2010

Collections

It is estimated that hundreds of millions of dollars in court-ordered costs, fees, and fines go uncollected in the State of Texas each year. However, collecting these funds is about more than lost revenue. These uncollected dollars represent many thousands of court orders, issued by judges, and ignored by lawbreakers. Ultimately, the taxpayers and citizens of every community in the State pay the price for this breakdown in the criminal justice process.

While the impact in terms of dollars is significant, the greater damage is inflicted by the erosion of our system of government from the loss of respect for judicial authority. The Collection Improvement Program is designed to improve in-house collections and the collection of balances more than 60 days past due. The collections improvement program has two major benefits. First, it encourages personal responsibility, and second, it increases revenue. Improving collections benefits both the local jurisdiction and the State of Texas.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.   Explain the importance of court collections in municipal court;

2.   Discuss current debt collection laws;

3.   Analyze the effectiveness of their court's current collection procedures; and

4.   Integrate collections improvement techniques to increase collections in their courts.

Procedural Update

This session is designed to inform municipal judges of the recent legislative changes made during the 81st Regular Legislative Session that will affect how municipal courts handle the processing and adjudication of criminal causes of action.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.   Identify the new legislation regarding criminal procedural law that applies to municipal courts;

2.   Compare and contrast the new legislation with the previously existing laws; and

3.   Determine what measures need to be taken in the judge's court to implement these new laws.

This session will detail pertinent changes in procedural and substantive law contained in the Texas Transportation Code.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.   Identify the new legislation regarding traffic safety and the Transportation Code that applies to municipal courts;

2.   Compare and contrast the new legislation with the previously existing laws; and

3.   Determine what measures need to be taken in the judge's court to implement these new laws.

Domestic Violence

Family violence continues to be a persistent problem and an all-too-often lethal crime. Texas magistrates and municipal court judges who serve on the front lines of the judicial process know this from firsthand experience. According to recent Texas Department of Public Safety reports, there are more than 175,000 reported incidents of family violence annually. Statistics show that while family violence offenses typically fall into several general categories, including homicides, kidnappings and/or abductions, robberies, and forcible sex offenses, an overwhelming number (96.7%) are assaults. Municipal courts are compelled to address the aftermath of highly volatile and emotionally charged family assault incidents on a regular basis. In the most recent session, the Texas Legislature made several changes to existing law and enacted new provisions related to family violence. This session highlights those changes.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Identify the new legislation regarding domestic violence that applies to municipal judges as magistrates;

2.    Compare and contrast the new legislation with the previously existing laws; and

          3.    Determine what measures need to be taken in the judge's court to implement new these laws.

Case Law and Attorney General Opinion Update

This course is designed to keep municipal judges apprised of recent events in case law and to identify opinions of interest issued by the Office of the Texas Attorney General.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.   Explain how recent federal and state court decisions affect procedural and substantive legal issues in municipal courts;

2.   Explain how recent federal and state court decisions affect procedural and substantive legal issues pertaining to state magistrates;

3.   Summarize Texas Attorney General Opinions of interest to municipal courts; and

4.   Describe the ethical implications of select case law and Attorney General Opinions.

Sign ordinances help a city maintain a safe and aesthetically pleasing environment. A city's ability to create and enforce a sign ordinance is limited only by the constitutional protections of property and speech. As such, crafting a valid sign ordinance is very much a balancing act between the desire to improve the city's visual landscape and not offending a citizen's constitutional rights, the latter of which can result in costly litigation. The purpose of this session is to assist judges with an understanding of the process cities undertake in adopting such ordinances, so as to assist with the prosecution and enforcement of the regulations themselves. An understanding of the balancing act facing cities in adopting constitutionally valid sign ordinances, that also achieve a city's aesthethic and safety goals, will assist the municipal judge tasked with interpreting and enforcing the same.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Differentiate between "a sign" violating the sign ordinance and "a person" violating the sign ordinance;

