So it’s been over a week since my last post and, yes, I have
heard from a few of you about whether I was AWOL. I can assure you I have been
here and covering committees of interest. Here a summary of the last week’s
activities. Last Thursday I attended a House Judiciary Committee hearing on H.
618, the bill that would require all criminal charges against kids under 18 be
brought in Family Division. As introduced the bill does not allow transfer of
those cases to the Criminal Division. Immediately the committee talked about
putting those transfer provisions back in the bill. This bill would really undo
the work of a special session of the general assembly after the Essex killing
involving defendants Hamlin and Savage. Probably some of you remember that.
I also got involved in H. 795, a bill to change some of the
procedures to collect restitution from criminal defendants. This is not so much
a VBA concern bu,t as Chair of the state’s Victims Compensation Board, it is an
issue I work on. Actually, this morning we made our presentation to the House
Appropriations Committee.
Last Friday I was out of the building at VLS participating
in more interviews for our next Poverty Law Fellow. We’re down to a small group
of incredibly talented young lawyers, any one of whom would serve our veteran
population very well. making a final decision between these candidates will not
be easy.
Tuesday morning started again in House Judiciary, again on
the restitution bill; the afternoon was devoted to H. 413, the collateral
consequences of conviction bill. This time Chittenden States Attorney TJ
Donovan weighed in supporting it. Other witnesses agreed. The bill seems to be
moving toward completion and floor action soon. yesterday House Judiciary
worked towards completion also on S. 119, the amending perpetual conservation
easements bill as well as the juvenile jurisdiction bill, H. 618. So, for the
most part I have been following the work of House Judiciary almost exclusively.
So, after crossover ( Friday, March 14th) my attention will turn to
the Senate Judiciary Committee which will begin work on the bills the House has
sent over.
There were two events of interest yesterday. First, the
Chief Justice, Justice Dooley, Court Administrator Patricia Gabel, and the
judiciary’s new financial person, Matt Rivin, made their presentation to the
House Appropriations Committee. The testimony came minutes after the House
adopted the Senate’s changes to the budget adjustment bill. That bill, as it
came back from the Senate, contained a supplemental appropriation of about
$650,000 for the judicial branch. The Chief spoke at length about the judicial
advisory council that the court convened to address governance issues within the
branch. The governor's recommended budget contains a 3.1% or $1.267 million increase in the base.
I was surprised when one committee member said he felt like
“we’re throwing money down the drain”. He felt as though “trust was broken” and
he wants to see what the court has identified ans the problem and how it will
fix it. Thinking that that was the feeling of a single member of the committee
I mentioned to another member this morning that I was shocked by that and was
told “the whole committee feels that way”. OUCH! Clearly a lot needs to be done
by the judicial branch. I don’t envy the work of the appropriations committees
this year.
Last evening the three remaining judges up for retention
appeared before the retention committee. Judge Nancy Corsones was the first to
be interviewed. Her surveys six years ago spoke to her need to “slow down” and
she took that advice. This year’s surveys contained a few negative comments (as
almost every judge has seen); she responded to those. Her love of her job was
evident and the was expertise she has developed in family court. She spoke to
the drug problem, to the decline in decorum among the public in the courtroom
and addressed issue of the mental health docket after Tropical Storm Irene.
Judge Hayes was next and said that this process of retention
is “painful but valuable”. In that, she agreed with Judge Corsones. This year
her surveys were quite positive and it appears that the issues she faced six
years ago have been corrected. Since 2008, she has worked on lessening the use
of humor in the courtroom, lest it be misunderstood; she has worked on being
more respectful of lawyers and not interrupting them. In response to a comment
that she didn’t appear to know the law,
she offered that may have been during a tenure in the Civil Division, where she
had not sat for some time. For her 11 years on the bench she has spent 7 in
Family Division.
Judge Suntag was up last and spoke to the changes in his
survey results from 12 years earlier. He discussed his teaching around the
country and responded to committee questions about his local rule about plea
agreements in the criminal docket. He also spoke to the Integrated Domestic
Violence Docket he has instituted in Windham County. This grant supported
effort should reduce recidivism, as results from other parts of the country
have shown. Given the focus of this session on opiate and prescription drug
abuse, the committee was very interested in his approach and in Judge Corsones’
comments about the effects of drugs in juvenile, family and criminal cases.
Well, I think I’m caught up. Sorry for the delay in keeping
you informed. As always, let me know what you think about any of these issues
and/or anything I may have missed which you want to hear about. Until my next
post, thanks for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment