NCJ Number
13424
Date Published
1973
Length
159 pages
Annotation
EVALUATION OF THE PERFORMANCE OF TWO PLANS FOR COURT OPERATION - THE MASTER CALENDAR SYSTEM AND THE ALL-PURPOSE PART SYSTEM.
Abstract
A COURT 'PART' IS A COURTROOM, A JUDGE, AND ALL THE OTHER PERSONNEL REQUIRED TO CONDUCT THE BUSINESS OF THE COURT. BY LATE 1970, THERE EXISTED A BROAD CONSENSUS THAT THE COURT HAD BECOME OVER-SPECIALIZED AND THAT A REVERSAL OF THE EARLIER TREND WAS IN ORDER. TWO PRIMARY ALTERNATIVES WERE PROPOSED. (1) A SYSTEM OF SIMPLE 'ALL-PURPOSE' PARTS IN WHICH INDIVIDUAL PARTS OR, PERHAPS, PAIRS OF PARTS WOULD CONDUCT ALL POST-ARRAIGNMENT PROCESSING OF ASSIGNED CASES, OPERATING RATHER INDEPENDENTLY FROM THE REST OF THE COURT, AND (2) A MASTER CALENDAR SYSTEM IN WHICH A SMALL GROUP OF PARTS WOULD BE CORRDINATED CENTRALLY AND SUPPORTED BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT. BOTH PLANS WERE INSTITUTED IN THE MANHATTAN CRIMINAL COURTS. THIS REPORT REVIEWS AND EVALUATED THE EXPERIMENT. IT OUTLINES THE BENEFITS AND COSTS OF THE MASTER CALENDAR SYSTEM, AND COMPARES THAT SYSTEM'S OVERALL PERFORMANCE WITH THE ALL-PURPOSE SYSTEM. IN ADDITION TO THE REPORT'S MAJOR CONCLUSION THAT THE ALL-PURPOSE SYSTEM WAS THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE, COMPLETE FINDINGS ON THE EXPERIMENT'S EFFECT ON THE QUALITY OF JUSTICE, PROCESSING EFFICIENCY, BURDEN ON PARTICIPANTS, AND PERIPHERAL CRITERIA ARE INCLUDED.