2.    Evaluate the municipal court judge's role in addressing arguments challenging the constitutionality of a sign ordinance; and

          3.    Identify the sources of authority in state and federal law that allow cities to regulate signs.

This session will cover recent changes in Texas law relating to court costs as well as changes in law impacting the administration of municipal courts.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Identify the new legislation regarding court costs and administration that applies to municipal courts;

2.    Compare and contrast the new legislation with the previously existing laws; and

3.    Determine what measures need to be taken in the judge's court to implement these new laws.

The Code of Criminal Procedure contains safeguards that should prevent indigent individuals from wrongfully being incarcerated. Judges who are unfamiliar with these safeguards and leading case law could feasibly commit a defendant to jail without having ever considered whether the defendant was indigent. This class is designed to inform judges of the proper procedures for contemplating indigency as well as the legal consequences and ethical issues that could arise upon the wrongful incarceration of indigent persons.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Define indigency;

2.    Recognize the safeguards built into criminal procedural law designed to prevent the wrongful incarceration of indigent persons; and

3.    Identify the points in the prosecution and enforcement of a criminal action when indigency must be evaluated.

Blood Draw Warrants

The 81st Legislature amended Article 18.01 of the Code of Criminal Procedure authorizing any magistrate who is a licensed Texas attorney to issue a search warrant to collect a blood specimen from a person who is arrested for a certain intoxication or alcohol offense and refuses to submit to a breath or blood alcohol test. The circumstances under which a peace officer must require the taking of a specimen of a person's blood or breath were also changed.

Historically, an evidentiary or "mere evidence" search warrant could, for the most part, only be issued by an attorney judge of a court of record. Many have questioned the relevance of the judge being of a court of record, since such warrants are issued by the judge in their capacity as a magistrate. While most municipal courts are not courts of record, more than half of municipal judges are attorneys. As a consequence of this bill, it is easy to imagine that these attorney judges may be asked to issue blood draw warrants.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Determine whether a blood search warrant IS or IS NOT required to obtain a blood specimen when given a set of facts;

2.    Assess whether he/she can legally sign a blood search warrant;

3.    Evaluate an affidavit for a blood search warrant to determine whether he/she should sign the accompanying blood search warrant; and

4.    Identify appropriate documents to prepare after he/she signs a blood search warrant.

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution contains a prominent guarantee known as the Confrontation Clause. One may typically visualize a witness against a defendant as a person who mounts the witness stand and testifies at trial. Undoubtedly, the Confrontation Clause gives defendants the right to confront such witnesses through cross-examination. However, a witness against a defendant can also be a person who does not physically testify at trial, but who instead has made a statement outside of court. The focus of this session is on the admissibility of out-of-court hearsay statements made by a witness who does not testify at trial. These are the only out-of-court statements that will trigger the protections of the Confrontation Clause.

Analyzing the admissibility of out-of-court statements can be complex. This session will attempt to simplify the process of analysis by covering a step-by-step chronological procedure that can be used when considering objections to out-of-court statements.

By the end of the course, judges will be able to:

1.    Describe the concept of hearsay;

2.    Distinguish Crawford issues from general hearsay issues; and

3.    Identify typical municipal court scenarios in which Crawford issues arise.

Federal law states that the State must not mask, defer imposition of judgment, or allow an individual to enter into a diversion program that would prevent a CDL driver's conviction for any violation, in any type of motor vehicle, of a state or local traffic control law (except a parking violation) from appearing on the driver's record, whether the driver was convicted for an offense committed in the state where the driver is licensed or another state. Masking laws have historically been misunderstood and misinterpreted, but recently the State of Missouri requested clarification from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration regarding the masking provisions outlined in the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act that became effective on September 30, 2005. Several scenarios were addressed and responses published. This session will examine the history of masking laws and look to the responses provided by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration in an effort to "unmask" CDL masking laws.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Describe the history of masking laws;

2.    Explain CDL masking; and

3.    Assess judicial acts for masking and ethical violations.

Judges in the Classroom: Driving on the Right Side of the Road

The notion that a judge's role as a public official is limited to decision making in the courtroom is a common misconception that is neither supported by law nor any canon of judicial conduct. The failure of judges to understand the proper legal and ethical constraints of their extra-judicial activities, compounded by perceived lack of opportunities for public outreach stymies the judiciary's ability to engage in important public dialog. Municipal judges in Texas constitute more than 36 percent of the state judiciary. On any given day, municipal judges in Texas come into more contact with members of the public than all other Texas courts combined. Many of the cases that are adjudicated in Texas municipal courts pertain to traffic safety issues. Driving on the Right Side of the Road is a curriculum developed with the State Bar of Texas that provides members of the judiciary an opportunity to play a meaningful role in discussing the law and various traffic safety issues with students in Texas public schools.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Locate the provisions of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct relating to a judge's "extra-judicial activities;"

2.    Identify an existing opportunity for municipal judges to engage in public outreach pertaining to traffic safety at the community level;

3.    Explain the parameters of a municipal judge as a public spokesperson on traffic safety issues; and

4.    Describe five ways authorized by Canon 4 of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct that a judge may participate in extra-judicial activities concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice, as well as non-legal subjects.

Debriefing Session

This course is designed to provide judges with an opportunity to address a broad range of questions pertaining to their participation in the day's sessions. The course will be structured around questions submitted by the participants.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Identify trends in the adjudication of criminal cases in municipal courts; and

2.    Locate statutory provisions applicable to common legal questions encountered by municipal courts.

Juvenile Records: Expunction and Nondisclosure

New law mandates that criminal courts immediately issue a nondisclosure order on the conviction of a child for a misdemeanor offense punishable by fine only. Although this bill creates more work for all courts that adjudicate cases involving children accused of fine-only misdemeanors, it is intended to provide parity to children in the juvenile justice system. This new requirement will be compared and contrasted with expunction orders that have traditionally been available in municipal courts as a way of providing a measure of confidentiality for juvenile records.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Describe nondisclosure orders related to juvenile Class C cases;

2.    Describe expunction orders related to juvenile Class C cases; and

3.    List the actions and orders required under nondisclosure and expunction laws. 

Texas law historically granted the authority to conduct a marriage ceremony to an officer of a religious organization, a justice of the peace, and almost all federal, state, and county judges, except for municipal judges. Senate Bill 935 amended Section 2.202 of the Family Code to include a judge of a municipal court as a person authorized to conduct a marriage ceremony. The inclusion of municipal judges would provide citizens with more availability and choice in a marriage ceremony.

In light of the passage of this legislation, municipal judges must consider the practical, legal, and ethical implications of being authorized to conduct marriages.

By the end of the session, participants will be able to:

1.    List the legal requirements for wedding ceremonies;

2.    Identify practical issues of performing wedding ceremonies;

3.    Summarize, interpret, and explain the legal requirements outlined in Chapter 2 of the Family Code applicable to marriage licenses and ceremonies; and

4.    Identify, analyze, and determine the ethical concerns and possible legal violations associated with performing weddings.

Citations are convenient and essential to the efficient administration of criminal justice in the United States. However, the misuse, abuse, and suppression of citations have also been the basis of allegations of government corruption and the obstruction of justice. Media accounts of "ticket fixing" are replete with accounts of misconduct by law enforcement, prosecutors, clerks, judges, and others. In such cases, the abuse of the public trust not only besmirches the integrity of the criminal justice system, it threatens public safety on roadways and throughout our communities.

By the end of the session, judges will be able to:

1.    Define "ticket fixing;"

2.    Identify how, when, and where ticket fixing can occur;

3.    Discuss the applicable statutory and ethical implications of ticket fixing; and

4.    Describe the harms of ticket fixing to social order in communities and on roadways.