Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:01 pm
Time: 10:01 pm
Results for court delays
3 results foundAuthor: Bornstein, Brian H. Title: Reducing Courts’ Failure to Appear Rate: A Procedural Justice Approach Summary: Failure-to-appear (FTA) is a significant problem in the nation’s courts. This paper examines the effectiveness of using different kinds of written reminders to reduce misdemeanants’ FTA rates. Misdemeanants (n = 7865) in 14 Nebraska counties were randomly assigned to one of four conditions prior to their court date: no reminder (control), reminder-only, reminder with information on the negative consequences of FTA (reminder-sanctions), or reminder with information on sanctions as well as the procedural justice benefits of appearing (reminder-combined). A subset of defendants (n = 452) was also surveyed after their scheduled court date to assess their perceptions of procedural fairness (both in general and regarding participants’ specific court experience) and their level of trust/confidence in the courts. Reminders significantly reduced FTA overall, and more substantive reminders were significantly more effective than a simple reminder. Specifically, the FTA rate was 12.6% in the control condition, 10.9% in the reminder-only condition, 8.3% in the reminder-sanctions condition, and 9.8% in the reminder-combined condition. The FTA rate was higher for some categories of misdemeanors than others, and for defendants with multiple charges (15.4% if two or more charges, versus 5.4% for one charge). The baseline FTA rate was higher for Blacks (18.7%) than for Whites (11.7%) and Hispanics (10.5%), but this difference was not statistically significant when controlling for other factors such as number of offenses and type of offense. Survey results indicated that misdemeanants’ trust/confidence assessments, as well as their perceptions of procedural justice, were related to their appearance in court. Defendants who appeared in court had higher institutional confidence and felt they had been treated more fairly by the criminal justice system (means = 3.23 and 3.52, respectively, on a 5-point scale) than non-appearers (means = 3.02 and 3.23, respectively). Institutional confidence and procedural justice were themselves highly correlated. Defendants with low trust in the courts were less likely to appear than those with higher trust when there was no reminder, but this relationship was not statistically significant when there was a reminder. The study has important implications for public policy and pretrial services, such as improving system efficiencies and increasing criminal defendants’ perceptions of procedural justice. We recommend that courts, especially in larger jurisdictions, adopt a reminder program for defendants and engage in outreach to increase offenders’ trust/confidence. Details: Final Report to the U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2011. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 1, 2011 at: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/234370.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/234370.pdf Shelf Number: 121934 Keywords: Court DelaysCourt ProceduresCourts (U.S.)Failure to Appear |
Author: Poynton, Suzanne Title: The NSW Rolling List Court Evaluation: Preliminary Report Summary: Aim: To determine whether greater efficiency can be achieved through application of the Rolling List Court (RLC) model to NSW District Criminal Court matters. Method: A non-blinded randomised trial was initiated in which eligible District Criminal Court matters were randomly assigned, after committal, either to the RLC or to the general court list. Each matter had an equal chance of being assigned to the RLC. Between March 2015 and April 2016, 110 matters were entered into the ballot; 51 of these were assigned to the RLC and 59 were assigned to the general court list. Results: By the end of July 2016 a significantly higher proportion of matters balloted to the RLC had been finalised compared with matters dealt with in the general court list (65% vs. 37%). Further, a higher proportion of matters dealt with by the RLC resulted in a guilty plea than matters dealt with by the control courts (63% vs. 41%). A guilty plea was entered within 3 months of ballot for nearly one in five (18%) of all the RLC matters. This compares with just 5% of matters dealt with in the control courts. Conclusion: From these early results the success of the RLC to date is promising. Further analyses should be undertaken once all balloted matters have been finalised to confirm the interim findings presented here. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Paper no. 120: Accessed November 30, 2017 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/Report-2016-NSW-Rolling-List-Court-Evaluation-BB120.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/Report-2016-NSW-Rolling-List-Court-Evaluation-BB120.pdf Shelf Number: 148594 Keywords: Court DelaysCriminal CourtGuilty Pleas |
Author: Rahman, Sara Title: The NSW Rolling List Court Evaluation: Final Report Summary: Aim: To assess whether the application of an alternative court model with fixed teams of lawyers operating on a rolling basis in the NSW District Criminal Court resulted in greater efficiency in the resolution of indictable criminal matters relative to the regular operation of the NSW District Court, and to identify the successful elements and mechanisms of the Rolling List Court (RLC) model. Method: A randomised controlled trial was conducted in the NSW District Criminal Court (NSW DCC), where eligible matters were balloted with 50:50 odds to the RLC or the general list of the NSW DCC. The proportion of early guilty pleas relative to late guilty pleas, trials reaching a verdict and no-bills were compared between the courts, and survival analysis was used to analyse the time taken to reach a guilty plea and to finalise matters in both courts. Stakeholder interviews were conducted to identify the key mechanisms behind the RLC, as well as any other benefits or drawbacks of the model. Results: More than half (58.0 %) of the matters balloted to the RLC resolved in a guilty plea before the trial date, compared to 22.0 per cent of the matters randomised to the general list of the NSW DCC. There were marked improvements in the average time taken to reach a guilty plea (t=-3.43; p-value<.001), to list matters for trial (t=-5.14; p-value<.001) and to finalise matters (t=-3.93; p-value<.001) in the RLC. Further evidence of faster resolution in the RLC was found through survival analyses of the time taken to reach a guilty plea (HR=1.73; 95% CI (1.08, 2.78); p-value=.023) and to finalise matters (HR=1.90; 95% CI (1.29, 2.79); p-value=.001). Stakeholders interviewed indicated that early briefing and negotiation was crucial to obtaining earlier guilty pleas, and further benefits to efficiency arose from the fixed-team composition of the court. Conclusion: The RLC proved effective at obtaining early guilty pleas and reducing delay in the processing of indictable criminal matters. The findings suggest that efforts to introduce some elements of the RLC, such as early briefing of practitioners and pre-trial negotiations, could have benefits for the NSW DCC's efficiency. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2017. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in crime and Justice, no. 208: Accessed February 5, 2018 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/2018-Report-The-NSW-Rolling-List-Court-Evaluation-Fianl-Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/2018-Report-The-NSW-Rolling-List-Court-Evaluation-Fianl-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 148989 Keywords: Court Delays Criminal Court Guilty Pleas |