner and software work together reading up to 1,800 sheets per hour. www.scantron.com, 1.800.SCANTRON

Mobile Content Management App

Laserfiche Rio is an enterprise content management (ECM) software suite that is used by municipal and county courts around the country to digitize paperwork and automate case management. Laserfiche has extended its popular Laserfiche Mobile app to Android devices, giving court clerks and judges secure, on-the-go access to case files from a variety of mobile phones and tablets. Laserfiche Mobile for Android is included as part of the Laserfiche Rio system. With Laserfiche Mobile for Android, users can: search across all documents in a Laserfiche repository, pan, zoom, rotate and easily access metadata while working with documents and quickly create and upload new documents from the device’s camera, gallery or files into the secure repository. www.laserfiche.com, 562.988.1688

eFile and Service Solution

LASERFICHE RIO

TrueFiling is a 7x24 Web-based eFile and service solution for court, law firm and individual filers. It expedites justice by reducing paper handling and travel time and improves the court’s internal processes through electronic workflow. The solution supports all case types for Circuit, District and Probate courts and integrates with the court’s Case Management System (CMS) and Enterprise Content Management (ECM) system to create a true Paper-onDemand court environment. TrueFiling is based on industry standards and is Oasis ECF compliant. www.imagesoftinc.com, 248.948.8100

Web-based System LT Court Tech is offering its innovative Web-based Case Management and E-Filing software to all levels of the judiciary. CTrack TrialCourtCMS is a comprehensive, highly intuitive case management solution developed specifically for general and limited jurisdiction courts to initiate, process, track, and dispose of court cases. It offers a complete set of functions for all general jurisdiction case February/March 2014x W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p12-18 scan/workflow 2_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:49 PM Page 18

types including: civil, citations, family, juvenile abuse and neglect, criminal, juvenile delinquency. C-Track TrialCourtCMS includes a robust configuration manager that allows courts to adjust to changes in procedures, rules, and legislation without relying on IT personnel. http://legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/law-products/solutions/lt-court-tech, 1.877.923.7800

Legal Scanning Services

Merritt Scanning digitizes all documents pertaining to a case into one database that can be easily located, accessed and shared. Experienced in the diverse needs of the legal industry, Merritt collaborates with legal clients to become part of their team in order to support all staff members and ensure powerful and accurate solutions are used in and out of the courtroom. In addition to legal scanning, they also offer courtroom graphics and provide full-service litigation support solutions including eDiscovery, and early case assessment tools. Their trial support professionals stand ready to provide eDiscovery and legal support solutions. www.merrittgraphics.com, 1.800.344.4477

THOMPSON REUTERS

Document Scanning Services The increasing costs of processing, managing and storing court documents are driving the need for electronic filing (e-filing) solutions. Southwest Solutions Group provides document scanning services and backfile scanning conversions to help achieve goals of the paperless office. Many courts are taking a proactive approach to e-filing and scanning active documents to lower processing and storage costs and improve services for their customers. The firm is able to help develop an efficient digital migration strategy based on specific needs and budget. www.southwestsolutions.com/ims, 1.800.803.1083

Integrated System

ISS offers their latest version of iJEEB (iJustice Enterprise Exchange Broker) with their new NIEM compliant Integrated Attorney-firm exchange solution for automated eFiling and advanced eServices. This iJustice solution extends the justice enterprise and greatly enhances productivity by enabling seamless integration and exchange directly with an attorney firms CMS systems. This is a huge productivity booster and valuable incentive for attorneys to adopt and religiously use eFiling solutions. It also dramatically improves court case filing data quality and case processing cycle-time. www.issintl.com, 1.888.ISS.0001

SOUTHWEST SOLUTIONS GROUP

Multi-Court Management Canyon Solutionsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; multi-court version of JcatsCourt allows agencies to manage several Courts with a central pool of resources. For example, JcatsCircuit supports roaming calendars for judges who may support all the courts in a particular circuit. With the click of a button, JcatsCircuit can provide Court-centric views of data as well as consolidated views across all Courts within the circuit. Additionally, JcatsCircuit provides summary reports for individual courts as well as for circuits. www.canyonsolutions.com, 1.480.722.1213 February/March 2014 18

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p19-21 e-courts_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 9:20 AM Page 19

