Supreme Court has formally excused municipal courts from some basic legal constraints: judges need not be attorneys and may simultaneously serve as city mayors, while proceedings are often summary and not of record. These hybrid institutions thus pose thorny conceptual challenges: they are stand-alone judicial entities that are also arms of municipal government operating under reduced constitutional constraints as they mete out criminal convictions.
As such, they create numerous tensions with modern norms of due process, judicial independence, and other traditional indicia of criminal court integrity. This Article provides a framework for appreciating the institutional complexity of this lowest tier of American criminal justice. Municipal courts deviate substantially from the classic model of courts as neutral, independent guardians of law.
They are also vehicles for cities to express their political autonomy and redistribute wealth, and thus constitute underappreciated engines of local governance. As criminal adjudicators, they quietly contribute to localized mass incarceration while threatening the integrity of some foundational features of the criminal process. At the same time, they represent a potentially attractive opportunity to render criminal institutions more locally responsive.
Finally, they reveal a deep dynamic at the bottom of the penal pyramid: low-status cases and institutions exert a formative influence over law itself. These complexities make reform especially challenging. There are doctrinal reforms that could strengthen municipal court operations, but they are inherently limited. The deeper reform would be to stop dismissing these courts as minor, inferior institutions and to take them and their millions of defendants seriously across the board of law, policy, and politics.
Widely influential, jurisprudentially challenging, and democratically complicated, municipal courts deserve a more central place in the modern legal conversation. For the data collected for this Article and more information about the Municipal Courts Project, or to contact the author, please visit www.
Far from the marble halls of the U. Supreme Court lurks a judicial animal of a completely different character: the lowly municipal court. Created and operated independently by cities and towns, these are courts of limited jurisdiction that hear misdemeanors, local ordinance violations, and sometimes civil claims involving small amounts. A few such courts are large — the Seattle municipal court filed nearly 10, criminal cases in — but many are small — just a room in the local municipal building or police station where the judge might preside once or twice a month.
In the aggregate, however, municipal courts comprise a substantial percentage of U. There are over 7, such courts in thirty states scattered across the country, they adjudicate over three and a half million criminal cases every year, and they collect over two billion dollars for local jurisdictions. See infra section I. They are central to the authority of cities to police, to maintain public safety, and to raise revenue. And yet they are commonly ignored or underestimated by scholars who study courts, cities, and criminal law.
The local criminal court phenomenon sits at the intersection of several legal disciplines: criminal justice, local government law, and the institutional role of courts. It has almost entirely slipped beneath the radar of each. Although historians and sociologists occasionally engage with local criminal courts. See Doris Marie Provine , Judging Credentials: Nonlawyer Judges and the Politics of Professionalism analyzing the historical evolution of the demand for legally trained judges in lower courts.
See generally, e. The vast scholarship theorizing the nature of courts, adjudication, and the judicial role barely mentions them. No leading casebook on municipal governance devotes a section to municipal courts, and most do not discuss them at all.
Gerald E. Frug et al. Baker et al. Reynolds, Jr. Few contemporary legal scholars focus on local courts at all. One exception is Professor Ethan Leib. See Ethan J. Leib, Localist Statutory Interpretation , U. Professor Wayne Logan is the rare scholar who has written about municipal criminal law promulgation by city legislatures, although he does not address municipal courts. See Wayne A. Wright, Mercenary Criminal Justice , U. A few scholars have examined municipal court systems in specific jurisdictions.
A defendant is entitled to a jury trial for these offenses. Juries in courts of limited jurisdiction are composed of six people as opposed to superior court juries, which have 12 people. District courts also have jurisdiction over traffic and non-traffic infractions , civil proceedings for which a monetary penalty--but no jail sentence-may be imposed.
There is no right to a jury trial for an infraction. District courts have jurisdiction to issue domestic violence and antiharassment protection orders and no-contact orders. They also have jurisdiction to hear change-of-name petitions and certain lien foreclosures. More information on these procedures can be obtained by contacting your local district court. These are filed and heard in the Small Claims Department of the district court. Generally, each party is self-represented--attorneys are not permitted except with the permission of the judge.
Witnesses may not be subpoenaed, but may be allowed to voluntarily testify for a party. The district court clerk can provide specific information about filing a claim. Violations of municipal or city ordinances are heard in municipal courts.
A municipal court's authority over these ordinance violations is similar to the authority that district courts have over state law violations. The ordinance violation must have occurred within the boundaries of the municipality. Like district courts, municipal courts only have jurisdiction over gross misdemeanors, misdemeanors and infractions.
Any number of municipalities may join and voters in all the municipalities elect the judge. A packet entitled Starting a Municipal Court is available to assist municipalities interested in creating municipal courts. It contains statistics about municipal courts, sample ordinances, answers to commonly asked questions, ethics advice and general information. The guide is continuously updated and distributed to municipalities upon request.
Upcoming Oral Argument Synopses. Prior Oral Argument Recordings. Prior Oral Argument Synopses. Appellate Courts Decisions Forthcoming Opinions. Court Interpreters Program. Guardianship Compliance Office. Services Clerk of the Court.
Commissions and Committees Access to Justice Commission. Child Custody Reform Committee.
0コメント