From the Editor. From the Chair

Transcription

1 Courtroom Information Project Participating Courts Newsletter Issue 20 January July, 2007 Inside this issue: Newly Participating Courts 2 Photo Gallery 3 Technology Spotlight 4 CLCT News 5 CIP Sponsors 6 From the Editor Once again, the summer seemed to arrive out of nowhere. Since our last newsletter, we have continued our efforts to increase our courthouse registrations and are currently working on a new brochure that will more accurately represent our growth in the past six years. We are excited with our continued success and thank you all for your support and participation in this project. Please keep us informed of technology highlights and other items you would like us to address via the newsletter format. Have a great summer! Celeste Vaughn Assistant Director for CIP Center for Legal and Court Technology From the Chair It has been some time since I have waived the training flag and reminded the Court of the importance of training in the advancement of technology for the administration of justice. A great deal of money is being dedicated to technology and some wonderful advancements are being made. However, we cannot truly say we have succeeded unless the majority of the bench and bar appreciate and understand how to take advantage of these tools. A commitment to training is a must and the training needs to be continual and reoccurring. To the extent any of the participating courts have training programs to share we would be pleased to receive them. Richard K. Herrmann, Esq. Morris, James LLP Senior Advisor, Legal Technology, Center for Legal and Court Technology

2 Courts: Newly Participating and Recently Updated PAGE 2 STATE COURTS California Superior Court of California, County of Santa Cruz Superior Court of California, County of Mendocino Florida 14th Judicial Circuit Court, Panama City Indiana Indiana Supreme Court Michigan 23rd Circuit Court, Arenac County 42nd Circuit Court, Midland County Missouri 16th Judicial Circuit Court, Jackson County New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, First Department North Dakota North Dakota Supreme Court, Bismark Oregon 25th Judicial District Court, Yamhill County Virginia Virginia Beach Circuit Court, Virginia Beach FEDERAL COURTS California U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California Idaho U.S. District & Bankruptcy Court, District of Idaho, Boise Florida U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Middle District of Florida Georgia U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Oklahoma U.S. District Court, Western District of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City

3 PAGE 3 Photo Gallery A sampling of photos from the CIP website Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia Atlanta, GA U.S. District Court, Western District of Oklahoma Oklahoma City, OK Virginia Beach Circuit Court Virginia Beach, VA 14th Judicial Court, Bay County Juvenile Courthouse Panama City, FL Indiana Supreme Court, Indianapolis, IN

4 PAGE 4 Technology Spotlight BIAMP: Telephonic Courtroom Interpreting Lowers Court Costs and Provides Greater Access BIAMP Systems has developed a new method for remote language interpretation in the courtroom over a standard telephone line. Using audio processors installed in many courtrooms around the world, this system allows simultaneous language interpretation over a single telephone line with the remote interpreter working from a home phone. The primary issues faced by courts and their need for language interpreting are cost, scheduling, and a limited qualified talent pool. Certified interpreters can connect to courtrooms by telephone, avoiding costly travel and providing better access. However, telephonic interpreting has been less than perfect since most is done via speakerphone technology, forcing interpretation to be consecutive. Consecutive interpreting slows court proceedings because both languages must be spoken in a sequential manner which breaks the natural cadence of speech and thought during proceedings. An interpreting system offered by Rauch does offer simultaneous interpreting by telephone. It overcomes the problem of consecutive interpreting, but requires a special interpreter s console at the remote site and two phones lines at both ends of the connection....jacs can save up to 50% of the judicial assistant s time BIAMP s system overcomes the issue of consecutive interpreting, special remote equipment, and two phone lines. A standard BIAMP audio processor, equipped with their telephone interface, is programmed to mix audio from the courtroom over a phone line to the remote interpreter. It also receives audio from the microphone of the interpreter and directs it to a device connected to the ear of the non-english speaker in the courtroom. All of this is accomplished over a single telephone line. Rather than requiring the use of a special console by the remote interpreter to control the destination of their voice, they simply use the telephone keypad. It also allows for private conversation between defendant, attorney and interpreter. There is no need for special equipment, and only one telephone line is necessary when the BIAMP processor is used in the courtroom. The system provides a new level of performance in remote interpreting systems, lowers interpreting costs and alleviates scheduling conflicts for courts. To learn more about the BIAMP Distance Courtroom Interpretation system, call or courts@biamp.com. CLCT Training &Conference Schedule The Center for Legal and Court Technology has set its conference and training schedule for next year: October 15-16, 2007 Technology Augmented Trial Advocacy Course March 3-5, 2008 Basic Court Technologist A/V Certification Course March 6-7, 2008 Courthouse Construction & Renovation Conference May 12-14, 2008 Advanced Court Technologist A/V Course July 14-15, 2008 Technology Augmented Trial Advocacy Course To learn more about these courses, and to register, go to