25 Years Later, PACER, Electronic Filing Continue to Change Courts

Twenty-five years ago, computers were hurtling America into the Information Age. From 1987 to 1989, the nation’s PC sales tripled, as consumers gained unprecedented power to process words, crunch numbers and print documents at home. The World Wide Web was still being invented, but early adopters were discovering personal email. In federal courts, the revolution also was getting under way. Documents were still kept on paper, and law firm couriers lined up daily in clerk’s offices, waiting to pore

through case files, but all that was about to change. In September 1988, the Judicial Conference of the United States approved a new way of opening information to the public, through a service known as PACER—Public Access to Court Electronic Records. PACER, now celebrating its 25th anniversary, and Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF), an electronic case management system that began in the late 1990s, have together fundamentally changed how federal courts, and the lawyers, judges and staff

who work in them, perform their jobs. Lawyers speak of reduced stress at a workday’s end, knowing they can electronically file a document until midnight, without fear that the courthouse doors will close on them. In clerks’ offices, work has changed from filing and stamping papers to performing quality control to make sure electronic entries are accurate and up to date. And everyone, from a self-represented litigant to an appellate judge, can track cases and case documents in nearly real time. February/March 2014x

W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p19-21 e-courts_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 9:20 AM Page 20

“Even skeptics have grown to love it,” said Stephen Funk, an Akron-based lawyer who said his colleagues quickly came to trust the system’s reliability and relative simplicity. In cases with multiple litigants, for example, it is far easier to notify all parties of new case documents by email, rather than through multiple paper mailings. “Lawyers know that the judge is promptly receiving what is being filed,” said Funk, who practices extensively in the Northern District of Ohio. “Lawyers like the ability to get documents out to everyone simultaneously. The system works more fairly and equitably.” Online access and case management also altered clerk’s offices, where paper had been king for decades. When Michael Kunz, clerk of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania,

Stakeholders in the justice system overwhelmingly endorsed it as an efficient system.” Kunz said online access and case management also made clerk’s office jobs more satisfying and helped federal courts manage growing caseloads. In courts with complex multi-district litigation (including the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, which has handled more than 100,000 asbestos cases since 1991), the benefits of online case management have been especially critical. “Were it not for the introduction of these programs,” Kunz said, “the court staff would have been quickly overwhelmed by the caseload presented to us over these last 25 years.” Today, PACER and CM/ECF provide online access to hundreds of millions of documents. Well over

“Online access makes the public record truly public, which I think is of great value.” —DENNIS ROSE joined the federal courts in 1962, one of his first assignments was to convert a 36-page handwritten docket sheet to a typewritten docket for a case being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Kunz’s court became one of the early pioneer sites for PACER, and he recalled being asked why the phones in the clerk’s office stopped ringing. People, he said, were getting their information online. “PACER was one of the most significant progressive steps in the implementation of technologies in the courts,” Kunz said. “It brought information from the clerk’s office to desktop computers located in law offices, government agencies, business entities and the news media.

a million users have accessed the two systems. But at first, PACER was available at only a few pilot courts, and it provided only basic information. Users with dial-in telephone modems—rubber-cup-shaped devices in which telephone receivers were placed—could receive docket sheet information, and see thumbnail case summaries on their computer screens. Actual case documents remained unavailable except at the courthouse. Even that was a major improvement, recalled Chuck Vagner, retired clerk of the Western District of Texas district and bankruptcy courts. Previously, the federal courts’ only electronic case manage-

ment systems were purely for internal purposes. Vagner, who later helped found the PACER Service Center in San Antonio, oversaw one of the earliest PACER pilot sites at his court. “We sent a report and the Administrative Office [of the U.S. Courts] liked what we were doing,” Vagner said. “They gave permission for six more bankruptcy courts to use PACER. They liked it there, and then we got the go-ahead to implement PACER at all bankruptcy courts. “It’s been good for clerk’s offices, saving staff time,” Vagner said. “A lot of attorneys with cases in different districts can just get that info. Knowing that it’s helped the Judiciary as much as it has, that’s the most gratifying thing for me.” PACER’s full potential became clear in the late 1990s, with the first testing of Case Management/ Electronic Case Files. Where PACER allowed the public a chance to see court business, CM/ECF enabled the legal community to file and update court records electronically, without coming to the courthouse. As CM/ECF came online, the lines of law firm couriers vanished at federal clerks’ offices. For lawyers, PACER and CM/ECF visibly changed how courts function. Dennis Rose, a commercial litigator from Cleveland who has practiced in federal courts throughout the country, helped draft local court rules when the Northern District of Ohio became “one of the first guinea pigs” to use electronic filing in 1997. He said the initial guidelines for electronic filing were forgiving, to assuage lawyers’ concerns that a judge might reprimand them if an electronic submission got lost and a filing was delayed. In practice, Rose said, the online systems were “a boon to practitioners. We didn’t have to keep paper files at our desk. We didn’t have to send runners to the clerk’s office to

