Thinking of International Cooperation

Just this week, a judge and nine lawyers from Afghanistan were able to watch oral arguments in four cases heard by the Ohio Supreme Court in the Thomas J. Moyer Judicial Center. Afterward, the group spent time with Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor discussing the differences between the U.S. and Afghan court systems.

Both the Ohio Judicial College and National Judicial College have sponsored programs that allow judges from the United States to periodically receive judges and attorneys from other countries and sponsor them in training. Judges from Ukraine, Russia, Libya, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, and Serbia have toured the nation’s court system, including here in Ohio and have marveled at our Supreme Court building. 

Visits have varied and have included more than judges. For example, members of the China International Economic Trade and Arbitration Commission learned about dispute resolution during a visit to Ohio in 2007. A 2009 Korean delegation studied the administration and use of jury trials. The Serbian delegation in 2012 learned about asset forfeiture, and Franklin County judges presented a program on commercial dockets to a Turkmenistan group. 

Twice in 1995, I had the wonderful opportunity to travel to Russia and Ukraine after the breakup of the Soviet Union to teach programs designed to introduce the U.S. legal system and encourage judicial independence. Many students were fascinated to hear that people believed in the rule of law and that American judges had no armies to enforce their opinions. They were surprised that we didn’t have to call party bosses to decide how to rule in a particular case. They were also amazed that someone could actually sue the government. 

So many times we take our system of law for granted. During this primary season, when politics seems to expose the rawer nerves of democracy, it’s not a bad idea to remember that when we are viewed from other places, we appear to be very fortunate and that the sharing of ideas benefits all of us.

d

Judicial Seats on March Primary Election Ballot

One week from today, Ohioans will have the opportunity to exercise their right to vote as they go to the polls on Tuesday, March 15 for the primary election.

In a previous post, I’ve mentioned Judicial Votes Count and the many resources available on the website for voters who’d like to learn more about the candidates for judge and justice. The website includes biographical information about the judicial candidates, including the candidates’ reasons for wanting to serve on the bench.

There are 145 judicial races on next week’s primary ballot, including three on the Ohio Supreme Court.

Twenty-seven court of appeals seats are also up for election this year. Before being elected as a Supreme Court justice, I served as a judge on the Sixth District Court of Appeals, as well as in common pleas and municipal court. I was asked to provide some insight in to the appeals court process in a video produced for the Judicial Votes Count website. That video, along with videos about the Supreme Court and common pleas courts, help voters understand the functions of each court.

Judges play an important role in our society by making decisions that affect our lives every day and in countless ways. Become more informed about these important offices by visiting judicialvotescount.org. Then, please vote!

Choosing a Justice – U.S. vs Ohio

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s death on Feb. 13 has led to much speculation about who will replace him. Based on the Constitution, justices on the U.S. Supreme Court are nominated by the president and those nomination must be confirmed by the Senate.

 

There are nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court who serve lifetime terms. Justice Elena Kagan was the last Supreme Court justice appointed to the bench back in August 2010 by President Barack Obama. The longest serving justice is Justice Anthony Kennedy, who took his seat in 1988, and was nominated by President Ronald Reagan. The newest appointed justice will become the 113th to serve on our nation’s Supreme Court.

 

The Washington Post recently published a helpful infographic that explains the path of U.S. Supreme Court appointments.

 

 

The president also nominates candidates for federal judgeships subject to the Senate’s approval. As of 2014, there are more than 625 active judges who serve federal district courts and nearly 175 judges who serve federal courts of appeals. All federal judges enjoy lifetime terms.

 

In contrast, the seven justices on Ohio’s highest court are elected in statewide elections. We are not appointed, and we serve six-year terms before standing for re-election. The Ohio governor can appoint a justice for vacancies that occur between elections, such as for a retirement or death. In the rare instance that a justice on the Ohio Supreme Court must be appointed, the governor makes the decision alone – it doesn’t have to be confirmed by the Ohio General Assembly. The same holds true for other state courts.   If a judge leaves in the middle of a term, the governor appoints someone to fill the vacancy until voters decide who will retain the seat in the next election.