5 PAGE 5 Center for Legal and Court Technology The College of William & Mary School of Law has many unique aspects, ranging from the McGlothlin Courtroom, the most technologically advanced courtroom in the world, application-oriented legal technology courses, to actual e-filing of cases. The e-filing of student Legal Skills cases is done in conjunction with the extremely supportive staff at the U.S. District Court Students E-filing with Federal Court The College of William & Mary School of Law has many unique aspects, ranging from the McGlothlin Courtroom, the most technologically advanced courtroom in the world, application-oriented legal technology courses, to actual e-filing of cases. The e- filing of student Legal Skills cases is done in conjunction with the extremely supportive staff at the U.S. District Court District of Maryland and the Center for Legal and Court Technology. This e-filing has given the law students at William & Mary experience and exposure to the system that our federal courts are moving toward. Legal Skills is a mandatory two year course in which law students are members of simulated law firms. Legal Skills teaches professional ethics, legal research and writing, interviewing, negotiation, alternative dispute resolution (ADR), and trial and appellate practice. Over the course of two years, students work on four major simulated role-played cases and a number of minor ones. The second case, Client B, begins with an interview of the client and goes through the entire process ending in appeal, roughly one and a half academic years later. Working through the Center for Legal and Court Technology, Legal Skills students had electronically filed their Client B case pleadings for some years. However, LexisNexis, the last company to assist with e- filing, was unable to continue its support, leaving student lawyers without e-filing. Help came from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The idea for working with a U.S. District Court in creating a system for students came about in 2004 when Felicia Cannon, Clerk of Court, and Lisa Rosenthal, Chief Deputy Clerk for U.S. District Court of Maryland were visiting the McGlothlin Courtroom. Hearing that e-filing had been suspended, the astute visitors volunteered to assist. Fred Lederer, Director of the Center for Legal and Court Technology and Chancellor Professor of Law, was delighted with the idea and started the wheels in motion to make it happen. First, both the law school and the U.S. District Court of Maryland came up with a punch list of initial information required and issues to investigate. The court needed to understand how the student class assignments worked to determine if the Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system would be of value. Once this was understood, the logistics of accessing the e-filing system had to be worked out. Details involved included: Determining where cases should reside in the U.S. District Court of Maryland system so they were out of the way of court personnel Creating and assigning logins and passwords Designing a method for students to register in the CM/ECF system as attorney-users to receive notices of electronic filings Training students to use the system Providing enough guidance to make it work in the MD federal CM/ECF world when the student assignment is based on rules of various state courts Although the list looked prohibitive, Lisa Rosenthal, Ginny Zahner with the U.S.D.C. of Maryland s IT department, and LuAnn Davis, the Operations Supervisor at the time, commented that none of these were major obstacles, particularly when receiving the full support of Felicia Cannon. Once completed, the crew from Maryland came back to Williamsburg to train the teaching assistants, who were tasked with educating the students. As with most new ventures, adjustments needed to be made in the initial stages in order for the simulated information and academic exercise to fit into the real-world scenario. Each year improvements have been made as the kinks have worked out. In the second year, Maryland provided training via video, and in year three, support was provided by phone and . In the same vein, program filings were limited to initial case opening documents that were entered into the system by the court itself. In the second year, students were filing their answers on-line and this year students have done further filing. Next year s planning is already in the works and the goal is to have the students file the complaints on-line.

6 ISSUE z 20 Many thanks to our sponsors without whose support the Courtroom Information Project would not be possible. PAGE 6 Featured Sponsor: Corporate Sponsors Founded in 1901, Hunton & Williams prides itself on excellence and hard work. We organize teams to provide our clients with experience and advise in virtually every discipline of the law. Our lawyers come from every state and represent more than 65 law schools. Many speak multiple languages and are located in the U.S., Europe and Asia and extensive practices exist in Africa and South America. This enables us to respond knowledgeably, effectively and quickly, whether the issue is local, regional, national or international. Our clients expect our lawyers to be responsive, attentive and flexible, and to communicate on a regular basis and in understandable terms. Our diverse backgrounds are combined with our commitment to provide clients with quality legal services. Supporting Architect Firms Supporting Law Firms To learn more, go to or contact one of their many local offices. CIP Newsletter A bimonthly publication of the Courtroom Information Project Chair: Richard Herrmann, Esquire, Senior Advisor, Legal Technology Editor: Celeste Vaughn, Assistant Director for Affiliates and CIP Please feel free to contact Celeste Vaughn at ccvaug@wm.edu if you have any comments, questions, or concerns.