In the North Dakota judicial system, a system of committees has been established to develop new ideas and evaluate proposals for improving public services. These advisory committees include citizen members, legislators, lawyers, and judges. The activities of these advisory committees are summarized here:
Joint Procedure Committee
The Joint Procedure Committee is the standing committee of the Supreme Court responsible for proposing adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules of civil procedure, criminal procedure, appellate procedure, evidence, and specialized court procedure.
Justice Dale V. Sandstrom chairs the Committee. The Committee membership of ten judges and ten attorneys is appointed by the Supreme Court, except for one liaison member appointed by the State Bar Association.
In 2004, the Committee continued work on a project to update and revise the North Dakota Rules of Criminal Procedure. Recent projects also include development of new rules to protect personal information in court files, including social security numbers. The Committee is also working on rules to govern electronic filing and service of documents.
Judiciary Standards Committee
The Judiciary Standards Committee, chaired by Brian Neugebauer of West Fargo, studies and reviews all rules relating to the supervision of the judiciary, including judicial discipline, judicial ethics, and the judicial nominating process. During 2004, the Committee reviewed issues concerning sexual harassment as a form of ethical misconduct by judges and recommended related amendments to the Code of Judicial Conduct to the Supreme Court. The Committee also recommended amendments to the administrative rule governing the judicial improvement program to include judicial referees in the program. The Committee, in late 2004, began consideration of a possible mechanism for responding to complaints concerning campaign conduct during elections for judicial office.
Court Services Administration Committee
The Court Services Administration Committee, chaired by Justice Carol Ronning Kapsner, is responsible for the study and review of all rules and orders relating to the administrative supervision of the judicial system. During 2004, the Committee completed work on a proposed rule establishing qualifications for court interpreters and procedures to be followed in proceedings in which interpreter services are needed. The proposed rule is under consideration by the Supreme Court.
Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee
The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee, chaired by District Judge Ronald E. Goodman of Ellendale, provides advisory services for judges relating to judicial ethics issues. The Committee has provided all judges with an ethics manual and responds to inquiries by judges on ethics questions. The Committee also documents responses for use by all members of the judiciary.
Jury Standards Committee
The Jury Standards Committee, chaired by District Judge Joel D. Medd of Grand Forks, studies and oversees the operation of North Dakota’s jury system. During 2004, the Committee developed and recommended to the Judicial Conference legislation amending the statute governing the selection of jurors from outside the county of venue and in situations in which a natural disaster affects the ability to summon a sufficient number of persons for jury duty.
Judicial Planning Committee
The Judicial Planning Committee is chaired by Justice William A. Neumann. The Committee studies the judicial system and makes recommendations concerning long-range and strategic planning and future improvements for the system.
North Dakota Legal Counsel for Indigents Commission
The North Dakota Legal Counsel for Indigents Commission, chaired by District Judge Laurie Fontaine, Cavalier, identifies and reviews issues concerning the operation of the indigent defense contract system. During 2004, members of the Commission participated in the work of the State Bar Association's Indigent Defense Task Force, the result of which was proposed legislation establishing a new mechanism for providing indigent defense services in the state. The Commission will monitor the progress of the legislation during the 2005 legislative session.
Administrative Council
The Administrative Council convened their first meeting in August replacing the Council of Presiding Judges as the policy making body charged with the responsibility to provide uniform and efficient delivery of administrative support to the trial courts. The council consists of the presiding judge of each judicial district, three elected judges from administrative units made up of two judicial districts, and one bar representative selected by the State Bar Association's Board of Governors. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court serves as presiding officer of the council. Duties of the council include the responsibility to develop administrative policies for the trial courts and provide the mechanism to ensure implementation. The Administrative Council meets at the call of the chair.
Juvenile Policy Board
At the request of the Chief Justice, the Juvenile Policy Board has undertaken a review of N.D.C.C. Ch.27-20, the Uniform Juvenile Court Act. The Chief Justice felt it was time to take a more comprehensive review of the entire Act to determine whether it adequately meets the needs of an effective juvenile justice system.
Related to this issue is whether a system of rules should be developed to address the juvenile court and its operation. Applying civil and criminal procedural rules to juvenile matters is a topic of discussion.
In light of these two important issues, the Chief Justice has asked representatives of other agencies and departments to join in on the discussions. Representatives from the Department of Human Services, County Welfare Directors Association, State's Attorneys Association, public defenders, and the Department of Juvenile Services have been invited to participate and meetings have begun.
The Juvenile Policy Board has also begun the study of a Best Practices policy to assist in developing some consistencies across the state in our juvenile court offices.
Commission on Judicial Education
The Judicial Education Commission was established following the adoption of Administrative Rule 36 by the Supreme Court in April 1994. The rule has been amended over the years with the most recent amendment effective March 1, 2005. The membership of the Commission is made up of five judges of courts of record of this state, one member each from the juvenile court personnel, support staff of courts of record, faculty of the University of North Dakota Law School, and one judge from a court not of record. The current chair of the Commission is Justice Mary Muehlen Maring.
The Commission develops policies and procedures concerning the implementation of a statewide continuing judicial education program for judges and personnel of the unified judicial system. The Commission was instrumental in the Supreme Court's decision to mandate that all supreme, district, and municipal judges, judicial referees and magistrates, and juvenile court officers receive an identified number of hours of continuing education.
Committee on Tribal and State Court Affairs
The Committee on Tribal and State Court Affairs was established following adoption of Administrative Rule 37 by the Supreme Court. The Committee is chaired by District Judge Donovan Foughty, Devils Lake, and is comprised of tribal and state court judges, tribal and state court support services representatives, and public members. It provides a vehicle for expanding awareness about the operation of tribal and state court systems; identifying and discussing issues regarding court practices, procedures, and administration which are of common concern to members of the two court systems; and for cultivating mutual respect for, and cooperation between, tribal and state courts.
Joint Committee on Attorney Standards
The Joint Committee on Attorney Standards was established following adoption of Administrative Rule 38 by the Supreme Court. The Committee, chaired in 2004 by Mike Williams, Fargo, is comprised of members appointed by the Chief Justice and the Board of Governors of the State Bar Association. During 2004, the Joint Committee continued its review of North Dakota's Rules of Professional Conduct in light of amendments to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct recently adopted by the American Bar Association. The Joint Committee also concluded a review of rule amendments regarding multi-jurisdictional practice recommended by the State Bar Association's Multi-jurisdictional Practice Task Force. The Joint Committee recommended the rule amendments, with modifications, to the Supreme Court and the amendments were recently adopted effective March 1, 2005.
Gender Fairness Implementation Committee
The Gender Fairness Implementation Committee, chaired by Justice Mary Muehlen Maring, was established by Supreme Court Administrative Order 7 to oversee implementation of the recommendations of the Supreme Court's Commission on Gender Fairness in the Courts. It is further charged with monitoring the progress of the judicial branch in eliminating gender bias in the courts. During 2004, the Committee completed work on a handbook for employees which provides guidance concerning appropriate employ conduct and resources to employees to assist in resolving questions concerning appropriate conduct. The handbook was recently distributed to all employees and will be used in employee education programs. The Committee also began work on planning a focus group process to take place in 2005 and 2006 which will aid in assessing the judicial system's progress in addressing bias-related issues in the courts.
Court Technology Committee
The Court Technology Committee, chaired by Judge Allan Schmalenberger, is comprised of representatives from the supreme court, district courts, clerks of court, and state court administrator's office. The committee is responsible for general oversight and direction of technology for the judicial branch.
The unified court information systems (UCIS) continued its growth in 2004 by being installed in West Fargo Municipal Court. UCIS is used in the district courts in all 53 counties and in municipal courts in 8 cities. There are currently nearly 600 enrolled users in the UCIS system.
Throughout 2004, the judicial branch continued its cooperative electronic citation effort with the Highway Patrol. During 2004, nearly 65,000 citations were received from the Highway Patrol. Of that total, 78 percent were received electronically. Additionally, dispositions for all traffic citations were reported electronically to the Department of Transportation. These electronic workflows result in significant efficiencies through reduced data entry and reduction of data entry errors.