 

Only 21 states have elections, both partisan and nonpartisan. Ohio has nonpartisan general elections. In 12 states, the justices are appointed for life and in the remaining 17 states the justices are elected after an initial appointment.

 

Voters choose two Ohio Supreme Court justices at the general election in even-numbered years. In the year when the chief justice runs, voters pick three members of the Court. A person must be an attorney with at least six years of experience in the practice of law to be elected or appointed to the Court.

 

Three justices are up for election this year. Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor has no opponent, and Justice Paul E. Pfeifer and I are no longer eligible to seek re-election due to age restrictions, so our Court will welcome two new members in 2017.

 

Now we will have to wait and see who will become the next U.S. Supreme Court justice and who will become the new justices on our state’s Supreme Court.

 

 

Sources: American Bar Association and United States Courts

jg

Annual Report on Discipline is Released

Do you ever wonder what happens when a lawyer or judge does something illegal or gets into serious trouble?  In most states, there is a disciplinary group that handles complaints against lawyers and judges. Ohio is no exception.

The Board of Professional Conduct, formerly called the Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline, just released its 2015 annual reporton Feb. 17, noting a nearly 20 percent decrease in active pending cases.  This board, made up of 28 volunteer commissioners appointed by the Supreme Court of Ohio, includes judges, lawyers, and members of the public. The board hears complaints against attorneys and judges for criminal behavior or for violations of the ethical codes of the Ohio Rules of Professional Responsibility and the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Disciplinary cases can arise in a number of situations ranging from a lawyer’s neglect of client matters to a felony conviction. When a complaint is made and has probable cause, a disputed case will be heard before a hearing panel of three commissioners, who then write an opinion to present to the full board. After consideration by all commissioners, the report is certified to the Supreme Court with both panel and board recommendations.

The justices will hear oral arguments about the case and then decide if the lawyer or judge will receive the recommended sanction, or a greater or lesser penalty, which might include a professional license suspension or a probationary period with conditions. License suspensions may last for six months, one or two years, or for an indefinite period.  A disbarment, which is the most serious penalty available, means that the attorney or judge will never practice law in Ohio again.

According to the 2015 annual report, there were 48 hearings and 61 certified reports and the board disposed of 102 cases, a 21.4 percent increase in dispositions from 2014.

More information can be found here.

n

2015 Ohio Supreme Court Case Highlights

As we start a new year, I think it is worthwhile to review the Supreme Court of Ohio’s opinions of the last year. According to our statistics, more than 300 opinions were written. Some related to technical issues of procedure or interpretation of statutes, others covered discipline of attorneys or judges, and many dealt with the constitutional rights of those injured or accused of crime. 

Among cases of particular interest to the public were:

• An opinion modifying gross-sexual-imposition We ruled that part of Ohio’s gross-sexual imposition law was unconstitutional and struck down the provision that mandated prison terms when evidence other than the alleged victim’s testimony corroborated the offense. State v Bevly, 2015-Ohio-475.

• An opinion on garbage search We held that evidence from a single trash pull was enough to find probable cause for a search warrant if it corroborates information and tips on drug activity. State v Jones, 2015-Ohio-483.

• An opinion on a 911 recording In granting the Cincinnati Enquirer’s public-record request, we held that the recording of a 911 dispatcher’s return call to an emergency caller is a public record subject to release. State ex rel. Cincinnati v. Sage, 2015-Ohio-974.

• Two opinions involving the taxing of National Football League players In both cases, we rejected Cleveland’s method of taxing the pro athletes based on games that were played. The tax calculation was held to violate each player’s due process rights. Hillenmeyer v. Cleveland Bd. of Review 2015-Ohio-1623, Saturday v. Cleveland Bd of Review 2015-Ohio-1625.

