Just another WordPress site

Author: recovery_x970td

  • 2012 Homelessness Summit

    Administrative Office of the Courts and ABA Commission on Homelessness and Poverty
    San Francisco, CA, Friday, May 11, 2012
    Reported by Michael Roosevelt, CJER, California

    According to the 2012 Judicial Council of California Homeless Court Fact Sheet, homelessness is a major problem affecting the country, states, cities and counties. In a 2008 study by Nieto, Gittelman, and Abad published the International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, the average number of homeless people at any given time in the United States is 750,000, 1 percent of the U.S. population. Nationally, the largest percentage increase of homeless subpopulations between 2005 and 2007 was in the number of family households, which increased by more than 3,200 households, or 4 percent, according to the National Alliance to End Homelessness.

    In California, an estimated 133,000 people were homeless in 2010, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Statewide, veterans are thought to comprise 10 percent of the homeless, and according to the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), approximately 50,000 homeless individuals have mental illness. California’s homeless courts reflect a partnership among the courts, justice system partners (such as the American Bar Association’s Commission on Homelessness and Poverty), service providers, community groups, and the homeless to address a common concerni.

    Homelessness has only increased with the economic, employment and housing downturn. Recognizing the problem, the California Administrative Office of the Courts Center for Families, Children & the Courts, in collaboration with the ABA Commission on Homelessness and Poverty, convened a day-long statewide program in San Francisco to explore promising and best practices for addressing homelessness among youth, adults, veterans, and parolees. Among the invitation-only attendees at the “Homelessness Summit” were service providers, attorneys, judges, law enforcement, and representatives from the VA, the military, and churches – all who are considered experts in the field of homelessness. The day began with a keynote plenary session on veterans issues, followed by a discussion of experiences and challenges facing those programs working to reduce homeless. The late morning and early afternoon consisted of breakout sessions that focused on specific target populations (namely, veterans, youth, parolees and adults). In these sessions, participants discussed the challenges facing homeless programs in light of California’s poor fiscal condition. The afternoon focused on solutions. The day concluded with breakouts reporting challenges and solutions or recommendations for addressing the challenges.

    Some Recommendations
    While there were a number of recommendations offered for moving forward, the summit planning committee plans to compile the findings into a single report, share it with the summit attendees and follow-up with action steps. Not surprisingly, there are significant barriers to overcome in order to serve the homeless population: the stigma associated with being a homeless veteran, youth, parolee or adult; the lack of funding to sustain programs to serve this population, federal housing rules that prevent parolees from living in subsidized housing and difficulty placing people who are both homeless and mentally ill. Solutions or recommendations for addressing some of these problems include changing federal housing rules to allow former offenders to live in subsidized housing, and educating the public about the cost-benefit and public safety benefit of serving and providing housing for the homeless in the community. Finally, programs that serve the homeless must collaborate on funding.

    Conclusion
    Attendees at the Summit left with renewed energy to improve and expand programs and services for and to the homeless.

  • Nevada Supreme Court Hosts Egyptian Judicial Delegation

    L to R: Mr. Tamer Seoudy, Mr. Hany M. Bakr, Mr. Omar El Farouk, Mr. Mohamed Sid Mohamed Alaaeldin

    The Nevada Supreme Court hosted a delegation from the Egyptian Court of Cassation on May 18th, 2012. The group of four visitors and two interpreters had been invited to the United States through the Department of State’s International Visitor Leadership Program. Mr. Mohamed Said Mohamed Alaaeldin, Chief Judge of the Technical Bureau of the Court of Cassation, was accompanied by three Chief Prosecutors, Mr. Hany M. Bakr, Mr. Omar El Farouk, and Mr. Tamer Seoudy.

    The Egyptian delegation participated in a discussion with Mr. John McCormick, Court Services Supervisor, regarding the role of Nevada courts in the issuing of search warrants and bench warrants. Later Mr. David Gordon delivered a brief presentation on continuing judicial education, and the role of NASJE. Judge Alaaedin expressed interest in NASJE, and received the link to NASJE’s web site.

  • Justice Anthony Kennedy Addresses Nevada Judiciary

    Every four years, Nevada holds a week-long Judicial Leadership Summit for judges from all jurisdictions within the state. The 2012 Nevada Judicial Leadership Summit was held April 30th through May 4th in Las Vegas, and included federal judges from the District of Nevada. The keynote speaker was U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy. Justice Kennedy spoke at Boyd School of Law at the University of Nevada Las Vegas during the morning of May 1st and then joined the Nevada Judiciary (and about 250 members of the Bar) for a luncheon and address at the M Resort.

    L to R: Chief Justice Nancy Saitta, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, Associate Justice James Hardesty. (Photo by Beau Sterling)

    “A functioning legal system is part of the capital infrastructure. It’s as important as roads, bridges, schools,” he said. “You have to have an efficient, fair, decent, transparent, open legal system.”

    Justice Kennedy discussed the state of American legal education and the role elections play in choosing judges.

    “It is up to the members of the bar to step up and show that judicial elections work. Since Andrew Jackson, judicial elections have been a part of the American political landscape, and it seems to me somewhat unrealistic going around and saying we should have no elections,” Kennedy said. “The question is: Can we use these to teach what judicial integrity is? … Judicial independence isn’t so the judge can decide as he or she chooses; it’s so he or she can decide as they must.”
    Justice Kennedy said legal professionals must work to uphold the integrity of the judicial system to show the importance it plays in functioning democracies, addressing the roles of law schools, the Bar, and the Bench.

    Justice Kennedy’s speech dovetailed nicely with a plenary educational session later in the week that saw former Iowa Chief Justice Marsha Ternus address the judges on the topic of “The Rule of Law Versus The Will of The People.” Former Chief Justice Ternus spoke about the ramifications that the Varnum v. Brien decision had on the Iowa Supreme Court. Former Chief Justice Ternus and two of her colleagues who were turned out of office as a result of the decision (a textbook civics lesson on Judicial Review) received the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award the week after speaking at the Summit.

    The 2012 Nevada Judicial Leadership Summit was comprised of multiple tracks over two and a half days, with over 50 faculty, and was more than 14 months in planning.

  • The Judicial Institute on Adolescent Relationship Abuse

    July 9-11, 2012, in Phoenix, Arizona, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, in partnership with Futures Without Violence (formerly the Family Violence Prevention Fund) and with the support of the Office for Victims of Crimes (OVC), will offer a new three-day, highly interactive workshop that will help state court and tribal court judges enhance their skills and ability to respond to cases involving adolescents and relationship abuse.

    A judge participating in this workshop will be better able to:

    • Define adolescence and describe the impact of brain development and environmental factors on adolescent behaviors, particularly in cases of adolescent relationship abuse
    • Identify the dynamics of adolescent relationship abuse, and the short and long term impact on victims and perpetrators
    • Make distinctions between dynamics in violent adult relationships and adolescent relationships
    • Identify effective outcomes for youth in an abusive relationships
    • Assess risk factors in the adolescent cases you see, including the presence and impact of trauma
    • Recognize protective factors that might enhance an individual youth’s resiliency, well-being, and safety
    • Evaluate the utility, accuracy, comprehensiveness, and efficacy of youth assessments
    • Select developmentally appropriate interventions and accountability mechanisms that recognize the circumstances unique to adolescent relationship abuse cases
    • Rule on evidentiary issues particular to cases that involve adolescent parties
    • Define the terms culture and cultural competence and enhance respect for the dynamics of difference in cases involving adolescent abuse
    • Identify a judge’s role in the court and the community to promote healthy relationships amongst adolescents
    • Initiate or enhance communication and collaboration amongst justice system and community partners to improve services for youth involved in adolescent abuse

    The program is offered to participants free of charge. Complimentary breakfast and reception are available each day of the training. All participants are responsible for their own travel and per diem costs.

    How do You Apply to Attend?
    To apply for participation in this workshop, please complete the ARA Registration form (PDF) and fax to 775-784-6160. Applications will be reviewed on a first-come, first-served basis. Please note that your application is not confirmed until you receive an acceptance letter via email.

  • FEATURE: Juvenile Justice Model Courts Project Expands

    By Cheri Ely, M.A., LSW, Program Manager, NCJFCJ

    NCJFCJThe National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) Juvenile Justice Model Courts Project, managed by the Juvenile and Family Law Department, has expanded the number of courts participating in the project to 12. Four of the recently added sites in the project (Pittsburgh, Pa., State of Minnesota; New Orleans, La.; and Memphis, Tenn.) are developing goals and addressing challenges to achieve the recommendations from the Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Juvenile Delinquency Cases. Model courts are asked to select goals in accordance with the 16 Key Principles and various recommendations made in the Guidelines.

    Judge Tracy Flemings-Davillier

    The model court site in Pittsburgh, Pa., under the leadership of Judge Kim Clark, has completed its first full site visit and assessment and is in the process of completing its model court strategic plan. The model court has selected an overarching goal to treat all youth, families, victims, and witnesses with dignity and respect, and has also chosen additional goals targeting diversion programs for youth, timely decision making, and family/community engagement in the court process.