We continue to provide access to district court case information to other criminal justice related personnel. Currently, web-based access is provided to over 300 non-judicial personnel, and UCIS access is provided to over 125 non-judicial personnel.
The district court in Cass County began using interactive television for appearances of in-custody participants from the newly constructed jail in Cass County. Future plans include increasing the use of interactive television throughout the state.
Digital recording, the practice of taking the court record digitally and storing it to a computer server, was expanded to include district court in Grand Forks County. This involved placing a digital recording server in the courthouse for audio storage and placing a computer in each courtroom for digital encoding of the audio tracks. Future plans include adding additional digital recording systems to other courthouses.
The North Dakota judicial branch continues its work with the state's criminal justice information system (CJIS) initiative. This initiative is a joint, multi-branch of government effort to facilitate sharing of criminal justice information.
The judicial branch's Help Desk provides technical support to all judicial branch employees, judges, clerk of court personnel and others using and accessing our information systems. Over 5,100 calls for assistance were placed to the help desk in 2004.
The judicial branch IT Department continues to provide email and anti-spam services for judicial personnel. In 2004, the anti-spam server received 4,240,157 email messages and blocked 88.2% of those as spam.
In 2004, we continued our technology training efforts by having our technology coordinator provide on-site computer training for various topics, including email usage, word processor training, UCIS training, and jury system training.
The Court Technology Committee, with assistance from several temporary members, created a draft rule that would allow electronic access to court records. The results of the months-long project are included in a new, draft version of Administrative Rule 41, which was then sent to the Supreme Court for approval.
Throughout 2004 planning efforts continued on an enhanced records management system (ERMS). Such a system provides a method of capturing all court case related documents electronically and storing them within an imaging system. Implementation of a pilot phase is set to begin in 2005 with statewide implementation beginning in 2006.
The biennial judicial branch IT plan was approved by the Court Technology Committee in 2004 and submitted as required by statute.
Personnel Policy Board
The Personnel Policy Board was established following adoption of Administrative Policy 106 by the Supreme Court. The board is chaired by Judge M. Richard Geiger and is comprised of a supreme court justice, district court judges, supreme court department heads, and employees of the supreme and district courts. The board is tasked with the responsibility of reviewing and implementing the personnel system and developing a salary administration plan for the judiciary. In 2004 the board's primary focus centered around finalizing the review of the current pay and classification system. In October 2004, the proposed revisions to the plan were finalized by the Supreme Court.
Trial Court Legal Research Assistance Committee
The Trial Court Legal Research Assistance Committee, chaired by Judge David Nelson, was created in 1999. The committee provides technical assistance and management assistance to trial courts in the state. The contract for computer assisted legal research (CALR) was again awarded to Lexis after a thorough review and bidding process. The Committee continues to look at library holdings between districts and encourages group purchasing when appropriate.
Committee on Caseflow Management
The Committee on Caseflow Management, chaired by Judge Allan Schmalenberger, has been established to review district and administrative unit case management plans and practices as prescribed by the Administrative Council. Ensuring early court monitoring and continuous control over case progress is essential in caseflow management. Caseflow management also includes developing strategies for differentiated case management, creation of realistic and credible trial dates, and the development of strategies to ensure oversight of all court related case events.
The Committee is made up of judges from each judicial district, bar association representatives, court administrative personnel, public defenders and state's attorney representatives. The Committee meets at the call of the chair, but usually quarterly.
Committee on Trial Court Operations
The Committee on Trial Court Operations, chaired by Judge David Nelson, develops and maintains a current clerk of court procedures manual; reviews various clerk of court operations for consistent application of statutes, rules, and policies; develops and maintains forms for use statewide; and reviews matters assigned by the Administrative Council. During 2004, the Committee completed a lengthy review and revision of the Clerk of Court Manual and submitted revisions to the Administrative Council for consideration.
The seven member committee, appointed by the chief justice, includes two district judges, two trial court administrative representatives, and three clerks of district court.