As most of the regulars strongly suspected, we are getting word that the Harris County Criminal Justice Building may be shut down for up to a year due to damage sustained from Hurricane Harvey. As I wrote in my last post, this was almost exactly what happened in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Allison in 2001.
As this is being written, prosecutors are packing up their personal effects from their offices, as we did during Allison. This will likely be followed with trustees from the Harris County Jail and D.A. personnel boxing up and moving the files, computers, and other government property from the Office. The same will have to be done for the PD's Office, the Courts and the Clerk's offices. In 2001, I found myself loading and unloading boxes out of big panel vans, side by side with inmates. In all actuality, it was kind of fun.
But things are much different than sixteen years ago. In May of 2001, the D.A.'s Office moved back to 201 Fannin (where we had all moved from in November of 1999). I'm not sure what the status of that building is, so I don't know if it is a possible temporary shelter for the displaced prosecutors or not. It is my understanding that the District Attorney's Office is currently operating out of the Harris County Law Library on the upper floors of the old jury assembly building.
In 2001, the Courts all relocated back to 301 San Jacinto. All things considered, it was a fairly smooth move. Some courts were doubled up into the same room, but it wasn't bad. The atmosphere was relaxed and there was a camaraderie between prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys, and sometimes, even the Defendants.
But now, 301 San Jacinto holds the Juvenile Justice Center -- the heavily damaged Juvenile Justice Center. As of this writing, it doesn't look like that particular structure provides a feasible solution for housing 22 District Courts and 16 County Courts. There have been rumblings of potentially having some trials in the nice and shiny Civil Courts building, but that is said to be meeting heavy resistance from the Civil Court Judges. If true, I can't say that I blame them.
Holding criminal dockets (and trials) in buildings not designed for criminal cases causes problems with security. There are no jail holdovers for in-custody Defendants, which creates issues of how to keep everyone safe and secure. Problems abound. Despite that, there is an urgent need to get the Courts back to some semblance of normal as soon as possible -- especially for cases where there are people incarcerated and awaiting trial. Many have already been in custody for months (if not over a year), awaiting their trials. Last Monday (during the storm), I had originally been scheduled for trial on a case from April of 2016. That case (and many more like it) isn't getting any younger.
As of this writing, we have been told that dockets are tentatively scheduled to resume on Monday, September 11th. I'll believe that when I see it.
As I see it, there are two potential positives that can come out of the days to come.
The first is an opportunity to make some meaningful improvements to the structure of the CJC. We bypassed this opportunity in the aftermath of Allison, and I hope we don't do so again. There are things that can be done that are short of a full-blown do-over. Courts can be moved to lower floors. Accessible stairwells can be made between floors. I don't know that anything could have been done to stop the damage to the CJC done by Hurricane Harvey, but I do think things can be done to help the day-to-day disasters that we deal with in that building under even the best of circumstances.
The second positive is the bonding experience that we are all about to have (whether we like it or not). Things are about to get more casual, and thus more real around whatever place ends up holding our courts. That's a good thing. I can promise that every prosecutor, judge, defense attorney, clerk, coordinator, court reporter, and bailiff who was around during Allison can tell a host of stories of the year during "flood conditions." They weren't always pleasant experiences, but they created the memories that each of us will have when we finally wrap up our careers.
Now those stories that began with "During Allison . . ." are going to start with "During Harvey . . ." The days, weeks, and months ahead are not going to always be pleasant. We'll get through them, because (as my Dad always told me) "you've just got to."
When it is all said and done (and you're back in your regular office and court), you'll be proud to be a survivor of the experience.
10 comments:
Family lawyers and clients have taken the shine off the civil building--which, by the way, only has two working elevators at any given time for the upper floors right now. Last thing it needs is the extra traffic criminal judge's cause by constant and unnecessary resets.
So keep your mitts off what used to be a pretty nice courthouse.
My experience (as a 14-year civil district judge in his last term) is that the civil judges were entirely receptive to the idea of helping our colleagues from across the street. I don't know where the rumors of supposed opposition to helping got started, but they have no basis in fact that I am aware of. My colleagues on the civil side were totally cooperative with the county and the criminal judges in helping find a place for them to work while the repairs to the CJC were implemented. Any suggestion otherwise is a bum rap as far as I am concerned.
Judge Bill Burke
No offense intended, Judge Burke. Maybe we just relied too much on Jason Truitt as an ambassador to the civil world . . .
Afternoon dockets?
