Minnesota State Courts | 2001 - 2002 Annual Report

Access to Justice

Each Minnesota judge handles nearly 8,000 cases each year, and if the last 25 years are any indication, judges will continue to see substantial caseload growth. Since 1975, major caseloads have increased more than 700 percent. As a result, we understand the importance of working efficiently and effectively by addressing the problems that lead to crime and increasing citizens' access to justice.

Dealing with DWI faster

Hennepin County District Court began handling the new felony level DWI cases in 2002 under the Expedited DWI program. The court has been expediting misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor alcohol-related offenses since 2000. The program has led to a higher percentage of case dispositions in a shorter amount of time, allowing people to begin healing and recovery sooner.

Program results show that more than 81 percent of the DWI cases are resolved within 45 days and 96 percent within 75 days. The number of days from first appearance to case resolution decreased 40 percent (from 38 days prior to the start of the program to 23 days after). Implied consent trials decreased 73 percent in the same time frame.

Studying potential race bias

The Minnesota Supreme Court's Implementation Committee on Multicultural Diversity and Racial Fairness in the Courts is overseeing a statewide court race data collection project, which is the first of its kind in the country. Since early 2002, every court in Minnesota has collected self-reported race data at the first court appearance in traffic, criminal and juvenile cases. The goal is to understand whether bias enters into decisions made in the criminal justice system, and to address those problems, so everyone is treated fairly.

Fighting alcohol, drug use

St. Louis County

St. Louis County District Court launched the state's newest adult drug court in 2002 to address the nearly 80 percent of defendants who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of their offense. The drug court, similar to those in Hennepin and Ramsey counties, provides early chemical dependency assessments and identification of addiction, closer and more intensive supervision, and frequent unscheduled drug tests and meetings with the judge. Such courts have reduced court processing time and increased drug defendants' accountability.

Dodge County

In November 2002, Dodge County implemented a juvenile drug court, modeled after one in Ramsey County, but designed to address issues unique to rural Minnesota. The program has gained widespread community support. In addition to providing the usual benefits of drug court, Dodge County's courts have received grants and worked with local organizations to create services that ensure the success of participating youth and their families.

Statewide

Nearly 275 criminal justice and community leaders from across the state met to pioneer new ways of addressing chemical use and addiction amongst juveniles. The Supreme Court sponsored the July 2002 conference, Ending the Disconnect, Advancing the Dialogue: Innovative Judicial Interventions for Chemical Health. Conference participants heard about chemical health issues from national leaders, talked to colleagues across the system and together, focused on solutions to the challenge chemical use poses for the courts.

Drug Court

Hennepin County Drug Court Judge Robert Lynn (left) and U.S. Congress-man Jim Ramstad (center) recognize one of many people who contribute to the success of Drug Court during a June 4, 2001 ceremony in Minneapolis.

Addressing family needs

In 2001, the Hennepin County Family Court reduced delays by more than 30 percent and significantly increased the satisfaction of the parties, their attorneys and the court. Now, a meeting is held within seven days of case filing between the parties and their lawyers, and the judicial officer assigned to the divorce case. During the meeting, parties resolve initial property division, support allocation, and child custody issues. Deadlines are also set for the remainder of the case.

Ensuring greater efficiency

In 2001, the Third Judicial District worked with the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of scheduling and calendaring practices while making the most of existing resources. Among the NCSC's recommendations were to work with attorneys and public defenders to dispose of cases as soon as possible after the case is initiated; to widely use "best practices" already employed in one or more counties of the district; and to encourage realistic and early plea agreements when possible.

Reducing litigation costs

Ramsey County District Court launched a two-year reduced-cost litigation pilot project in 2001. It is designed to save certain civil litigants time and money by scheduling trials within shorter timeframes and limiting pre-trial "paper battles" that delay court proceedings. Cases are assigned to a single judge who manages them to reduce the cost of hearings, motions and required conferences. A scheduling conference is held within 30 days, the period of discovery is limited to no more than 75 days, and a trial date is set within 150 days. Telephone and interactive video conferencing is also encouraged. Parties and the judge must agree that a case is suitable to participate.

Repairing communities

In 2000, the Eighth Judicial District began using circle sentencing, an alternative sentencing process that requires the defendant to meet with a community group that may include the victim, Native American tribal representatives, social services and legal system representatives, and others from the community. The circle discusses the crime, its impact, and an appropriate punishment. The circle then meets periodically to help the defendant avoid crime in the future, provided the offender complies with the circle's recommendations.

Since 2000, 18 Kandiyohi County youth have participated in the process. Twenty volunteers were trained by restorative justice experts from Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, the Minnesota Restorative Justice Campaign and St. Cloud State University. The program is now working with new computer software in cooperation with the Department of Corrections to track how well restorative justice programs are working.

Yellow Medicine County started a similar program in September 2002. In one of the program's first cases, the victim and offender came face to face to make amends in the circle. The victim has since stayed involved in the process to make sure the young offender "makes something of his life."

Judge G. Barry Anderson

Court of Appeals Judge G. Barry Anderson meets with a group of constituents represented by State Rep. Dan Dorman of St. Paul during their March 11, 2002 visit to the State Judicial Center.

Reforming the jury system

In December 2001, the Minnesota Supreme Court Jury Task Force issued its final report on District Court jury service and practice (view it at http://www.courts.state.mn.us/cio/public_notices/jtf_final_report_5.doc). The report recommends changes and innovations in the areas of jury service and orientation, the jury selection process, juror privacy during voir dire, efficient jury trial conduct, enhancing juror understanding, jury deliberations and discharge, juror stress, and development of district juror treatment plans.

Among the Task Force's recommendations were:

Addressing mental health needs

Hennepin and Ramsey Counties' District Courts have developed problem-solving courts meant to address mental health issues early and decrease repeat court appearances, which lead to heavier caseloads and greater taxpayer expense. The voluntary mental health courts provide options for offenders, including treatment instead of jail time or allowing defendants to erase minor crimes from their records if they agree to treatment.

Hennepin and Ramsey district courts are also studying how mentally ill defendants are adjudicated. As a result, Hennepin County Community Court now has a liaison from County Children, Family and Adult Services in the jail and courtrooms. The liaison provides recommendations to the court for defendants suspected of having significant mental illness. The ultimate goal of the project, funded by the State Justice Institute, is to recommend improvements to the entire criminal court.

Increasing access through court innovations

Washington County

In July 2002, the Washington County District Court Self-Service Center opened to improve citizens' access to the courts, save time, and increase customer satisfaction. Over the last decade, courts across the country have seen an increase in self-representation by litigants. In addition to Washington County, other Minnesota counties like Hennepin and Stearns have developed self-service centers to address this need.

Washington County's Center will provide:

Dakota County

In July 2001, Dakota County District Court initiated self-help sessions on family law matters once a month in Hastings, Apple Valley, and West St. Paul. The sessions provide family court forms, information about legal resources, Internet access, photocopy machines, and assistance from volunteer attorneys. The courts worked with the Dakota County Law Library and Bar Association to initiate the program.

Judge Richard Ahles Birthday Wedding

Judge Richard Ahles celebrates his 60th birthday by wedding 19 couples free-of-charge at the Stearns County Courthouse on Valentine's Day 2002.

Simplifying court processes for citizens

In July 2002, Sherburne County District Court transformed its case processing to increase accountability, shorten time to case resolution, and simplify the court process for citizens. The changes include:

Meeting victims' needs

In November 2000, Hennepin County District Court began a new innovation to help domestic violence victims. Domestic Violence Court was designed to handle a higher volume of cases quickly and effectively while providing greater accountability for the offender and the system.

Since its creation, it has expedited domestic abuse cases and conviction rates appear to be rising. In addition, a 2002 study reported that victims whose cases were heard in Hennepin County Domestic Violence Court were favorably impressed with the court process.

The study reported:

More than 70 percent of victims were satisfied with case outcomes. Satisfaction was unrelated to the outcomes of the cases in which the victims were involved.

Reducing case delay

Washington County District Court adopted a new Differentiated Case Management Plan for felony and gross misdemeanor cases in July 2002 meant to decrease the time to disposition. Under the plan, judges require prosecutors, defendants, and defense counsel to appear in court to develop pretrial schedules that meet the specific needs of the case. The plan ensures sufficient time to prepare and present cases without rescheduling hearings because of conflicts with other court appearances, inadequate time to conduct evaluations and investigations, insufficient hearing notices or the unavailability of witnesses.

Improving quality of service

In 2002, Hennepin County District Court became one of the first courts in the country to begin using the Baldrige Award Program assessment, established by Congress in 1987 to raise awareness about the importance of quality and performance excellence.

As it prepares for the transition to state funding, the district has conducted self-assessments in each of the Baldrige categories to identify areas for improvement and strategies to implement change. The categories are leadership, strategic planning, customer and market focus, information and analysis, human resources, process management, and business results.

The process has already enhanced the relationships between the court's judges and court managers. It will also help the court work smarter, and improve efficiency and public service.

Closing the language gap

Rule 8 of the General Rules of Practice, which governs the appointment of court interpreters, was amended in March 2002 to allow greater flexibility when scheduling sign language interpreters. The courts continue to monitor responses to sign language interpreter requests and collect response data, and plan to report results to the Supreme Court in early 2003. The data will be used to ensure that the needs of the deaf and hearing impaired community are being met by the courts.

In addition, the courts collected data on all interpreter requests (both spoken and sign language) between July 2001 and February 2002. The data was distributed to each judicial district and was used to assess future interpreter needs.

The State Court Administrator's Office will help courts and judicial districts develop plans for meeting the needs of people with Limited English Proficiency, as required by guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Justice in June 2002.

Back to top