February/March 2014 20

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p19-21 e-courts_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 9:20 AM Page 21

retrieve copies of filings. We didn’t have to pay a copy charge. PACER is cheaper than old-fashioned paper files.”

Unprecedented Level Of Transparency Best of all was the expanded transparency on court affairs, Rose said. While the vast majority of court records always have been public,

universal. PACER use expanded accordingly, as the quantity of downloadable information grew. More recently, a growing number of court opinions also are available through the Government Printing Office’s FDSys website. “Twenty-five years ago, the vast majority of cases were practically obscure. Today, every Third Branch court is using CM/ECF and

showed strong and growing user satisfaction with PACER and CM/ECF, but efforts continue to build on the first quarter-century’s success. “We are in the process of modernizing the CM/ECF system and PACER service, to make it more user-friendly,” Ishakian said. “The biggest challenge—and opportunity—lies in the area of preservation of the electronic dockets and opin-

PACER,” said Michel Ishakian, chief of staff for the AO’s Department of Program Services, who oversaw PACER from 2008 to 2013. “That means that all dockets, opinions, and case file documents can be accessed worldwide in real time, unless they are sealed or otherwise restricted for legal purposes. This level of transparency and access to a legal system is unprecedented and unparalleled.” User surveys in 2009 and 2012

ions for posterity. Electrons don't age as gracefully as paper. We will need to work closely with the National Archives and the Government Printing Office to ensure that future generations can access this valuable information.”

PACER and Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) have together fundamentally changed how federal courts, and the lawyers, judges and staff who work in them, perform their jobs. they were available only at a federal courthouse, and hard for many to access. “Online access makes the public record truly public, which I think is of great value.” The scale of both PACER and CM/ECF changed dramatically in the early 2000s, as more courts adopted online filing. In 2002, 11 of the nation’s 94 U.S. District Courts and 40 of the 90 Bankruptcy Courts used electronic filing. By 2007, CM/ECF and PACER were nearly

For further information see: www.pacer.gov/ or http://news.uscourts.gov/25-yearslater-pacer-electronic-filing-continuechange-courts February/March 2014x

W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p22-26 presentation_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 9:21 AM Page 22

BY DONNA ROGERS, EDITOR

Making a Motion, Literally From full-motion video links to conduct pretrial motions to apps that control courtroom presentations, courtrooms are making giant digital strides. IMAGE COURTESY CISCO SYSTEMS

Because

of their proximity to Disney World and tourists from all over the world, establishing interpretive services at one court in Florida that does a great deal of interpretive services for courtroom proceedings was particularly challenging. “One of the biggest problems is that there are not enough interpreters out there to handle the growing case loads and the cost for outsourcing to a language interpretation service is prohibitive,” says Daniel Stewart, senior justice advisor with Cisco Connected Justice Systems. Most outsourced language services charge a four-hour minimum,

plus travel expenses, so it gets very expensive, he continues. Instead of incurring the cost for these outsourced services, or having full-time interpreters running between courtrooms and jails, they can hook up via videoconferencing and can quickly connect with different courts around the county or even the state, he says. “Now they can sign on at 10 am, do the interpretation for tenfifteen minutes and move on to the next case. The cost savings are incredible.” With continually increasing court, parole and probation case loads, numerous other courts are heading in that direction also. In Kentucky, Logan County jailer Bill Jenkins reported last summer

that inmates in the jail would soon get to go through their parole hearings via teleconference. Jenkins said that then, whenever an inmate at his jail came up for parole, a deputy had to drive the prisoner to the hearing at the Green River Correctional Complex in Muhlenberg County. “They usually leave about 6 a.m. and don’t get back until noon,” Jenkins said in the News-Democratic & Leader. “So that ties up an employee for about six hours whenever it happens.” And, he added, when the inmates go to the hearing at Green River, they don’t get to see the parole board directly anyway. The inmate is kept in a separate room and just sees the board via a television moni-