I'm sorry Judge Burke, I have to respond here. As much as you say that you "were entirely receptive to the idea of helping your colleagues from across the street...and you don't know where the rumors of supposed opposition to helping got stated, but they have no basis in fact", I have a problem with this. I have a very good friend who is a brethren from across the street. That brethren has told me that ya'll, the civil brethren, do not want members of the defense bar in y'all's back offices during this very stressful time. It was reiterated that "y'all just don't". I can think of only two (2) reasons that you, the civil judges, don't want members of the defense bar in your back offices: 1) you think we have cooties, or 2) you think we might steal from you. Offensive both. Most of us went to the same law schools you went to, most of us passed the same bar exam you did, and a lot of us have been practicing law longer than your brethren. Keep up thinking you are better than us, but you're or not. We don't play for money. Luci Davidson.
Well there's your problem.
You know I say these things mostly in jest.
But I do hope that the way the family and criminal dockets are handled gets some light shone on it. I still think, and do not believe I am an outlier, that the way they do things contributes to overcrowded dockets and overcrowded buildings.
Jason
The best I can hope for out of all of this is afternoon dockets and waiting for substantive settings.
If you want to make sure of bond compliance, which is all we are doing with 30 day settings, offset the cost savings of dropping from 8-10 settings to two with hiring more pre-trial release staff.
The best justification I have heard for the way the cluster currently works, beyond "that's the way it has always been done" is that judges want to move the docket and put pressure on defense counsel to move the case.
Great. First, you have allowed a handful of slackers to dictate the pace and inconvenience literally millions of citizens of the county. Second, if you want to see what is being done on a case, you have the technology to see if it is just percolating or actually being worked. Third, we still have crap coming in at month six on some of the more complex cases, and even some misdemeanor cases. No one is holding up the case, it just takes that long to get blood back from Bayshore, as an example.
On afternoon dockets, I heard from a DA that they could never get anything done. Uh. You would have the mornings, where now you have the afternoons.
Lot's of ways we can improve things moving forward and I am hoping that seeing afternoon dockets (I miss Judge Patrick's staggered morning dockets) and the like can make everyone's life much easier.
Or do we really like seeing both lines wrapped around the corner every morning and young DA's moving to revoke bond of someone stuck in an elevator?
I heard a civil judge in open court yesterday say that several additional courtrooms were offered to the criminal district judges three days a week (the civil judges have a job to do too, you know), but the criminal judges declined. I guess if they can't take over a court 100% of the time, they're just going to take their ball and go home.
I hate to agree with grumpy Judge Burke, but it appears he's more right than not here.
I also heard another judge say that he thought it would be two years before a civil case gets tried. Man, I hope that's not the case. But with criminal cases (rightly) having priority for juries, and the jury system crippled for who knows how long, he may be right.
As for 6:55's post:
"If you want to make sure of bond compliance, which is all we are doing with 30 day settings..."
A judge does not do a damn thing to make sure they're complying with the bond during these constant settings. The judge doesn't test their blood, breath, or urine, and does not do the readout on any device attached to a car or an ankle. This reason is total bullshit--and I think you agree, but I wanted it to be more clear. Your suggestion to hire more pre-trial staff is great and would be cheaper than all of the jail costs, but the PR bond issue is reducing that some hopefully, and the pre-trial department has already been decimated, so I doubt they'll increase it again.
If compliance is all they want, they can make the defendant go to community supervision every month, but they don't need to set foot in the courtroom unless there's a violation--which would drastically reduce the traffic in the courthouse. All the current system does is allow a judge to revoke or increase the bond (or again revoke of they can't afford it) in the cases where a defendant is late to court.
"is that judges want to move the docket and put pressure on defense counsel to move the case. "
Also bullshit. Do you know how many more cases could be tried if they didn't have three hours of every morning filled with bullshit settings/resets? And God forbid the judges hit the bench on time. Some do, but many show nothing but contempt of the citizens and lawyers in their courtroom.
The current system is set up to force pleas y making the lives of the Defendants miserable. I hate to sound like Fickman, but it's just plain obvious that their justifications for the current system are crap. Maybe now that the PR bond issue is getting worked out to some degree these bullshit games can be rolled back, but something tells me the judges will simply double down on the few enforcement mechanisms they have left to coerce a plea.
To add to Luci's comment, prosecutors have also been "asked" not to go into the back offices as well, even to get to the courtroom to set up when the doors are still locked in the morning.
Anony of 12:52 PM from Anony 6:55:
Glad we agree.
Post a Comment