Judge Works to Relieve Court's Logjam

Editor's Note: In November, 2001, the Richmond Review presented an in-depth look at failure of the San Francisco Police Department to make arrests in more than one-half of the 305 homicides that occurred from 1996-2000. The article also focused on the District Attorney's low conviction rate of 40 percent in homicide cases. This month, we are continuing to focus on the criminal justice system by looking at the courts.

By Carol Dimmick

The top judge in San Francisco is about to administer a stiff dose of medicine to an ailing criminal justice system. Presiding Judge Ronald Quidachay has decided that one way to stop the fingerpointing and break a logjam of felony cases threatening to paralyze the judicial pipeline is to make more courtrooms available in January.

"I am calling their bluff with these measures. Then they will say, 'But I'm not ready' (for trial)," Quidachay said.

What Quidachay is referring to is the blame game that erupted after a story appeared in The Recorder, a local American Lawyer media publication, in September showing about a 35 percent increase in the number of felony cases awaiting trial.

According to the article, 836 felony cases were awaiting trial in July compared with 620 cases in July 2000. Narcotics offenses topped the list at 318, but the number also included 80 murder cases, 83 attempted murders, 50 rapes, 277 assaults, 11 kidnappings, 16 burglaries and 52 gang-related incidents.

The backlog touched off finger pointing, with judges and defense attorneys blaming SF District Attorney Terence Hallinan for filing narcotics cases for minor offenses and rejecting plea bargain offers.

Chief Assistant District Attorney Paul Cummins counterpunched by saying the D.A.'s new "get tough" policy is needed and the real problem is a lack of courtrooms.

The escalating backlog of cases and public fingerpointing spurred Quidachay, whose tenure as the top jurist began last January, to take action. He recently talked about several new measures he thinks will move the backlog of criminal cases through the courts. Quidachay's plan is to relieve the misdemeanor courts from the burden of hearing miscellaneous matters and make those courtrooms available for trials.

Beginning in January, all bench warrants, motions and arraignments now handled by misdemeanor courts will be reassigned to the judge who handles the court's Master Calendar.

Judge Kevin Ryan, who presides over the Master Calendar for the criminal courts, thinks it will make a difference.

"That will make a total of 11 trial departments that can hear these cases as opposed to four," Ryan said. "The DA is going to have to take a new look at their procedures, prioritize cases and be ready to deal."

Ryan, like Quidachay, emphasized that once more courtrooms become available judges will expect attorneys to be ready for trial.

"It's turning it up a notch .... I'm going to make you try your case or settle it," he said.

Chief Assistant District Attorney Paul Cummins said he has been asking for more courtrooms for years, but he declined to comment on the specifics of Quidachay's reforms until he learns more about the details.

"I am all for changes that expedite the process. We have a large number of serious murder and rape cases we would like moved through the courts," he said.

Another change Quidachay made when he accepted the top job last January was to hire two retired judges to hear criminal cases on Fridays. He also recently transferred approximately 20 criminal cases to civil judges, including one murder case. He says it's all part of his plan to make the most of the resources at his disposal.

"The trick is to take the existing resources and expand what you can do with those resources," he explained.

Felony Cases Linger Longer In SF Courts

Statistics compiled by the Judicial Council of California, the policy-making body of the courts, confirm that felonies are moving through San Francisco's courts at a much slower pace than other jurisdictions in California.

According to the most recent statistics available, in 1999-2000 there were 7,190 felony filings in San Francisco and 76 percent moved through the courts in less than 12 months. The statewide average was 92 percent for the same time period.

The previous year, 1998-1999, there were 111 fewer felonies filed and 77 percent were disposed of by the courts in less than 12 months. The statewide average was 93 percent.

Proposition 36 Expected to Clog Courts With More Drug Cases

Experts are predicting that court reform will become even more critical once the full impact of Proposition 36 is felt. The proposition calls for medical treatment instead of criminal penalties for drug offenders.

Under provisions that went into effect July 31, 2001, legal experts predict drug defendants will be asking for more trials. Although the measure requires a guilty plea before treatment is recommended, critics say public defenders are more likely to tell their clients they can still get treatment if they are found guilty at trial.

But Quidachay put some of the blame for the backlog of narcotics and domestic violence cases on what he called the "progressive culture" in San Francisco's courts.

"The culture in San Francisco courts is different. It is progressive to the extent that it is one of the reasons why cases stay around much longer .... Courts are looked at here in San Francisco as a way to solve social problems. I need courts open so we can go to trial," he said.

S.F. Courts Facing $3 Million Budget Deficit

To make Quidachay's job even harder, the state of California recently asked San Francisco courts to trim $3 million from its $62 million annual budget. To meet the shortfall, the court recently eliminated nine full-time support-staff positions.

Unlike the police department, the public defender and the district attorney, the fiscal responsibility for funding trial courts shifted from the local level to the state in 1997 with the adoption of the Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act approved by the California legislature.

About 75 percent of the budget for the courts goes to pay the salaries of support staff, while the remainder goes to pay for training, supplies, court bailiffs and computers to keep the city's 58 courtrooms operating. The 50 judges - who earn an annual salary of $134,000 - are paid from a separate state fund.

Getting new judgeships approved is cumbersome process that begins with the Judicial Council. Although San Francisco was recently approved for one position, court administrators say getting funding from the state is unlikely.

Quidachay, as presiding judge, has wide leeway to shift funds from existing programs. But with a $3 million budget deficit he will be looking for ways to deliver services better.

Court-watchers are predicting that the latest round of support-staff layoffs ensure that San Francisco will continue to lag behind other counties in the state. According to the latest statistics available, San Francisco has 7.7 staff per judge, while the official statewide average is 8.5.

San Francisco's courts fare better when comparing judges per 1,000 FBI crimes. In 1999, the latest year for which statistics are available, San Francisco had 1.4 judges per 1,000 crimes, putting it in the middle of 14 jurisdictions in California with residential populations of 700,000.

While it is too early to say whether Quidachay has prescribed the right medication to break the logjam in the courts, he is optimistic. "I wouldn't have asked for the job if I didn't think I could do it," he said.