February/March 2014 22

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p22-26 presentation_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 9:21 AM Page 23

tor. The jail was expecting the new video system to save them a great deal in transport costs. Another agency some 500 miles southeast has been conducting its hearings via real-time high speed phone lines since 1997. Board members, who come to the S.C. Board of Parole and Pardons’ Central Office in Columbia, are able to see inmates present their testimony from seven different prisons, according to the state’s web site. Victims also are able come to Columbia and present their testimony to the Parole Board; they may also attend parole hearings by remote videoconferencing at the Charleston and Spartanburg Remote Videoconferencing Sites. This arrangement, they point out, saves the Department of Corrections significant amounts of money in transportation costs and security. In addition, victims are not physically in the same location as the inmate who victimized them. Videoconferencing is growing in all aspects of criminal justice from police to probation to juvenile justice, according to Cisco Connected Justice Solutions. It markets its WebEx TelePresence system to criminal justice for applications such as delivering e-warrants to squad cars, arraignments, remote appearances, remote interpretation and more. The company has deployments in the San Antonio, Texas, courts, several county courts in Florida and in several federal prisons.

Behind the Scenes Recent cutbacks in corrections have significantly impacted probation and parole. They must grow to take up the slack—and technology must help bridge the gap. Because of several factors that reduce costs, investment in videoconferencing technology pays for itself more quickly than ever. “The return on

investment is much more achievable today,” says Stewart of Cisco. The almost immediate ROI is due to the wide availability of videoconferencing equipment, the drop in prices of this hardware and the ability to use an standard high speed Internet connection. While using ISDN was expensive 10 yrs ago, “riding across the Internet is free,” points out Stewart. “The Internet has allowed users to be able to reduce their costs significantly,”. Specifying open standards in equipment is also important so that devices will be able to talk to those you hope to connect with. “We believe in open standards,” says Stewart. “Our competitors can communicate with our equipment.” When counties or state agencies have existing equipment, they must be able to leverage it to communicate with other agencies or individuals, he says. He points out, “[a vendor] cannot cause them to change overnight because you think you have a better product.”

Getting Personal A change making inroads in the business world may impact courts too, he opines. According to a study conducted in March 2013 by a group of Cisco partner firms, 90% of fulltime American workers use their personal smart phones for work purposes. The report says it’s “a staggering finding that validates a trend industry experts have been debating for several years now: Bring Your Own Device or BYOD.” BYOD, an approach whereby those that connect with the system can be enabled to bring their own iPad, android phone, or any other end point device, will allow them to talk to the video end point the offender is using. If players such as judges, lawyers, probation officers, and victims are able to seamlessly

connect with the courts via their own devices it will only quicken the pace that can lead to an explosion of video conferencing use.

Best Uses Some applications are catching on more quickly than others. One such use is the application of videoconferencing in pre-sentence investigation, or PSI, notes Stewart. The probation officer/probationer interview can take up to an hour, but the Court doesn’t know exactly how long it will take, which leads to escort waiting times and delays between hearings. Use of video allows processing inmates’ scheduled appearance time on the fly, reducing waiting time. “This is an area where there is a 30 percent to 40 percent gain in productivity,” Stewart says. Videoconferencing is becoming relevant in remote areas where legal representation is scarce, providing defendants better and immediate representation from a distance. It can also be applied well during the inmate intake classification process to correctly assess an offender with a suicide risk, or to properly take the medical/mental history. It is also ideal for American Sign Language interpretation where deaf clients need fair access to the legal system. In a recent lawsuit, reports Newsday.com, three Long Island medical facilities are being sued because they didn’t communicate with a deaf patient, Alfred Weinrib, and his family. Because of lack of interpretive services, when he died last April he did not have knowledge of his cancer diagnosis. His children claim in the federal lawsuit filed in February in U.S. District Court in Central Islip that the family's requests for qualified interpreters and services such as a video phone were routinely denied in the seven months he was treated. February/March 2014x

W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p22-26 presentation_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 9:21 AM Page 24

Upping the Ante While videoconferencing is taking a bigger role in courtrooms across the country, a piece of software is helping do some of the housekeeping. Renovo Software collaborates with video systems, including Cisco’s, to add automation and scheduling capabilities to the video platform. This software can automate all pieces of equipment that need to work for a regularly recurring conference, i.e., at a weekly set time. The software automates all those pieces of equipment and is the interface to manage the devices, explains Drew Barrette, Renovo’s marketing manager. “It has the ability to set up certain rules and policies, such as who

can’t visit with a minor, [etc].” Its courtroom capabilities check hardware, and manage the above mentioned policies and staff tasks. For example, it can remind an officer with an email or text notification to bring an inmate to court, it can notify the bailiff to prepare for the start of the call, queue it up, and automatically dial into the interpretation service, or note confidentially on the call. On the inmate side, the software can display all upcoming court appearances or video calls scheduled. Meanwhile all the calls can be monitored, recorded and reports run. Into the future, technological compatibility not only between the jails and courts but between other devices will be key, adds Barrette. Software development with open standards will provide “so much

potential” to incorporate the latest devices. Families and friends already connect to corrections facilities via the Internet with consumer products like webcams, laptops and potentially cell phones, Barrette furthers. It’s conceivable in the near future they will be doing video chats over the Internet to a court or a jail from a public place like the library. As of now, Renovo’s court customers are not using video conferencing for parole applications but could, he says, with “very little development.” With the cutbacks in funding as we go forward, technology is expected to fill the vacuum in courtrooms across the U.S. “They must reduce their operations overall,” notes Stewart. “We have to give them tools to achieve that.” CT

Audio, Visual & Presentation Products Scheduling & Automation Platform

Renovo Software’s videoconference scheduling and automation platform is one of the most comprehensive and flexible video collaboration solution in justice today, reports the company. Designed to reduce security risks, increase efficiency, and eliminate transportation costs, the powerful, standards-based system leverages corrections-grade video

kiosks to connect the courtroom to inmates for hearings, arraignment, public defender consultations, parole hearings, rehabilitation programs, personal visitation, and countless

other applications. Renovo’s platform, reported to be the most widely chosen video system in corrections, is compatible with all leading videoconferencing hardware. www.renovosoftware.com, 952-931-0790 or sales@renovosoftware.com

Patron Kiosks InfoKiosk helps visitors to find case information and room locations with the touch of a finger. Using the kiosk system, patrons can access valuable facility information such as step-by-step directions, emergency exit locations and where certain amenities are located. The kiosk can integrate with your court’s case management system to provide real-time case information. www.CourtSight.com, Sales@Infax.com or 770-209-9925

February/March 2014 24

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p22-26 presentation_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 9:21 AM Page 25

Justice Teleconferencing Across IP Networks

Cisco Systems, Inc. a leader in networking, communications and collaboration technologies has been working with public safety, law enforcement, courts and corrections customers to leverage new technologies to more effectively accom-

A/V solutions that meet the demanding needs of today’s courtrooms. With extensive experience in courtroom A/V system design, engineering, integration and support, ExhibitOne specializes in presentation systems, digital recording solutions, portable and fully-integrated trial display systems, custom audio solutions, videoconferencing, digital signage and other trial-support solutions. www.ExhibitOne.com, 1.888.572.3265 or info@ExihibitOne.com

Digital Daily Docket Postings

plish their day-to-day deployment of justice with its Public Safety – Connected Justice Solutions. At the core of these solutions is Cisco’s intelligent networking infrastructure which allows any device such as a laptops, cell phones, tablets, phones, video end-point, surveillance and/or physical security components to seamlessly communicate with each other across any network or infrastructure. By driving networking and communications standards across an Internet Protocol (IP) based infrastructure, any device can now be used to effectively communicate and share information between individuals and applications. Courts can now use video to arraign prisoners remotely, which allows them to not only process more cases, but also reduce the expense and risk associated with transporting prisoners. www.cisco.com/go/connectedjustice

Presentation, Recording & More

More than 2,000 courtrooms are using audiovisual solutions from ExhibitOne. Judges, court administrators and system users at county, state and federal courts throughout the country rely on ExhibitOne for

DocketCall automates the process of posting daily docket information. DocketCall integrates with any court’s case management system and displays docket informa-

advanced digital audio/video recording solutions, remote conferencing systems, and digital video surveillance systems for courts, law enforcement, corrections, and legislatures. CourtSmart is an enterpriseclass solution providing fault-tolerance, no single fail point recording, in a managed environment. The systems provide complete ODBC-compliant systems, automated archiving, streaming concurrent audio/video, authenticated and secured access and data files, and automatic annotation with full indexed searching. All audio/video recordings are automatically archived to DVD, Blu-Ray, or SAN, and code verified. www.courtsmart.com or 1.800.235.8690

New Media Controller App

WolfVision’s new vConnect can integrate and control all your media types and files from your tablet. This innovative app lets you seamlessly add and control different media types all from one easy-to-use dashboard. Switch effortlessly between different content and stay in total

tion on public monitors located throughout the facility. By automating this process, court staff no longer has to manage printed dockets and are able to allocate time to other responsibilities. www.CourtSight.com, Sales@Infax.com or 770-209-9925.

Streaming, Recording & Archiving CourtSmart Digital Systems, Inc. designs and supports technically

control of your presentations. Wirelessly synced to your WolfVision Visualizer, vConnect February/March 2014x

W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p22-26 presentation_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 9:21 AM Page 26

gives you the freedom to present how you want in order to engage the courtroom. www.wolfvision.com, 1.877.873.WOLF or sales@wolfvision.us

Multi-media Information Sharing An all-in-one multi-media presentation and HD video recording solution for courts, WolfVision’s new VZ-9.4 Series Visualizers promise to transform the way we share information in a presentation. Featuring integrated WLAN and HD recording (with audio) functionality, these units

Transcription Process Updated VIQ Solutions has announced that its new tool NetScribe has revolutionized the transcription process. Netscribe Web Transcription Work-flow allows a court user to easily capture audio, transfer your audio to the server to be transcribed and then retrieve your transcription quickly, securely and cost effectively. The tool allows clients and transcriptionists to distribute digital audio and documents instantly via secure Internet. With NetScribe, multiple transcriptionists can work on separate segments of the same file from one location or from various remote locations. It offers accuracy, speed and security are these are crucial when processing your transcriptions. www.viqsolutions.com or 905.948.8266.

Simplifying Video Conferencing Vyopta Customer Engagement solutions leverage the power of today’s video conferencing technology to bring the Court to the people: improving citizen service, expediting

are ideal for public speakers wanting to make an impact in their presentations. True-to-life color reproduction and easy-to-use controls make WolfVision’s VZ-9.4 Series the right choice for the modern-day courtroom, says the company. www.wolfvision.com, 1.877.873.WOLF or sales@wolfvision.us

issue resolution and saving costs while generating revenue. Vyopta customer City of San Antonio Municipal Courts has employed video kiosks for pro se defendants to meet face-toface with the judge via video to resolve outstanding citations. By simpli-

fying and automating the virtual justice experience, Vyopta software solutions: intuitively guide users to know which buttons to select to reach the necessary expert; transparently and intelligently route the video call, so the citizen is connected to the appropriate court clerk or judge in their courtroom; effectively scale, with application management and business intelligence that enables broad deployments of kiosks, extending virtual court services anywhere. www.vyopta.com, 1.855.438.8967 or info@vyopta.com

Audio/Video Package

JAVS’s Centro Audio Video Processor (AVP) is the centerpiece of the JAVS system. The slim, rackmounted unit can support up to eight configurable cameras, 14 configurable microphones, four 3-pin euroblocks (phoenix) line level connectors, built-in audio & video conferencing, integrated digital presentation, interpretation and remote feeds. Rather than requiring an operator to cover each courtroom participant, this system covers each individual with a microphone connected to a corresponding camera. When someone speaks, the video automatically switches to the camera designated to that microphone. The result is a video comparable to a professional television production. The high quality of the audio is the result of sophisticated audio adjustment algorithms embedded into the processors combined with perfectly matched boundary-style microphones, says the company. www.javs.com, 1,800.354.5287, or solutions@javs.com.

February/March 2014 26

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p27-30 drug court_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:55 PM Page 27

DRUG COURTS, which combine treatment with incentives and sanctions, mandatory and random drug testing, and aftercare, are a proven tool for improving public health and public safety. They provide an innovative mechanism for promoting collaboration among the judiciary, prosecutors, community corrections agencies, drug treatment providers, and other community support groups. These special courts have been operating in the United States for more than 20 years, and their effectiveness is

well documented. In times of serious budget cuts, the drug court model offers state and local governments a cost effective way to increase the percentage of addicted offenders who achieve sustained recovery, thereby improving public safety and reducing costs associated with re arrest and additional incar-

ceration. Every $1 spent on drug courts yields more than $2 in savings in the criminal justice system alone. President Obamaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s budget request includes approximately $101 million for drug, mental health, and other problem solving courts, including Veterans Treatment, Tribal February/March 2014x

W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p27-30 drug court_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:55 PM Page 28

Healing to Wellness, and Family Dependency Treatment Courts. This demonstrates the Administration’s support for increasing and enhancing access to substance use disorder treatment. With more than 2,500 drug courts in operation today, approximately 120,000 Americans annually receive the help they need to break the cycle of addiction and recidivism

management to address participants’ other needs, such as education, housing, job training, and mental health referrals.

•Drug courts help participants recover from addiction and prevent future criminal activity while also reducing the burden and costs of repeatedly processing low-level, non-violent offenders through the Nation’s courts, jails,

drug courts provided $2.21 in benefits to the criminal justice system for every $1 invested. When expanding the program to all at-risk arrestees, the average return on investment increased even more, resulting in a benefit of $3.36 for every $1 spent.

By the Numbers • The drug court movement con-

Drug courts reduce costs of repeatedly processing lowlevel offenders. An analysis of their cost effectiveness conducted by The Urban Institute found that they provided $2.21 in benefits to the criminal justice system for every $1 invested. Overview • Drug courts operate on the local level to divert non-violent offenders with substance use problems from incarceration into supervised programs with treatment and rigorous standards of accountability.

• The courts connect the judicial, law enforcement, and treatment communities with other systems and provider organizations through comprehensive case

and prisons. Drug court programs have a tangible effect on criminal recidivism. A study funded by the Department of Justice examined re-arrest rates for drug court graduates and found that nationally, 84 percent of drug court graduates have not been re-arrested and charged with a serious crime in the first year after graduation, and 72.5 percent have no arrests at the two-year mark. Additionally, an analysis of drug court cost effectiveness conducted by The Urban Institute found that

tinues to grow. Since 1989, drug courts have been established or are being planned in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Guam, and in nearly 90 Tribal locations

• There are more than 2,500 drug court programs throughout the United States.

• Approximately 47 percent of counties in the United States are served by drug courts.

• A review of five independent

February/March 2014 28

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p27-30 drug court_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:55 PM Page 29

meta-analyses concluded that drug courts significantly reduce crime by an average of 8 to 26 percentage points; well-administered drug courts were found to reduce crime rates by as much as 35 percent, compared to traditional case dispositions.

• The success of drug courts has led to development of Tribal Wellness, Veterans Treatment, Mentally Ill Offender, Community, and Family Treatment courts.

The Drug Court Model: Best Practices Drug court participants are provided intensive treatment and other services for a minimum of one year. There are frequent court appearances and random drug testing, with sanctions and incentives to encourage compliance and completion. Successful completion of the treatment program results in dismissal of the charges, reduced or set-aside sentences, lesser penalties, or a combination of these. Most important, graduating participants gain the necessary tools to rebuild their lives. Because the problem of drugs and crime is much too broad for any single agency to tackle alone, drug courts rely upon the daily communication and cooperation of judges, court personnel, probation, treatment providers, and providers of other social services. Drug courts vary somewhat in terms of their structure, scope, and target populations, but they all share three primary goals: 1) Reduced recidivism rates 2) Reduced substance use among participants 3) Rehabilitation of participants Achieving these goals requires adherence to the core organizational structure and attributes of the drug

court model. This model, which has successfully been replicated in thousands of courtrooms nationwide, includes the following key components:

• Integration of alcohol and other drug treatment services within justice system case processing;

• A non-adversarial approach, through which prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while protecting participants’ due process rights;

• Early identification of eligible participants and prompt placement in the drug court;

• Access to a continuum of alcohol, drug and other treatment, and rehabilitation services;

• Frequent alcohol and other drug testing to monitor abstinence;

• A coordinated strategy governing drug court responses to participants’ compliance or noncompliance;

• Ongoing judicial interaction with each participant;

• Monitoring and evaluation to measure achievement of program goals and gauge effectiveness;

• Continuing interdisciplinary education to promote effective drug court planning, implementation and operations; and

• Forging of partnerships among drug courts, public agencies, and community-based organizations to generate local support and enhance drug court program effectiveness. Drug courts following these tenets reduce recidivism and promote other positive outcomes. The magnitude of a court's impact may depend upon how well the practitioners address and balance these core components and adapt to the needs of their clients and court staff.

Connecting Drug Courts to Law Enforcement A strong partnership with local law enforcement is a critical component of a successful drug court. Street-level enforcement officers provide a unique perspective and benefit to drug court teams. Law enforcement can improve referrals to the court and extend the connection of the drug court team into the community for further information gathering and monitoring of participants. Law enforcement personnel play important roles not only in the day-to-day operations of the drug court, but also in showing other government and community leaders the public safety efficacy of these courts. A comprehensive study of the key attributes of successful drug courts reinforces the importance of this relationship. In the 18 adult drug courts studied, researchers found that:

• Having a member from law enforcement on the team was associated with higher graduation rates, compared to teams without a law enforcement member (57 percent versus 46 percent).

• Drug court teams that included law enforcement personnel reduced costs an additional 36 percent over the reductions achieved by traditional drug courts. In recognition of the importance of law enforcement participation in the drug court process, the National Association of Drug Court Professionals’ (NADCP) National Drug Court Institute (NDCI) has created a National Law Enforcement Task Force. This Task Force is designed to increase the involvement of law enforcement personnel in the drug court process and gather critical input from key law February/March 2014x

W W W . C O U RT S T O D A Y . C O M

F-M 14 p27-30 drug court_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:56 PM Page 30

enforcement leaders across the country. The Task Force has representatives from a number of law enforcement organizations, including:

• International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)

• National Sheriffs Association (NSA)

• National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE)

• Hispanic American Police Command Officers Association (HAPCOA)

• National Native American Law Enforcement Association

AD I N DEX COMPANY

PAGE NO.

Carter Goble Lee ................5 Courtview ..........................13 Rev Q ...................................8 Infax .....................................2 Phoenix Kiosk ...................11 Stuncuff ...............................8 Thomson Reuters.............32 TouchPay Payment Systems.............................9 Tyler Technologies............31 Xerox....................................7 This advertisers index is provided as a service to our readers only. The publisher does not assume liability for errors or omissions.

A strong partnership with local law enforcement is a critical component of a successful drug court.

(NNALEA)

• National Organization of Women Law Enforcement Executives (NAWLEE)

• American Probation and Parole Association (APPA) To further educate and expand law enforcement involvement in drug courts, NDCI is developing a curriculum for law enforcement personnel. This curriculum will include information on the medical aspects of addiction, treatment, and recovery, and how to engage substance abuse service providers. ONDCP is providing the funding for this training course, which will qualify for Police Officer Standards and Training (POST) for the enrolled law enforcement officers.

Training & Technical Assistance Resources With the expansion of drug courts throughout the country, it is critical to ensure standards for drug court implementation and operations are effectively disseminated to the field. It is also critical for the more than 2,500 courts currently in operation, along with those in the planning and implementation phases, to be fully

trained and operating in accordance with the long-standing, strict standards designed for drug courts to achieve optimal outcomes. In an effort to maintain efficacy and improve the operations of drug courts, NDCI provides critical education, training, and technical assistance to longstanding as well as newly formed drug courts. NDCI is supported by several Federal agencies, including:

• U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs (Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention, and the National Institute of Justice)

• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment) A full list of trainings and technical assistance provided by NDCI and funded through these partners is available on the NDCI website, at www.ndci.org. In addition, NDCI maintains an updated list of Federal funding opportunities available for drug courts. The list is available on the NDCI website. CT Source: Fact Sheet published by the Office of National Drug Control Policy

February/March 2014 30

W W W .C OU RTSTO DAY .CO M

F-M 14 p27-30 drug court_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:56 PM Page 31

F-M 14 p27-30 drug court_CT 2/05 p020-21 Best Build 2/27/14 6:56 PM Page 32