• An opinion on a traffic stop We held that a traffic stop for a minor misdemeanor made by a township police officer without statutory jurisdiction or authority violates Ohio’s constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure. State v. Brown, 2015-Ohio-2438. 

• An opinion on charter schools In a case stemming from ongoing litigation brought by 10 Cleveland charter schools against the companies that operated and managed them, we held that an entity managing the daily operations of a charter school has a fiduciary relationship with the school it operates. Hope Academy v. White Hat Mgmt. L.L.C., 2015-Ohio-3716.

• An opinion on the Ohio Dormant Mineral Act In one of a series of cases on the subject of fracking, we held that a lease that grants oil and gas rights to another party and was recorded with the county recorder is a title transaction, but that expiration of the lease by its terms is not. Chesapeake Exploration v. Buell, L.L.C., 2015-Ohio-4551.

• An opinion upholding sex-registration We held that a 21-year-old man who had a consensual sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl and who was categorized as a Tier II sex offender and had to verify his home address, place of employment, and school location in person every 180 days for 25 years was not subject to cruel and unusual punishment. State v. Blankenship, 2015-Ohio-4624.

These, and all of our decisions, are a matter of public record on the Supreme Court's website www.sc.ohio.gov where you may read them in full. Our website also allows you to see and hear actual arguments of the cases online and to read previews and summaries when they are published.

Rosa Parks’ Courage

Today is the anniversary of Rosa Parks’ arrest after she refused to give up her seat on a segregated bus. Ms. Parks’ action led to the Montgomery Bus Boycott and eventually to a class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court. The United States Supreme Court in Browder v. Gayledetermined that segregated buses are unconstitutional. You may be interested in the United States Courts’ videoabout how Parks’ arrest sparked this historic ruling.

I also had the privilege of honoring Rosa Parks in 2011 in the “Power of One” celebration when the Ohio Supreme Court’s women justices discussed how one person can make a difference.

.

Looking at the Federal Court System

It is easy to be confused about the two separate court systems within the United States.

The Online Paralegal Programs website recently released a helpful infographic about the federal court system. Remember that although most cases are handled in state courts, violations of federal law are first tried in one of 94 U.S. District Courts. These cases, can later be appealed to one of the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeal and, potentially, to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

Although we at the Ohio Supreme Court accept about 10 percent of cases appealed to us, the U.S. Supreme Court takes less than 1 percent.

 

Look at the graphic of the Federal court system and compare it with Ohio’s court system. Notice the similarities and differences. 

A Focus on Families and Addiction

Ohio has 110 juvenile court judges who preside over some of the hardest decisions a judge has to make – those in cases of child abuse and neglect.

Many families who come before the judges are there because of problems that stem from addiction.

Juvenile court judges from 56 Ohio counties joined substance abuse treatment providers, child welfare advocates, and other community partners recently at a one-day symposium to discuss how parents and children in their communities are affected by addiction.

The Ohio Supreme Court, along with the Ohio Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, and the Ohio Association of County Behavioral Health Authorities, assembled a group of community partners for the 2015 Judicial Symposium on Addiction and Child Welfare on June 23.

Each county team developed action plans to ensure that families receive treatment intervention and the judicial oversight, and support they need to continue their recovery.

Last year, common pleas court judges participated in a similar event.

A new video, “Let’s Treat it Together,” introduces an explanation of the science of addiction and the response of courts who are addressing a solution. Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor explains in the video how we all must work together on this problem. Let’s all join the chief justice in that call for action. The future of our children is at stake.

Another Ohio Appellate Court Offers Video Access

You may know that we at the Ohio Supreme Court have streamed, recorded and archived our oral arguments since March 2004. Our website provides the links to updated materials.

Now the Ninth District Court of Appeals, based in Akron, has decided to begin posting its own oral arguments on YouTube. The Ninth District becomes the first of the 12 appellate courts in Ohio to use this platform for reaching the public.

Many people do not understand the appellate process. TV does not offer shows about courts of appeals, maybe because the work doesn’t seem dramatic. There are no witnesses, no evidence – just arguments presented to a panel of three judges about why a trial decision should be reversed or upheld.

The decisions by our appellate courts announce the law that must be followed in other cases within the district. Sometimes, if the district court decisions conflict, a case may need to be settled by our court. All the more reason that the courtroom door be open for public understanding of this important part of the legal process.

The U.S. Supreme Court so far has refused to allow cameras in the courtroom. As more state courts allow the public to see judges in action, perhaps the highest court in the nation will change its position and do the same.

Holding Court in Mansfield

Yesterday the Ohio Supreme Court traveled to Mansfield as part of our Off-Site Court Program. Twice a year we travel across the state and hear cases in a county courthouse or at a school.

More than 500 students from 11 schools in Richland County heard one of three oral arguments at Mansfield Senior High School. You can watch a video of the students’ experience here.

But before you click the video and see the process that allows the justices to hold an official court session outside of Columbus, you may be interested in a bit of history.

In the court’s very early days, there were only 3 Supreme Court “judges” instead of 7 justices.  And there was no separate courthouse in which to hear cases. Instead, the judges rode throughout the state on horseback. They called this travel “riding the circuit.” The judges carried law books along with clothing in their saddlebags, and they stayed overnight in homes of local residents when they travelled to a county. 

By 1834, Supreme Court judges rode more than 2,000 miles each year and covered 72 counties across the state. Those pioneer judges really needed an automobile!

Fast forward more than 100 years, and you now see the court again going out to Ohioans. I enjoy our twice-a-year journey because the Off-Site Court Program gives students a chance to see us in action and directly experience oral arguments.  And as a 21st century justice, I’m glad we don’t spend those hours on horseback.

We the Students Scholarship Essay Contest

High school students interested in a chance to win scholarship money may want to check out a new essay contest from the Bill of Rights Institute.

We the Students Scholarship competition seeks to help high school students understand the freedom and opportunity that the Constitution offers. Prizes include $5,000 for the winning essay writer and $500 for his or her teacher.

In 800 words or fewer, students must answer the question: “Since you were born, has America moved closer to or further away from the ideals outlined in the Declaration of Independence?”

If video is more your style, there’s a video contest, too.

The deadline to submit an essay or video is December 5, 2014.

Good luck!

Nothing Lost in Translation

Can you imagine walking into a room full of strangers who start talking in a language that you can’t understand? That happens in courtrooms around Ohio every day for people who are limited in their English proficiency, or are deaf or hard of hearing.

The Ohio Supreme Court is committed to ensuring equal access to justice for all who come before the court. We have put in place services to courts to protect rights of individuals with special language needs, including rules and guidelines for the use of court interpreters.

Court certified language interpreters are dedicated men and women who provide interpretation services in thousands of cases each year. They work hard to ensure that nothing gets lost in translation. They become a key connection between witnesses, defendants, lawyers, judges, and other court personnel.

You can hear interpreters explain the important role they play in our judicial system in this video from Court News Ohio.

Transportation Grants Now Available to Visit Ohio Supreme Court

Are you an educator looking for a fun, hands-on approach to teach students about civic education? Look no further than the Visitor Education Center (VEC) located in the Thomas J. Moyer Ohio Judicial Center.

Even if you think it is too expensive to travel, or not in your school’s budget this year, you may be surprised. The Ohio Supreme Court’s Civic Education Section is accepting online applications for transportation grants of up to $440 to help schools offset costs to visit the VEC.

 

Online applications from teachers or administrators will be accepted from October 17 through November 7. The grants will be used for visiting in January through June 2015. The grants, paid for by the Thomas J. Moyer Ohio Judicial Center Foundation, are for schools with students in the fourth through twelfth grades.

All Ohio educators are eligible to apply for a grant, which will be awarded to schools with the highest percentage of students enrolled in the free and reduced lunch program as reported by the Ohio Department of Education.

For more information, please email the VEC at courttours@sc.ohio.gov or call 614.387.9223.

Courts Warming up to Social Media

A new national survey by the Conference of Court Public Information Officers shows the impact social media is having on judges and courts.

The 2014 CCPIO New Media Survey has some interesting findings. More courts are using social media like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube as a public information tool. Facebook use by courts is up by more than 5 percent; Twitter use increased by 3.5 percent and YouTube by 3.2 percent.

Court officials have also changed their attitudes about reporters’ use of social media during courtroom proceedings. Nearly 66 percent of court officials in the previous survey had objected to the media’s sending of messages. Now only 46 percent say it’s inappropriate and 39 percent have no problem permitting it. 

Over time more judges and court personnel have begun to become comfortable using social media themselves, but there are still pitfalls for judges due to ethical restrictions on what they may say about their pending work and opinions they express. I certainly understand that concern, and since my first blog post in 2010, I’ve been very cautious in the topics chosen because I write as a sitting justice. 

I was glad to share some thoughts about blogging in the survey report. While by no means an expert in the field of communication, I am a firm believer that exchanging ideas on the best ways to help the public understand our courts is time well spent.

Law & Leadership Institute Student’s Perspective

In the summer of 2008, the Ohio Supreme Court started a pilot program to help increase the number of young people from underserved communities in the legal profession. Today, more than 400 students are involved in the Law and Leadership Institute (LLI) program that has spread to eight law school campuses in Ohio.

Athena Williams has been involved in LLI for two years. Athena will be a high school tenth grader this year, and she is already getting a taste of what it’s like to be a lawyer. She is a very engaging young lady, and I’m sure she will succeed in whatever career path she chooses.

Athena gives a report about her LLI experience this summer in this video story.

What Does Independence Mean to You?

Our country celebrates its 238th birthday tomorrow. The Declaration of Independence was approved by the Continental Congress on July 2, 1776, but the official document wasn’t ready until two days later. So, we celebrate our independence on July 4.

The U.S. Courts put together a great video in which citizens, attorneys, and federal judges from across the country reflect on what independence means, and how the U.S. courts protect their freedoms. The different perspectives are very interesting.



Have a safe and happy holiday!

Addressing an Epidemic

Back in 1985 when I first became a judge and served in the Toledo Municipal Court, we had few drug cases other than marijuana. But over the next 20 years, we saw drugs of choice change from those of powder and crack cocaine to Oxycontin. Today, we are faced with an epidemic that takes the lives of hundreds of Ohioans each year – opiate abuse involving prescription pain medication and illegal drugs such as heroin.

On June 30, more than 800 of Ohio’s judges and others concerned about the impact this epidemic has on their courts and in their communities came to Columbus for the Ohio Judicial Symposium on Opiate Addiction.

Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor helped to open the one-day event that explained the consequences of addiction and offered information on promising judicial practices leading to new methods of treatment for offenders. Each team of the 83 counties represented returned to their communities with a plan to find specific solutions.

Many courts have begun to address this serious problem by using drug courts, which bring together court and treatment personnel to work collaboratively in assisting defendants with their addiction issues by treatment instead of jail or prison. The drug courts are seeing results with reduced recidivism and improved treatment for drug offenders, and with measurable cost savings. Court News Ohio recently visited the drug court at Fairfield County Municipal Court. You can watch the video here:

There’s still much to be done to stop the alarming trend of illegal drug use and death due to opiates. The actions that will be taken as a result of the Ohio Judicial Symposium on Opiate Addiction are steps in the right direction.

Ohio Mock Trial March Madness XXXI

The NCAA is not the only game in town. Ohio high schools had their own version of March Madness this past week when in the span of three days, 30 teams from across the state competed in the Ohio Center for Law-Related Education’s 31st High School Mock Trial Competition.

Preliminaries had been conducted throughout the state, and winners advanced to the regional competitions. The state semi-finals began on Thursday, March 6 at the Franklin County Courthouse in Columbus with two teams advancing to the finals held Saturday at the Ohio Statehouse. Sylvania Southview High School in Lucas County and Orange High School in Cuyahoga County each won four consecutive trials to advance to the championship.

 

The mock trials this year focused on the First Amendment freedom of expression and Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure. The case pitted the school district against students who protested the district’s signing the high school field’s naming rights to a large corporation. The competing teams, coached by their volunteer legal advisors, presented their cases before a panel of two judges and two attorneys in a case written by a committee of volunteer attorneys.

2014 Ohio High School Mock Trial champions
Sylvania Southview
with the panel of judges after the competition.

The panel that presided over the championship after lengthy deliberations chose Sylvania Southview as the winner. Team member Yuran Chen was singled out for his outstanding performance as a plaintiff’s attorney. This is the first time in 10 years that a Southview team has won the championship.

Beginning in 1983, The Mock Trial Program is Ohio’s largest high school academic competition with more than 3,000 students participating each year. The case materials show students what a case is like and how it progresses throughout a trial and allow them to become attorneys and witnesses. We now have attorneys and at least one judge who actually got their first taste of law through by experiencing the mock trial program.

The Madness continues into May, when competition goes national in Madison, Wisconsin. Stay tuned, and we will update you on the outcome.

Good luck, Sylvania Southview! You carry the best wishes of your state. Do us proud!

Happy Birthday, Ohio!

Two hundred eleven years ago Ohio became the 17th state in our nation. President Thomas Jefferson allowed Ohio to apply for statehood in April 1802 when he signed the Enabling Act into law. Later that year a state constitutional convention was held, and on February 19, 1803, President Jefferson approved and signed the first Ohio Constitution.

We officially celebrate Ohio’s birth as a state on March 1, 1803, when the General Assembly gathered for the first time to meet in Chillicothe, the new state capital. Statehood Day is a good time to reflect on our history and the founders who established our governing principles. These principles developed over time, and often were determined by the judiciary.

For example, in an early case, the Supreme Court of Ohio was called upon in 1807 to decide the extent of the authority given by the constitution to the state’s legislature. In Rutherford v. McFadden, the Court asserted its right to nullify an unconstitutional act of the General Assembly.

The Ohio Historical Society will hold its annual Statehood Day event at the Ohio Statehouse on Thursday, February 27. The keynote luncheon speaker is Erin Moriarty, an Ohio native and reporter for CBS News.

On whatever day we remember Ohio’s birth, let us strive to ensure that it will stay healthy to celebrate many, many more.

Martin Luther King’s Dream of Justice

State and federal government offices, including the Ohio Supreme Court, will be closed on Monday to observe Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

More than 50 years ago,  Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech inspired our nation. And today, students still learn about the meaning of the speech that continues to inspire.  Each February as part of the Supreme Court’s recognition of Black History Month we hear from the local junior division winner of the Martin Luther King Jr. Oratorical Contest.

It’s wholly appropriate that the Supreme Court hosts this celebration. The ideals that Dr. King outlined in 1963 are those of legal justice and equality. These are the hopes not just of one person, but are the ideals on which our country was founded and those that are to be upheld by our state and federal courts.

State law requires  each judge in Ohio to take an oath of office that promises to strive for justice and equal protection under law.  After swearing or affirming to support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Ohio,  the judge promises to  “administer justice without respect to persons,”  and to faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all of the duties of the office according to the best of his or her ability and understanding.

These words regarding administering justice “without respect to persons” echo the portion of Dr. King’s speech that said: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

The U.S. Supreme Court building has the words “Equal Justice Under Law” prominently displayed.  We in the legal profession must continue to work toward equality and justice. And as a nation we can hope Dr. King’s words become more than a dream.