    Minnesota, the only statewide participant in the model courts project, is working on a statewide implementation of the recommendations from the Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines. The Minnesota JDG Statewide Initiative, led by the Juvenile Justice Coalition of Minnesota, held a one-day training in June 2011 for juvenile court judges and juvenile justice professionals from around the state. The training provided a thorough orientation to the Guidelines and model court practices, including how to use the model court self-assessment tools in local jurisdictions. The Initiative is now hard at work to complete the Minnesota Juvenile Delinquency Courts Guidebook. Law students from the University of Minnesota are assisting to transfer the information from NCJFCJ’s Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines into a manual specific to laws and practices in Minnesota for use by its juvenile courts.

    New Model Court sites in New Orleans, La., under the leadership of Judge Tracey Flemings-Davillier, and in Memphis, Tenn., under the leadership of Judge Curtis S. Person, have also completed their first full site visit and assessment and are moving into the strategic planning phase of the model court process.

    Judge Curtis S. Person

    Veteran model courts in the program are also continuing to move forward with their strategic plans. The model court in San Jose, Calif., under the leadership of Judge Patrick Tondreau, is implementing new practices to address youth in the court system who are both delinquent and dependent, and is working to engage parents and community support systems into juvenile cases. In 2011, the San Jose Model Court visited the model courts in Salt Lake City, Utah, and Tucson, Ariz., to learn about programs and practices in those jurisdictions that may help the San Jose Model Court accomplish its goals.

    The Reno, Nev., Model Court, under the leadership of Judges Frances Doherty and Janet Schmuck, is in its third year as a model court and continues to follow its model court strategic plan. The court is working to streamline practices to improve case flow and timely case processing and is reviewing its data capabilities to improve information sharing with system partners and stakeholders. The Reno Model Court has also prioritized training opportunities for its staff and juvenile justice professionals. Through private funding for scholarships, five participants were able to attend NCJFCJ’s National Conference on Juvenile and Family Law in March 2011.

    All sites in the Juvenile Justice Model Courts Project continue to embrace the model court philosophy of performing ongoing evaluation and system improvement. The project operates an active online discussion group for the model court sites to engage in networking and information sharing. New model court sites are encouraged to join the project anytime during the year.

    Want to Become a Model Court?
    Courts can contract with the NCJFCJ to become a Juvenile Justice Model Court site and receive individualized assessment, planning, training, technical assistance, and evaluation services as they seek to implement the principles and recommendations set forth in the Guidelines and work toward improved practice and outcomes. Each Model Court secures its own funding to underwrite the multi-year process. Funds may be public, private, local, state or federal. Although Model Courts can contract on a yearly basis, we encourage courts to remain involved in the project for at least three years in order to maximize system change/improvement. With multi-year involvement, Model Courts repeat the planning and technical assistance process on an annual basis as court improvement goals are attained. As part of this effort, Model Courts are expected to be “laboratories for change,” meaning that they participate in an ongoing critical assessment of their performance and share their results with other sites in order to inform and sustain a larger system improvement effort.

    Juvenile Justice Model Court Project Focuses on JDG Principles
    The focus of the Juvenile Justice Model Court Project has been to disseminate the Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines and encourage its use by jurisdictions to help guide system reform and improve practice in delinquency cases. The model courts—with support from project staff in the form of training and technical assistance, and a commitment to using the Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines to improve practice from intake to case closure—are leaders in this important system reform effort.

    Active Juvenile Justice Model Courts include

    • Austin, Texas – Lead Judge W. Jeanne Meurer (Ret.)
    • Buffalo, New York – Lead Judge Paul Buchanan
    • Cincinnati, Ohio – new Lead Judge to be determined
    • Howell, Mich. – Lead Judge Carol Hackett Garagiola
    • Memphis, Tenn. – Lead Judge Curtis S. Person
    • Minnesota Statewide JDG Initiative – led by the Juvenile Justice Coalition of Minnesota
    • New Orleans, La. – Lead Judge Tracey Flemings-Davillier
    • Pittsburgh, Pa. – Lead Judge Kim Clark
    • Reno, Nev. – Co-Lead Judges Frances Doherty and Janet Schmuck
    • San Jose, Calif. – Lead Judge Patrick Tondreau
    • Scranton, Pa. – Lead Judge Chester Harhut
    • Tucson, Ariz. – Lead Judge Karen Adam

    Cheryl EliCheri M. Ely is a Licensed Social Worker whose duties at the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges include management of the Delinquency Model Courts Project. She is responsible for the expenditure of funds and completion of deliverables for each model court site, manages the Juvenile Court Users’ Project, and assists courts with implementation of strategies to enhance the engagement of victims of juvenile offenders in the court system.

  • Cutting Edge: Personal Best

    There is a recent New Yorker article that asks how to be your best and in the course of that discussion addresses the issue of coaching for experienced practitioners (the article focuses on surgeons). There might, in fact, be implications for us and our profession.

    If you have a few minutes, it is an interesting read: “Personal Best” at New Yorker website

  • Transitions – Spring 2012

    Please join us in welcoming the following new NASJE members:

    • Hon. Linda L. Chezem, Professor, Purdue University, Mooresville, IN
    • Ms. Courtney Gabriele, Program Attorney, Texas Center for the Judiciary, Austin, TX
    • Ms. Cynthia Hensley, Education Coordinator, New Mexico Judicial Education Center, University of New Mexico, Alburquerque, NM
    • Mr. Chad Kewish, Program Manager, Arizona Supreme Court, Phoenix, AZ
    • Ms. Patricia Rae Lenzi, Program Attorney, National Judicial College, Reno, NV
    • Ms. Janine McIntosh, Director, Institute of Judicial Studies, Wellington, New Zealand
    • Ms. Elizabeth Norris, Operations Specialist, New Mexico Judicial Education Center, University of New Mexico, Alburquerque, NM

  • From the President

    NASJE President, Joseph Sawyer
    NASJE President for 2011-2012, Joseph Sawyer

    Dear NASJE Members,

    I hope that each of you has a wonderful spring and summer.

    In the coming two months, the Diversity, Access and Fairness Committee and the Website and Technology Committee will present two webcasts.

    On Tuesday, May 22 at 11:00 a.m. Pacific Time, the Diversity, Access, and Fairness Committee will bring you the latest research on the impact of implicit bias on the courts. During the webcast, the committee will share with NASJE members ways to reduce the influence of implicit bias.

    On Tuesday, June 26 at 9:00 a.m. Pacific Time, the Website and Technology Committee, working with the Curriculum Committee, will take you on a tour of NASJE’s members only website. During this live tour, you will learn where to find the SJI funded Curriculum Designs and other learning resources. At the end of the June 26 webcast, you will be able to post content on the members only website. NASJE members can share program plans, conference schedules, and teaching techniques using the discussion forums within the members’ only site. You, as a judicial educator, will have an online place to go to discuss new developments in judicial education and share solutions to common problems we all face in our work.

    Of course, none of you should forget about our upcoming conference scheduled for August 5-8, 2012. We will be meeting in the historic city of Boston. The education committee has put together an exciting program, which will include Dr. David Kolb discussing his Learning Style Inventory and Learning Circle.

    I look forward to seeing all of you in Boston in August.

    Warm regards,
    Joseph

  • NASJE Southeast Regional Newsletter

    Director’s Message from Cynthia D. Davis

    Dear Southeast Region Members:

    As your representative on the NASJE Board, I encourage you to make plans to attend the 2012 NASJE Conference. Please mark the dates to attend: August 5-8, 2012 in Boston, Massachusetts. The host hotel is the Seaport Hotel, 1 Seaport Lane, Boston, MA 02210 (617) 385-4000. The room rate is $189.00 per night single/double occupancy. The cutoff date for rooms is July 16, 2012. Advance registration for the conference is $550.00.

    The Curriculum Committee has a wonderful agenda in store. As soon as the agenda is finalized, I will send it to each of you. Also, as soon as the registration form is available, I will send it to each of you. The 2012 NASJE Conference promises to be the best yet!

    In the meantime, please make plans to attend. Make your airline reservations NOW for the best rates. Check out NASJE’s website for additional information for the 2012 Annual Conference.

    Hope to see each of you in Boston.

    All the best,
    Cynthia

  • U.S. Supreme Court Hears Juvenile Life Without Parole Homicide Cases

    Earlier this month, NCJFCJ posted about the 45th anniversary of the 1967 In re Gault decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that juveniles accused of crimes must be afforded many of the same due process rights as adults as required by the Fourteenth Amendment. This Supreme Court decision was followed in 2005 by the Roper v. Simmons case in which the court outlawed death sentences for juveniles and the 2010 Graham v. Florida case in which the court ruled that life sentences for juveniles convicted of non-homicide crimes was unconstitutional, but did not rule out life without parole sentences for homicide crimes committed by juveniles.

    On March 20, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases, Miller v. Alabama and Jackson v. Hobbs, to consider whether imposing a sentence of life without possibility of parole on an offender who was fourteen at the time he committed capital murder constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Juvenile justice advocates argue that such punishments do not consider the immaturity of the juvenile’s age, which makes them less culpable than adults. Opponents argue that the Tenth Amendment gives states the right to operate their prison systems according to their own standards.

    The 90-minute hearing indicated that the court might allow life without parole to be imposed on some youth, but may draw the line for younger youth, but at what age is unknown. There was no indication during the hearing that a majority of justices would agree to a flat ban on life without chance of parole sentences for anyone under eighteen.

    NCJFCJ will follow these cases and post additional information once the U.S. Supreme Court releases an opinion in the next few months. More information on these pending U.S. Supreme Court cases can be found on the SCOTUS Blog at: