A New Paradigm for Fairness: the First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts

Home , Fairness Project, Kerner Commission, Raymond Pace Alexander, Syracuse Law Review

1.-.- 3 -4185 00322265-I 9 J A New Paradigm for Fairness: The First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts ,

P A New Paradigm for Fairness: The First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts

H. Clifton Grandy, J.D

Edited by Dawn Spinozza I Chuck Campbell

National Center for State Courts

State Justice Institute

t Q 1995 National Center for State Courts ISBN 0-89656- 160-7 National Center Publication Number 'R- 180

These proceedings were prepared and reproduced with finds fiom the State Justice Insti- tute, Grant Number SJI-93- 12A-C-B- 198-P94-( l -3), for the First NationaZ Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts. The points of view expressed are those of the presenters and author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Center for State Courts or the State Justice Institute. Planning Committee

Honorable Veronica Simmons McBeth Chair, Planning Committee Los Angeles Municipal Court, California

Honorable Benjamin Aranda 111 Dr. Yolande P. Marlow South Bay Municipal Court Project Director, Task Force on Minority California Concerns, New Jersey

Marilyn Callaway Honorable Jon J. Mayeda Director, Juvenile Court Services Los Angeles Municipal Court, California San Diego, California

Honorable Carl J. Character Joseph A. Myers, Esq. Court of Common Pleas, Cleveland, Ohio Executive Director National Indian Justice Center

Honorable Charles R Cloud Rose M. Ochi, Esq. Norfolk General District Court, Virginia Associate Director Office of National Drug Control Policy

Honorable Lewis L. Douglass Honorable Charles 2.Smith King’s County Supreme Court, New York Justice, Supreme Court of Washington

Dolly M. Gee, Esq. Dr. John H. Stanfield II National Asian Pacific Professor, University of California at Davis American Bar Association, California California

Honorable Janice Gradwohl Arline S. Tyler, Esq. Secretary, Board of Directors, Program Manager State Justice Institute Judicial Council of California

Honorable Paul J. Liacos Myrna Contreras-Trejo, Esq. Chief Justice, Supreme Judicial Court Yakima, Washington Massachusetts Conference Goals and Objectives

The Conference is an action-oriented event that brings together teams from each state’s judlcial branch, the federal judiciary, and the public. Participants will share and exchange information and strategies that will help judicial leaders, court managers, and others to identify racial and ebcbias in the judicial branch and develop innovative strategies for its elimination.

Objectives To change the attitudes of judicial leaders toward the existence of bias in the judicial branch To present an analytical framework for understanding how personal, institutional, and systemic racial and ebcbiases operate in the judicial environment To provide a forum to assess the policy and management implications of both the existence and elimination of bias To dorm the conference participants about successful measures taken to eliminate bias from the courts To inspire representatives from each jurisdiction to develop and implement a strategy for eliminating racial and ebcbias from their systems Conference Endorsements

Conference of Chief Justices

Conference of State Court Administrators

National Association for Court Management

National Consortium of Task Forces and Commissions on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts

+ American Bar Association Commission on Opportunities for Minorities in the Profession

National American Indian Court Judges Association

National Asian Pacific American Bar Association

National Bar Association

Judicial Council of the National Bar Association

National Conference of Special Court Judges

National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges

National Judicial College Acknowledgments 1

Introduction vii

Major Conference Themes ix

Conference Agenda xii

Conference Welcome 1

Conference Overview by Judge Veronica Simmons McBeth 2

Remarks by David I. Tevelin 6

Remarks by Professor Charles J. Ogletree, Ji. 7

Keynote Address by Dr. Robert C. Henderson 8

Luncheon Address by Justice ReVius 0. Ortique, Jr. 13

Luncheon Address by Assistant Attorney General Eleanor D. Acheson 19

Case Studies: State and Federal Perspectives 23

State Team Action Planning 27

Public Participants and the Town Hall Forums 28

Racism and Justice: Perceptions and Realities 28 Juveniles in the Justice System 30 Achieving Bias-Free Criminal Proceedings and Laws 32 Concurrent Educational Sessions 35

Establishing and Operating a Commission or Task Force to Study Bias in the Courts 35 Researching the Existence, Extent, and Effects of Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts 36 The Court as Employer: Eliminating Bias in Recruitment and Employment 38 Institutionalizing Change: Translating Findings and Recommendations into Sustained Implementation 41 Staying Vigilant Against Bias: Informal Feedback, Formal Grievance Procedures, and Ethics 43 Diversity Training in the Courts 44 The Impact of Interpreters on Court Proceedings: Protecting , the Rights of Linguistic Minorities 46 Racial and Ethnicity Issues in Criminal Law and in the Criminal Justice Process 49 The Interrelations of State, Tribal, and Federal Courts 54 Achieving a Diverse Jury: And Then What? 58 Juveniles in the Justice System: The Overincarceration of Minority Youth in the Juvenile Justice System 60 Equal Access to the Justice System 63

Conference Closing 67

Documenting Bias in the Judicial System: Are There Any Implications? 67 Conference Update and “Where Do We Go from Here?’ 69 Concluding Remarks by Judge McBeth 72

Appendices 75

Biographical Sketches 77 State Bibliographies 107 Participant List 133 The American judiciary is an honored institution charged with the responsibility of making fair and just determinations about the rights of all people, regardless of their gender or their racial or ethnic background. Even though a few state court systems have taken a leadership role in the areas of civil rights within the last ten years, at times exceeding U.S. Supreme Court mandates, it appears that unarticulated or unconscious racism is present in the justice system and that the courts have been inattentive to the need for racial and ethnic diversity. Court bias against ethnic and racial minorities has been addressed by research. Some of these studies are included in the bibliographies in Appendix B. The findings fiom these studies have verified disparities in the treatment of minorities throughout the justice system and suggest that, like the society of which they are a part, the courts bear the marks of centuries of racial and ethnic prejudice. The civil disturbances in 1992 in North American cities following the verdict in People v. Powell stimulated hrther reexamination and discussion about racial and ethnic bias in the judicial system. This discourse needed to be followed up with action-oriented remedies for the courts because as of the summer of 1993, only 15 state commissions had been formed and only six of these commissions had issued final reports with recommendations. Only three of these six states had progressed to implementing strategies and remedies. In March 1994, the American Bar Association in cooperation with the National Bar Association, the Native American Bar Association, the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, and the Hispanic Na- tional Bar Association convened a meeting to explore racial and ethnic bias in the Ameri- can justice system, the Summit on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Justice System. Thus, the need for the First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts (“Conference ’7. For the first time, justices, judges, court administrators, judicial educators, attorneys, and court users gathered to focus on strategies to eliminate racial and ethnic bias in the courts and in the judicial branch. More than 425 participants, including 75 faculty, 270 state team members, 12 chief justices, and several state court administrators, attended the Conference. State teams selected by the chief justices of all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Puerto Rico participated in the Conference. Forty representatives fiom the federal judiciary, selected by the chief judges of their respective circuits, participated. In addition to attending Conference sessions, the federal judges and senior federal staff participated in sessions tailored to address the specific issues of the federal system. The states that have established task forces were able to provide guidance and counsel to the states that had not established task forces or that had task forces in the early stages of formation or research. The Conference provided an opportunity for each state’s participants to network and exchange invaluable information to assist them in establishing a task force, refining their research methods, or achieving their task force’s goals and ob- j ectives. I would like to acknowledge those persons and organizations who helped to make the Conference a groundbreaking success. The State Justice Institute (SJI) provided the primary financial support, as well as substantive assistance in planning the agenda. I am appreciative for the generous substantive assistance and the camaraderie of Cheryl D.

\ Reynolds, Program Manager. The substantive recommendations of Richard Van Duizend, Deputy Director, were invaluable, as was the ongoing support of David I. Tevelin, Execu- tive Director. When the Conference was still in the proposal stage, we had the support of numerous judges, attorneys, and judicial administrators who submitted letters supporting funding for the Conference to SJI. While it is impractical to list every one of these sup- porters here, their efforts deserve acknowledgment. The National Consortium of Task Forces and Commissions on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, with the Honorable Charles Z. Smith as its Moderator and Dr. Yolande Marlow as its Coordinator, collaborated with the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) in the early 1990s on an earlier endeavor to secure hnding for a national gathering of racial and ethc bias task force and commission members and directors. While that effort was not successhl, it laid the groundwork for later cooperative endeavors with the NCSC. This relationship made possible the collaboration that resulted in the Conference. The 17-person Planning Committee assisted the conference staff with planning the conference agenda, securing the commitment of the keynote speakers and faculty, and encouraging the participation of their respective states and courts. The Planning Commit- tee was chaired by the Honorable Veronica Simmons McBeth, Assistant Presiding Judge of the Los Angeles Municipal Court. Members of the Planning Committee also served as faculty and facilitators during the Conference. Judge Benjamin Aranda was the Master of Ceremonies for the Conference Welcome. Judge Jon Mayeda helped keep the program and the participants on schedule. Rose Ochi and Joseph Myers graciously shared their own unique perspectives when the agenda was in the early stages of formation. The Proceed- ings Subcommittee reviewed and commented on the Conference Proceedings. The members of this subcommittee were the Honorable Lewis L. Douglas, Marilyn Callaway, and Dolly Gee. Justice Charles Z. Smith, Judge Charles Cloud, and Professor John Stanfield contributed a lot of their time and expertise in commenting on draft documents and in broadening the base of support for the Conference. The names of all the Planning Com- mittee members are listed at the beginning of the Conference Proceedings. One Planning Committee member deserves special mention-the Honorable Janice Gradwohl. As Secretary of the SJI Board of Directors, Judge Gradwohl was an early champion for, the Conference. Once the Conference became a reality, she diligently reviewed staff drafts and reports and responded quickly to them with useful comments. Fifty-four teams representing all of the states and four territories were at the Con- ference. This high level of participation did not happen by chance. It was the result of the support that the Conference received fiom several key organizations. The Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) endorsed the Conference and actively encouraged the participation of each chief justice. Perhaps as a direct result of this endorsement, several chief justices sent extra team members. I would like to thank Chief Justice Ellen Ash Peters of Connecticut, Chair of the CCJ, and Chief Justice Paul J. Liacos of Massachusetts, Chair of the CCJ Committee on Discrimination in the Courts, for their commitment to the success of the Conference. The Conference participants and agenda would not have reflected the diversity of the judicial, legal, and judicial administration communities without the support of several national organizations: the American Indian Court Judges Association (AICJA); the

11 American Bar Association (ABA); the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA); the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA); and the NBA Judicial Council (JCNBA); the National Association for Court Management (NACM); the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA); and the National Association Tribal Court Judges (NATCJ); the National Bar Association (NBA); the ABA National Conference of Special Court Judges (NCSCJ); the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NO;and the National Judicial College (NJC). These organizations showed their support in a variety of ways, including resolutions of support, copyright releases, documents, and in-kind contributions toward faculty expenses. Special thanks to the Honorable Charles R. Cloud (NCSCJ); President H. T. Smith (NBA); the Honorable Benjamin Logan I1 (JCNBA); President Roberta Cooper Ram0 (ABA); President Sheila Gonzalez (NACM); President Mary Hernandez (HNBA); President Nancy Lee (NAPABA); Rachel Patrick, Council Staff, of the ABA Council on Racial and Ethc Bias in the Legal System; President Robert Payant (NJC); and Dean Louis W. Hardy (NCJFCJ) for their assistance in securing the support of their respective organizations. The need for state and federal courts to cooperate is the thrust of the several state- federal judicial councils and was the major theme that emerged from the 1992 National Conference on State-Federal Judicial Relationships that was jointly sponsored by the SJI and the Federal Judicial Center (FJC). This theme was recognized and acted upon by the Conference planners. Most of the federal circuits participated at the Conference, and I thank Dr. Russell R. Wheeler, Deputy Director of the FJC, for encouraging the chief circuit judges to participate. I would also like to acknowledge the FJC's many contributions, which included faculty and publications, to which all participants had access, as well as the expertise and support of Denise M. Glover, Education Training Specialist; Denise Neary, Judicial Education Attorney; and 'Molly Treadway Johnson, AttorneyResearcher, who worked with us in shaping the program. We were fortunate to have three keynote speakers-Justice Revius 0. Ortique, Jr., of Louisiana, Dr. Robert C. Henderson, and Assistant Attorney General Eleanor D. Ache- son. These keynote speakers provided the attendees with a new paradigm for viewing race relations and a model for change. They inspired and informed the attendees at critical points during the Conference. Their edited remarks are included in this report with their permission. The Conference program was made possible by the selfless contributions of the 75 conference faculty members. The faculty member who was the glue that held the two and a half day event together was Professor Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., who served as the facilitator for several plenary sessions. Although the names of all of the faculty members cannot practically be listed here, they do appear in the participant list and biographical sketches sections of these Conference Proceedings. In addition to the Conference faculty, several other participants served as group facilitators for the state teams and the discussion groups. Chief Justice Joseph F. Baca of New Mexico and Deborah Kanter, State Court Administrator, assisted the project staff over the course of several months leading up to the Conference, identifjling local resources and experts and helping us with dozens of logistical details. Dean Leo M. Romero of the University of New Mexico Law School not

... 111 only served as faculty, but also recruited several law students to be volunteers during the Conference. New Mexico’s judicial-legal community extended its hospitality to the Conference participants. The New Mexico judicial-legal community was represented by the New Mexico Bar hssociation; the New Mexico Hispanic Bar Association; the New Mexico Association of Black Lawyers; the New Mexico Native American Bar Association; the New Mexico Judicial Education Center; and the New Mexico Women’s Law Group. The resources of the NCSC project st& were enhanced by the contributions of several others, including retired Justice Allen Broussard of California, who used his skills as a photographer to document the Conference. Arline Tyler, a member of the Planning Committee, was instrumental in making it possible for Steven Montan0 of the California Administrative Office of the Courts to assist the staff during the Conference. Paula Coo- per, Senior Clerk of the United States Probation Office, graciously volunteered her time to assist us in Albuquerque. Judge McBeth and Frederick Ohlrich made it possible for Marcia Skolnik, Public Information Officer for the Los Angeles Municipal Court, to assist us with media relations during the Conference. Shirley Mark, Consultant, and Alex Maganello, Law Clerk, assisted us as liaisons to Chief Justice Liacos. Though the scope of the topics included on the Conference agenda was broad, the planners wanted to focus in some way on juveniles. Thus, juvenile issues were covered in not only a concurrent session, but a town hall forum as well. The town hall forum was moderated by the Honorable David Gray Ross, the Deputy Director of the U.S. Office of Child Support Enforcement. Judge Ross’s personal interest in the Conference is deeply appreciated. Because of the interest in juveniles, the High Land High School ROTC Corps presented the colors at the Conference Opening. At the Conference Welcome, the Dinetah Dancers shared their Navajo culture. Thanks to Esther Yazzie and to Martha Guerin and Sylvia Torres of the Albuquerque Convention and Visitors Bureau for their assistance in identifllng these groups. The well-laid plans of the Conference planners were reviewed and critiqued by two outside consultants, Dr. Carolyn C. W. Hines and Dr. David Baety of C & W Associates, Inc., of Newport News, Virginia. They also served as faculty at the faculty training workshop that was held to prepare the faculty for the Conference. The project would have been impossible without the support of the management and st& of the NCSC. Larry L. Sipes, President Emeritus; Sally T. Hillsman, Vice Presi- dent, Research; and Victor Eugene Flango, Acting Vice President, Research, provided this critical management support. Mary Brittain, Senior Judicial Educator, took the lead in working with the conference consultants in developing the faculty training program. Ms. Brittain also reviewed the conference program to ensure its pedagogical soundness. John G. Richardson, Research Analyst, and Deanna Parker, Information Specialist, took the lead in conducting the preconference survey and producing materials for the conference notebook. Margaret Former, Administrative Assistant, was indispensable to all aspects of this project. She compiled the faculty biographical sketches and desktop-published this document. Although she joined the project staff late in the process, she consistently provided high-quality support.

iv Charles Campbell contributed his considerable editing skills to proofread the draft manuscripts. Dawn Spinozza served as copy editor. Joseph Kueser assisted by locating the Navajo alphabet font for this document and provided administrative support for the Con- ference proposal. Karin Marks Hughes also provided administrative support early in the project . This Conference was the first time the NCSC used a convention center for a national meeting. Maxine Rhodes and Kimberly Swanson of the NCSC’s Conference Plan- ning and Travel Department, took the lead in identifiing possible conference venues, analyzing the bids from the responding hotels and convention centers, and preparing reports for the Planning Committee. Carol Davanay of the Institute for Court Management provided follow-up and follow-through support with the hotels, convention center, visitors bureau, audio-visual companies, convention center decorator, printer, and other meeting- related specialists. Several other colleagues at the NCSC assisted this effort in a variety of ways. G. Thomas Munsterman, Director, Center for Jury Studies, and William Hewitt, Senior Re- search Associate, provided their expertise as facilitators and faculty. Tom Munsterman served as faculty for the concurrent sessions on juries, and Bill Hewitt served as the Mod- erator and faculty for the concurrent session on court interpretation. Susan Keilitz and Roger Hanson reviewed and commented on several key documents, including the propos- als and agenda. Sekio Matsumoto designed the Conference logo and layout. The design represents people of all heritages surrounding the scales of justice, with their arms raised in celebra- tion. Justice James M. Dolliver and Justice Charles Z. Smith, Cochairs, along with the members of the Washington State Minority and Justice Task Force, shared this design with us. The Conference theme, “Justice for All: Eliminating Bias in the Courts,” is the backdrop for the design. The phrase is in 14 languages: Amharic, Arabic, Chinese, Eng- lish, French, Haitian Creole, Japanese, Korean, Navajo, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, KiSwahili, and Vietnamese. Several NCSC colleagues who departed the NCSC before the Conference contributed to this project. Before his departure to become Senior Researcher with the Commission on the Future of the North Carolina Courts, Steve Hairston coordinated communications with prospective Conference faculty and joined us as staff in Albuquer- que. Stevelyn Adams, Graphic Artist, prepared the graphics design for the Conference material. Phillip Lattimore, former Staff Attorney with the NCSC’s Information Service; Dixie Knoebel, former Director of the Information Service; and Rae Lovko, former Infor- mation Analyst, all contributed research that was used by this project. Paul Ramos, Sara Crawford, and Glen Growkowski, student interns at the College of William and Mary, obtained permission to reproduce copyrighted materials and provided able follow-up support with the prospective faculty members by obtaining their biographical information and the state team bibliographies.

V The First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, March 2-5, 1995, was the first time state, federal, and tribal court judges, officials, academics, and judicial educators, as well as citizens, convened to work on eliminating bias fiom the nation’s courts. The Conference was a project of the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), funded by a grant fiom the State Justice Institute (SJI). Other contributions included in- kind contributions from the members of the Planning Committee and faculty, as well as fiom the Federal Judicial Center, the organizations that endorsed the conference, and the National Center for State Courts. The 17-member Planning Committee served as the Conference ’s independent advisors and planners. The Planning Committee was a racially and ethcally diverse group with broad expertise and experience in judicial training, task force administration, court management, and research. This report documents the major themes, keynote addresses, and other proceedings of the Conference. Since the Conference, many states have been active with follow-up activities, including the establishment of agendas for new commissions on racial and ethnic bias. National organizations have also focused on the themes that emerged from the Conference. At its annual meeting in July 1995, the Conference of Chief Justices called for research to determine the effectiveness of racial and ethnic bias commissions. The Coali- tion of Bar Associations of Color, at its third annual meeting held in June 1995 in Wash- ington, D.C., adopted a resolution on eliminating racial and ethnic bias in the courts. Gender and racial bias in the judicial system against women of color, another major conference theme, was examined by the National Consortium of Task Forces and Commis- sions on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts at its annual meeting held in May 1995. This issue was raised again at a national conference, African American Women and the Law, held in June 1995 in Washington, D.C. The Hispanic National Bar Association, the Judi- cial Council of the National Bar Association, the Md-Atlantic Association for Court Man- agement, and the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association addressed judicial branch racial and ethnic bias at their 1995 annual meetings. Each of the Conference sessions included several findings and recommendations. The most important of these are captured in the reports for each respective event. They are summarized in the first section of this volume, Major Conference Themes. This volume continues with the Conference Agenda, since this report is organized around the Conference events. The Conference Welcome, the dinner and program that opened the two and a half day meeting, is reported, followed by the Conference Overview by Judge Veronica Simmons McBeth, Chair of the Planning Committee, who opened the first full day of the Conference, and the remarks of David I. Tevelin, the Executive Director of the State Justice Institute, and Professor Charles J. Ogletree, Jr. The keynote presentation of Dr. Robert C. Henderson is the next reported event in which a new paradigm for addressing bias is presented. Following Dr. Henderson’s presentation is “A Balance of Power and Rights,” the keynote address of Justice Revius 0. Ortique, Jr., of Louisiana. Assistant Attorney General Eleanor D. Acheson addresses the

vii need for and the challenges of identifllng and eliminating bias in the third keynote presentation. This volume then reports on the plenary session that highlighted the experiences of selected federal and state courts. The process used by the state teams to develop their state plans is described next. The participants who were not members of a state team did not produce a state plan, but instead contributed by participating in three town forums on public perception of the courts, juveniles, and criminal law and proceedings. The deliberations of the town forums were reported to the general body throughout the Conference. Summaries of,each of these town forums follow the discussion of the state plan process. To give judicial leaders the information that they needed to identif) racial and ethnic bias in the judicial branch and to develop innovative strategies for the elimination of bias, a dozen honcurrently run sessions were held. Racial and ethnic bias were discussed in a variety of contexts, including judicial independence, court interpretation, sovereignty of Native American tribes, the compound bias against women of color, the process for research and implementation, training, jury management, the improvement of equity and access in the administration of justice, and mechanisms to ensure fair and impartial criminal and civil proceedings. Each of these concurrent sessions is summarized. This report on the Conference Proceedings concludes with a summary on the panel of chief justices, “Documenting Bias in the Judicial System: Are There Any Implica- tions?’, a combined report on the sessions “Conference Update” and “Where Do We Go fiom Here?”, and the concluding remarks of Judge McBeth. Appendix A contains the biographical sketches of the conference faculty and speakers. The information contained in this section can be used to identif) persons with specific expertise and experience in a broad range of topics encompassed by the identification and elimination of bias in the judicial system. Appendix B includes the bibliographies prepared by the state team members as part of their preparation for the Conference. Ap- pendix C contains a listing of all of the Conference participants by state. This listing can be used to identi@ state team members, public participants, and faculty. I know that this report on the First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, the only resource of its kind, will become invaluable to you, not only because of the topics it covers and of the remarkable quality of the information it contains, but also because of the vision of a fair and unbiased court system that is shared by all those who dedicated themselves to this endeavor. This vision of fairness is the foundation for this work.

H. Clifton Grandy Project Director November 1995

... Vlll Major themes emerging from the First National Conference on Eliminatz'ng Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts:

The courts as an institution have a responsibility to be fair and the individuals in the judicial Vstem have personal responsibility as well

0 Racial and ethnic bias has no place in the judicial system in our society of laws. 0 Eliminating racial and ethnic bias is not limited to organizational change and the creation of task forces and commissions. It includes changing ourselves and our hndamental patterns of behavior. 0 All of us as individuals are the foundation of our system and as such must assume leadership in addressing racial and ethnic bias. 0 The commitment of the chief justice is important in establishing a task force, implementing recommendations, and otherwise addressing racial and ethnic bias.

Do not focus only upon the negative, include the positive

Courts must identiQ and attend to the models of unity already existing within their court systems. Courts must take affirmative steps to eliminate racial and ethnic bias.

Staying vigrlant against bias and continuous self-examination by the courts is important

Courts should continuously monitor and evaluate their operations to determine if they are making any progress in addressing bias. Courts should have a mechanism for receiving and addressing information pertaining to perceived and alleged biased conduct.

nerole of the community in aaessing access and fairness

0 The public should be involved in the work of the race and ethnic bias task forces through public hearings and the commitment to serve on commissions. The race and ethic bias task forces need public support both in the research phase (to help them better understand public perception of the courts) and in the implementation phase. The judicial system must be responsive to not only the level of need of the community it serves, but also the diversity of the life experiences and disputes in that community, including those of women of color.

ix Research

Researchers conducting studies for the courts should be familiar not only with the court system, but also with racial and ethc bias issues. 0 There is a need to provide the commissions with objective data about strategies to address bias, including the operation of the commissions. 0 Researching the existence of racial and ethnic bias is a good area for cooperation between the federal, state, and tribal court systems.

The presence of people of color on the bench and in the judicial worvorce

0 People of color are underrepresented as judges. 0 People of color often overlook the court as a source of employment and judicial administration as a career choice. Court systems must focus not only on recruiting people of color, but also on retaining and promoting people of color by making the judicial work environment more diversity-friendly.

Training

0 Training is an important tool in addressing bias. It can foster self-reflection, provide information, and provide early intervention in instances of perceived or actual bias. Off-the-shelf training is not the best approach.

Court interpretation

0 There is a need for standards for certifllng court interpreters and developing a code of ethics to govern their conduct.

Criminaljustice

0 The criminal justice process has several points in which bias can affect outcomes. Eliminating disparities in criminal sentencing alone will not reduce unwarranted racial disparities. Disparities in law enforcement and criminal legislation, as well as diversity in the judicial and prosecutorial workforces and in the legal profession, must also be considered.

Women of color

There is a need to examine and address the compound bias of race/ethnicity and gender against women of color. Facilities and services for female juveniles of color are inadequate.

X Native Americans, sovereignty and jurisdictional conflict with tribal courts

The state courts and the tribal courts need to enter into working agreements to resolve jurisdictional conflict between the two judicial systems. 0 Racial and ethnic bias against some Native Americans is compounded by sovereignty issues and the jurisdictional confbsion between and among the state, federal, and tribal court systems.

Jury Administration

The jury system is an area of concern to people of color who are litigants, victims, defendants, and their attorneys, and several issues deserve firther study, especially preemptory strikes. Existing standards can be used to address public perception, representiveness, inclusiveness, and hardships.

Juveniles

0 Juveniles of color are overrepresented in juvenile justice detention facilities. The juvenile justice system needs more culturally competent practitioners and service deliverers so that youths can be better served. People of color must be represented at the critical decision-making points in the juvenile justice system.

Implementation

Implementation should be viewed as an ongoing process and should not com- mence after the final report has been issued. Interim reports and pilot projects are just two ways to start implementation.

Access

All jurisdictions have not addressed inadequate legal representation for victims in serious misdemeanor cases. 0 Compound psychological, cultural, linguistic, economic, and informational barriers make the justice system hostile and alien to significant numbers of people of color. First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts

March 2-5,1995 Albuquerque Convention Center Albuquerque, New Mexko

Conference Agenda

I wURSDAY, MARCH2 I

6:OO p,m, - 9:OO p.m. Conference Welcome

FRIDAY, MARCH 3 I

8:30 a.m. - 9:OO a.m. Presentatlon of Colors Highland High School Junior ROTC, Albuquerque, New Mexico Pledge of Alleglence Honorable Tommy Day Wilcox, Jr.

Conference Ovendew and lntroductlon of Speakers Honorable Veronica Simmons McBeth Chair, Planning Committee; Judge, Los Angeles Municipal Court, California

Guest Speakers David LTevelin Executive Director, State Justice Institute Charles J, Ogletree, Jr. Professor of Law, Harvard Law School

9:OO a,m. - 9:45 a.m. Introductlon of Presenter Honorable Jon M. Mayeda Judge, Los Angeles Municipal Court, California

“Freedom from Race and Ethnlc Blas: The Prlnclples of Change” Robert C. Henderson, Ed.D, Secretary General National Spiritual Assembly Baha’is of the United States

9:45 a.m. - 10:15 am, BREAK

... xlll rFRIDAY, MARCH 3, CON7 1

lO:15 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. “Overcoming Obstacles of Change: An Exerclse”

12:OO Noon - 1 :30 p.m. luncheon

Introduction of Guest Speaker Honorable Janice Gradwohl Judge (Ret.): Secretary, Board of Directors, State Justice Institute

Guest Speaker Honorable Revius 0. Ortique, Jr. Associate Justice (Ret.), Louisiana Supreme Court

1 :30 p.m, - 2:30 p.m. “Overcoming Obstacles of Change: The Follow Up” Dr. Robert C. Henderson

2:30 p.m. - 4:30p.m. State Team Action Plan Building

Federal Judicial Center Meeting

Public Participant Session “Racism and Justice: Perceptions and Realities”

Moderator: Honorable David Rothman Judge, Superior Court, Santa Monica, California Faculty: Natsu Saito Jenga Georgia Supreme Court Commission on Racial and Ebnic Bias in the Court System Lennox Hinds Professor of Law; Chair, Administration of Justice Program, Rutgers University H.T. Smith President, National Bar Association

5:30 p.m, Women of Color: Explorfng the Agenda Discussion Group, La Placita Restaurant, Old Town Plaza

I SAIURDAY,MARCH 4 I

8:30 aomo- 9:OO a.m. “Where Are We Now?” - Conference Update Professor Charles J. Ogletree, Jr,

9:OO a.m, - 1O:OO a.m. Introductlon of Plenary Sesslon Sheila Gonzalez President, National Association for Court Management

XiV I SATURDAY, MARCH4, COW I

“Case Studies: State and Federal Perspectives” Moderator: Honorable Nathaniel LoJones Judge, Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Faculty: Honorable Gerald Kogan Justice, Supreme Court of Florida Honorable Karen L. Hunt Deputy Presiding Judge, Anchorage, Alaska Dr. Russell R, Wheeler Deputy Director, Federal Judicial Center Honorable Gerald Bruce Lee Judge, Fairfax County Circuit Court, Virginia

1O:OO a.m. - 10:30 a.m. BREAK

10:30 a.m. - 12:OO Noon Concurrent Educational Sessions I Establishing and Operating a Commission or Task Force to Study Bias in the Courts Researching the Existence, Extent, and Effects of Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts The Court as Employer: Eliminating Bias in Recruitment and Employment v Institutionalizing Change: Translating Findings and Recommendations into Sustained Implementation Staying Vigilant Against Bias: Informal Feedback, Formal Grievance Procedures, and Ethics Diversity Training in the Courts The Impact of Interpreters on Court Proceedings: Protecting the Rights of Linguistic Minorities Racial and Ethnicity Issues in Criminal Law and in the Criminal Justice Process The Intenelations of State, Tribal, and Federal Courts Achieving a Diverse Jury: And Then What? Juveniles in the Justice System Equal Access to the Justice System

12:OO Noon - 1 :45p.m. luncheon Introduction of Speaker Joseph A, Myers, Esq. Executive Director, National Indian Justice Center

Guest Speaker Honorable Eleanor D. Acheson Assistant Attorney General, Office of Policy Development, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. I SANRDAY, MARCH 4, CON’T I

2:oo p.m. - 3:30 Pam. Concunent Educational Sessions II Establishing and Operating a Commission or Task Force to Study Bias in the Courts Researching the Existence, Extent, and Effects of Racial and Ethnic Bias In the Courts The Court as Employer: Eliminating Bias in Recruitment and Employment Institutionalizing Change: Translating Findings and Recommendations into Sustained Implementation Staying Vigilant Against Bias: Informal Feedback, Formal Grievance Procedures, and Ethics Diversity Training In the Courts The Impact of Interpreters on Court F’roceedings: Protecting the Rights of Linguistic Minorities Racial and Ethnicity Issues in Criminal Law and in the Criminal Justice Process The Intenelations of State, Tribal, and Federal Courts Achieving a Diverse Jury: And Then What? Juveniles in the Justice System Equal Access to the Justice System 3:30 p.m. - 4:OO p,m. BREAK

4:OO porn,- 5:30 p.m. State Team Action Plan Bulldlng

0 Federal Judlclal Center Meeting

Public Pafticipant Session “Juveniles In the Justice System”

Moderator: Honorable David Gray Ross Deputy Director, Office Child Support Enforcement Department of Health and Human Services Faculty: Honorable David Ramirez Juvenile Court, Denver, Colorado Gerald P. Richard II, Esq, Director, Community Services, Phoenix, Arizona: Chairman, Arizona Committee on Minorities Paulette Brown, Esq. Vice Chair, American Bar Association Council on Racial and Ethnic Bias Ada Melton Executive Director, American Indian Development Associates Leo Romero Dean, University of New Mexico School of Law I SUNDAY. MARCH5 I

8:OO a,m. - 8:30 a.m. “Where Are We Now?” - Conference Update Professor Charles J. Ogletree, Jr,

8:30 a.m. - 9:30 a.m. 0 State Team Action Pian Building

Federal Judlclal Center Meeting

0 Public Partlclpant Session “Achieving Bias-Free Criminal Proceedings and Laws”

Moderator: Honorable Candace Cooper Superior Court of Los Angeles County, California Faculty: Rose M, Ochi, Esq. Assoc. Director, Office of National Drug Control Policy Honorable Terry J. Hatter, Jr. U.S. District Court, Los Angeles, California Edna Wells Handy, Esq. Professor, Hofstra Law School; former Director, New York Commission on Minorities John J. Kelly US. Attorney, Albuquerque, New Mexico

1O:OO a.m. - 1 1 :00 a.m. Introduction of Plenary Session Charles Z. Smith Justice, Supreme Court of Washington State; Co-Chair. Washington State Minority and Justice Commission

“Documenting Bias in the Judicial System: Are There Any implications?” Moderator: Chief Justice Ellen Ash Peters Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Connecticut; President, Conference of Chief Justices Faculty: Honorable Joseph F. Baca Chief Justice, Supreme Court of New Mexico Honorable Paul J. Liacos Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Massachusetts Honorable Thomas J. Moyer Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Ohio Honorable Annice M. Wagner Chief Judge. District of Columbia Court of Appeals

1 1 :00 a.m. - 1 1 :30 a,m, “Where Do We Go from Here?”- Conference Summary Professor Charles J. Ogletree, Jr,

Closing Remarks Honorable Veronica Simmons McBeth

*** Conference Adjournment *** xvii The Conference Welcome on the evening of Thursday, March 2, 1995, was the first event on the Conference agenda and consisted of an organized dinner and welcoming remarks. The Honorable Benjamin Aranda 111, a member of the Planning Committee, was the Moderator. Judge Aranda introduced each of the Planning Committee members and representatives of the organizations that endorsed the Conference. The Honorable Charles 2. Smith, Moderator of the National Consortium of Task Forces and Commissions on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, the principal cosponsor- ing organization with the NCSC, spoke of the need for task forces and commissions to address racial and ethnic bias in the courts. Justice Smith said, “H. Clifton Grandy de- semes recognition for his outstanding work on behalf of the National Center for State courts.’’ The Honorable David A. Brock, Chair of the Board of Directors of the State Jus- tice Institute, the principal fknding authority for the Conference, welcomed the participants to the Conference. Joseph F. Baca, Chief Justice of the host state, New Mexico, welcomed everyone to his state. The representatives of the organizations that endorsed the Conference gave very inspirational remarks in support of the Conference and spoke of the importance of a fair and impartial court system. Chief Justice Ellen Ash Peters of Connecticut, President of the Conference of Chief Justices, and Chief Justice Paul J. Liacos of Massachusetts, Chair of the Committee on Discrimination in the Courts, represented the Conference of Chief Jus- tices. Also speaking were Sheila Gonzales, President of the National Association for Court Management; the Honorable Benjamin Logan 11, Chair of the Judicial Council of the Na- tional Bar Association; Judge Bernice Donald, Chair of the Commission on Opportunities for Minorities in the Profession of the American Bar Association; Roberta Cooper Ramo, President-Elect of the American Bar Association; Nancy Lee, Esq., President of the Na- tional Asian Pacific American Bar Association; Mary Hernandez, President of the Hispanic National Bar Association; and Dr. Leo Romero, Dean of the University of New Mexico Law School. Also recognized were the Honorable David Ramirez, member of the Board of Trustees of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges; the Honorable Robert Payant, President of the National Judicial College; the Honorable Charles R. Cloud, Norfolk General District Court, representing the National Conference of Special Court Judges of the American Bar Association; Arthur H. Snowden 11, past President of the Conference of State Court Administrators; Joseph Meyers, Esq., Executive Director, National Indian Justice Center; and the Honorable Elbridge Coochise of the NW Inter- tribal Court System and President of the National American Indian Court Judges Associa- tion. Following the dinner, the Dinetah Dancers performed several Navajo ritual dances.

1 What I am going to do this morning is go over the conference agenda and tell how things fit in and give some of the whys behind some of the topics that we are going to be discussing as well as introducing some of the speakers. One of the things I want to stress is that this is an action-oriented conference. We did not come here just to talk and listen, though that is an important element of what we are going to do, but we are here to do a plan, and it is going to require the active participation of every single participant if we are going to be able to accomplish the goal that we set out: for each of the three groups of participants to leave with a product. There are three groups of participants here with us for the next two and a half days. The members of the designated state teams are wearing a blue name tag. The federal participants are wearing green. What we refer to as the “public participants” are wearing yellow. The conference stafF and all of the faculty and facilitators are wearing a clear tag like the one that I am wearing. Those of you who have been designated “public participants”-what does that term mean? It means only that you are not a member of a state team or federal team. The public participants are judges, they are court administrators, they are bar leaders, they are legislators, they are exactly the same kinds of people who make up the federal teams or the state teams, except that they did not have to be designated by their chief justice to serve on the team. So, they come representing their organizations, or because they are committed to this issue. So those are the three groups that are here. We want you to know that throughout the conference that all of us will be meeting together in plenary sessions. We do have enough room for you. There are three times, designated in the program, when we all will not be meeting together. The state teams, the federal teams, and the public participants will meet separately at three times during the next two days. The state teams will be working on their action plans. The federal teams will be deciding on what product they want to have toward the end. And the public participants will be discussing issues that were raised in the course of planning the conference, and they will have a product that will be shared with everybody. The first time that we are going to meet in a small group will be this morning. In just a few moments Dr. Robert Henderson will come and talk about institutionalized bias. How bias has become institutionalized in our system of justice. We will have a break immediately following his presentation. Then we are going to start with the first small group exercise. You have been divided randomly so you may not be with your team members in those small groups. What we are going to do is investigate and have you discuss with each other your observations about the obstacles that may arise in reaching a state team plan, or for the federal participants in reaching your plan, and for the public participants the kind of obstacles that may stand in the way of our achieving the conference goal. The conference goal that we always want to keep in mind is a plan for action once we leave Sunday der- noon. So we are going to discuss that in the small groups. After that discussion, all the facilitators are going to meet with Dr. Henderson to report what happened in all of the small groups. We have a speaker for lunch, and when we come back, Dr. Henderson is

2 going to give us a summary for everything that happened in the small groups. We are going to have a major list for all of you to take to the next series of meetings, which are the state team action plans. You’ll have the benefit of the thoughts of everybody in the room about what the obstacles may be in arriving at that goal and then a plan to get around the obstacles and so everybody is going to be able to share in that. We’ll do that fiom 1.30 to 2:30. From 2:30 to 4:30 we will break off into the three groups. The state teams will each report. And in your program it tells you exactly to which room you are to report. The federal groups will meet also. And the public participants will have their first session, “Racism and Justice: Perceptions and Realities.” Judge David Rothman from Los Angeles will moderate that. Tomorrow morning, when we meet here again fiom 8:30 to 9:00, Professor Char- les Ogletree, who I am going to introduce to you in just a few moments, will give us an update of everything that occurred in the groups while we were not together the day before. He will let us know where the state teams are, where the federal participants are, and what product has been produced at the public session on racism and justice. We will then have a plenary session, “Case Studies: State and Federal Perspectives.’’ When we first put this panel together, we wanted to call it “successfbl case studies,” because what we wanted to hold up to you were the different plans that have been put into effect in the different jurisdictions to handle the problem of racial and ethnic bias. Some 20 plus states have already formed a task force or commission. Some of those are holding public hearings and conducting research. Others have completed their findings, published them, and are in the implementation stages of carrying out what’s been recommended in the course of their hearings. Some states, however, aren’t going to have a task force or commission. There may not be money enough, quite frankly, to sponsor such an endeavor, or the minority population of that state may be so small that what would be more effective in your jurisdiction is to hold a series of town hall meetings. Maybe it’s a better idea for the local bar to work with the local judiciary in planning something that is specific to the problems you have in your locale. What is going to happen during the case studies is that we are going to have a discussion from these folks who have been involved in this area for a long time, who have a lot of experience and a lot of ideas they are going to share with you. Those will be helpful to the state teams who are going to meet again later that day to work on the second phase of their plans. It will also be helpfbl to the federal and public participants. After that meeting, we will have the first series of concurrent educational sessions. There are 12 concurrent educational sessions. We have selected topics that we believe will be helpful to you in your jurisdiction whether you have taken any formal action or whether you are in the research or implementation stages. What we would like the state team participants to do is to break up your state team so that you can cover as many of these educational seminars as possible. The state teams vary in size from four to ten. If you’ve got four members, you will be able to cover eight of the 12. But as I said earlier, you are going to have to talk a lot to each other. Although we have a lot of experience and a lot of commitment, quite fiankly, there are not a lot of people that we would label as experts in this area. What we are attempting to do is nothing like giving you a checklist like you have gotten fiom some other conferences that you

3 have attended. We are talking about hopes and dreams that I know all of us in this room share to make our system what it should be for everybody regardless of race or color. Last night when I heard our speakers suggest that if the whole nation reflected what we were in that room, we would not even have to be here. They were so hopehl. To hear Chief Jus- tice Paul J. Liacos talk about growing up and being of Greek ethnicity and having suffered from discrimination himself. And quite fiankly, even if we, and I am sure that we are going to, leave with our action plans, once we get to our states, we are going to have to start all over again convincing people that this is important to all. And, I want to talk about that in just a few moments, and we are going to talk about that a lot in Dr. Henderson’s exercise this morning. Last night as we were working until about 1:00 in the morning just doing some fine-tuning, I turned on CIW just to see what was going on. There was a discussion going on among three very reasonable people who said: “One of the things we have to stop focusing on is race and ethnicity.” “We’ve got to have a color-blind society.” “We’ve got to stop talking about it.” And 1 said, that just goes to show you that reasonable people can disagree. The purpose of this conference is to help us achieve that color-blind society. We are not going to have it unless we at some point, and this will be a beginning for many of us, discuss these issues of race and ethnicity. And we have got to do it in an open and fiank fashion., I can’t stress too strongly that you may hear an idea or opinion that you disagree with,here. I mean, I may have said something that you disagree with. I usually manage to do that. I try to do it sometimes. You may hear opinions that may test your beliefs. They may challenge you. They may be about ideas that you consider hndamental truths. You can’t sit quietly in the conference and let it go by. What we need you to do in the small groups and in the educational seminars is to say “I have difficulty with that notion.” Don’t be afraid to do it. This conference is not about white male bashing or female bashing or one group against another. We are all here together for a common purpose. So you’ve got to feel comfortable and it’s not something we feel comfortable about. I remember growing up and my mother telling me that in polite conversation you don’t discuss religion, you don’t discuss politics, and you don’t discuss race. You’ll hear a notion raised at this conference and you will let it go, you will say I don’t agree with that but I don’t feel comfortable raising it. But believe me, when you go back to your jurisdiction and try to sell this notion of setting up a task force or setting up a research committee, that question is going to come right back at you and you will not have the benefit of these collective minds to give an answer-to answer your own questions about it and, later, so that you can be an advocate for this when you go back to your state. As we said earlier, not everybody in the United States of America wants to talk about race. It’s not because they are bad people; it’s because people want to move on. Most states do not have money to deal with basic services, and they see this as extra. So, you are going to have to be a champion for this notion when you get back. And you can get the tools to handle that when you get back to your jurisdiction if you bring it up here. If you don’t feel comfortable doing it in the large group, please contact anybody that has got one of these clear badges and we will make sure that you get the information you need to handle that issue.

4 I do want to note one thing. Justice Cardozo was talking about judicial decision- making and he said: “Judges, [court administrators and bar leaders,] like everybody else, are tugged by forces that one doesn’t even realize are going on. They are inherited instincts, traditional beliefs, acquired convictions, and the result is an outlook on life. We may try to see things as objectively as we please; nonetheless, we can never see them with any eyes except our own.” What we are going to do in the next two and a half days is attempt to see our justice system though the eyes of others. Through the eyes of those who don’t feel that they have been treated fairly. I feel that we can do this because I see it happen all the time. I live and sit in the city in which I grew up, Los Angeles. I hear exclusively criminal juries and supervise Los Angeles central criminal, but I sit in a trial court. Every day when I interview juries, jurors tell me that although we live in one of the most diverse cities in the United States of America, they never see and have any contact whatsoever with persons of another race. I hear it every single time that I do a trial. Because I create an atmosphere in which they can share that information, those jurors tell me that their views about people of other groups come fiom the media. I’ve had people say, for example, “I believe, based upon what I see in the media, that Afiican-Americans are more likely to commit crimes than other people.” I think that they notice that I am an Afiican-American, but they share that.

“We, judges and administrators, not only in our individual courtrooms, but in the institutions in which we work, can create an atmosphere, even if it does not exist anywhere else in the United States of America, where a person can walk in and know that he or she is going to be treated fairly. What we want to do these next two and a half days is encoumge you to talk, to listen, to reflect, to do your pian, and leave and be a champion for it once we finish on Sunday afternoon. So that we can restore public confidence in our courts. I think we all care about that.”

The last day is pretty self-explanatory. The last thing we are going to do is have Professor Charles Ogletree share with us some of the state action plans and where the federal participants are. We will have the reports on the two additional public forums which are “Juveniles in the Justice System” and “Achieving Bias-Free Criminal Proceed- ings.” And then we are going to have a panel of chief justices who are going to share with us all they have learned fiom the past two and a half daypand where they intend to go with it in their states once they return. Then Professor Ogletree will give a summary. I will say “good bye” and we will have left and accomplished everything we set out to do.

5 David I. Teveh, Executive Director of the State Justice Institute, welcomed the Conference attendees and informed them about the special fbnding cycle. He said that a special &ding cycle was used, successfblly following three other SJI-fknded conferences on substance abuse, domestic violence, and the hture of the courts. He explained that the special finding cycle was a mechanism for implementing the ideas coming out of the Conference around the country. The special funding cycle could also be viewed as another incentive for the state team members to develop an action plan. Mr. Tevelin explained the concept paper requirements, the deadlines, and the review and approval processes.

6 Professor Ogletree told the Conference participants that they would come to understand that the buck stops with judges, court administrators, lawyers, and other officials, because the judicial system is where the injured flock for justice. The injured want justice handed out fairly and evenhandedly. They want justice by people who are sincere, sensitive, and will respect all of their rights and address all of their concerns. Professor Ogletree explained that judges and lawyers judge themselves by a higher standard than many others in our society. They look beyond what is right and wrong and judge themselves on the appearance of impropriety. For this reason, the Conference participants must address and resolve not ody the realities of bias, but also the appearance and the perception of bias. In addition to the evidence of conscious and patently obvious bias, the hidden effects of unconscious bias must be searched out, uprooted, and under- mined. Professor Ogletree admonished the attendees to not go for just the popular ideas, but to be willing to let all perspectives be shared. The goal of the Conference participants is to eradicate and eliminate every instance of bias in the court system. This goal is in some respects simple, and in some respects impossible. Professor Ogletree said the participants should try to answer the following questions: What can we do on an individual basis to make the court system more user- fbendly? What can we do with our administrative power to make the court more efficient in addressing bias issues? What can we do with our personnel to make sure that everyone is aware of these issues? What can we do by looking at sister states and getting ideas on how they handle problems, so that we can anticipate them in advance? In closing, Professor Ogletree added that he hoped that there would be a lot of constructive, sensitive, thoughthl, thorough, probing, and provocative thinking during the Conference. He stated that he hoped that candor would be a key ingredient in addressing the issues; that the chief justices would take very seriously the advice and ideas of the other Conference participants. Professor Ogletree ended by stating that he hoped everyone would leave Albuquerque saying that they heard some things that they did not agree with, that they had not been exposed to, and that were enlightening, simple, creative, and possible to implement and that they would go back home and see that those things are implemented.

7 In order to take meaningfbl and significant action to reduce and eliminate racial and ethnic bias in the justice system, we need to understand not only its features and manifestations in the justice system, but also its origins in the culture at large. But we have to go beyond that. Racial and cultural conflicts are generally discussed only in times of conflict. Matters of race zoom to the top of our priorities, the particular problem is solved, and we reiterate the platitudes of living in brotherly and sisterly love. Then .race and ethnic bias and the importance of unity and diversity begin to drift down to the lower end of our operational priorities. If we are going to solve this problem in a way that is not dependent on the stimu- lus of crisis, we are going to have to begin to integrate different understandings and approaches into the way we think, the way we behave, and the way that we feel about certain circumstances and about one another. That gives way to a new pattern of life, which itself is conducive to unity and to diversity. From the beginning, the United States has embraced a contradictory set of values. The founders enshrined slavery in the Constitution and, at the same time, proclaimed their devotion to the highest principles of equality and justice. It took a bloody Civil War to abolish that evil institution. Today racism remains the most challenging issue confronting the American nation, a nation whose ancestry includes every people on Earth, whose motto is: Epluribus umm, “Out of many people,’’ The mission of this nation is to forge one people whose ideals of fieedom under law have inspired millions of people worldwide; such a nation cannot engage in discrimination or prejudice toward any race or culture without betraying the spiritual foundations of its own nation-ness. Persistent neglect of the ravages of racism jeopardize both the internal order and the national security of this nation. I will never forget when I watched my neighborhood in Los Angeles go up in flames for the third time in my lifetime when the Rodney King verdict was handed in. You know, so many of us had been so hopehl when that trial engaged, because we know that the fact of being black puts you at risk, whether you are guilty of a crime or not. That is a fact of life. These‘problems are not simply temporary explosions of the rage of the discon- tented and disenfianchised; these are problems that represent a fiacture in the foundation of our nation, that jeopardize its internal security, internal order, and its national security, and that have to be looked at as that important. You cannot build a nation dedicated to the proposition of equality and liberty and then have dividers. Tulane University studies have shown us that when white decision makers make decisions about people of color who are of equal or superior qualifications, they will be passed over 80 percent of the time. So, the frustration and the sense among people of color that others do not understand the challenges we face. That unless there is some way to bring it to your attention and to cause you to feel my concern, my frustration, my pain, sometimes my rage, there is no way to give vent to the expression of concern that I have about the conditions in which I live and operate and make changes in the way we operate that will foster a condition of equality and a culture of unity and diversity.

8 We have got to develop a new language, so, as Plat0 taught us, if equality is the mother of justice, then the target for change must be the spirit and character of every one of us. We must begin to redefine the problem as not being limited to the development of organizational plans, to the appointment of commissions, to the establishment of investiga- tory bodies; we must begin to redefine and draw a circle around the challenge of changing ourselves and not just at the level of polite behavior, but at the level of spirit and character. So that we begin to understand that the way we behave and the initiatives we begin and the sincerity that we bring to problem-solving and to the challenges we face as we go about our business is absolutely indispensable to the pursuit and achievement of an endur- ing solution. What we are after is to change those fundamental patterns of behavior, of thought, and of spirit that are the patterns that everyone of us lives our life by. The principle that I would describe here is the principle of oneness of human kind: that regardless of color or culture or ethmcity or gender, everyone of us is equal, has rich bounty to share in the collective struggle to live and to carry on an ever-advancing civilization. The application of this principle to the way we think, to the way we behave, to the way we make decisions is itself the most important guideline for the reorganization of the things we do and the conclusions we reach. It will not be sufficient for us to come out of this conference with good plans if we do not also emerge from the conference with a basic understanding of the changes we will need to make in ourselves. The appeal of this conference has got to go beyond organizational change. The appeal has got to begin with the individual, because the transformation of the society as a whole, the transformation of each one of your court systems, the transformation of each one of your operational units, however they are described, cannot succeed unless there is a change in the spirit in each one of us as individuals. There are things that we can do to make significant change. I would like to talk about what those principles for change are and how we might employ them to the benefit of progress. Now, fundamental to the change that we are going to have to pursue is change in the way we think about the role of leadership, because the days of hierarchical differentia- tion are over. These are the days in which all of us must assume a collective, a shared responsibility for the constant overhaul, refinement, and improvement of ourselves and of the social organizations in which we live and work. The leadership style that will serve us under these conditions will not be the leadership style of the military tradition of our past. I would like to suggest to you that leadership itself must be redefined. Each of us must see, not as a cliche and not as a platitude, ourselves as leaders, because all of us can initiate processes, can sustain an environment in which change is possible, and can enrich an environment, which becomes a breading ground for constructive change. Now this change is going to have to be based upon certain organizing principles. Because, as Einstein taught us, the significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level at which we were thinking when we created them. So we are going to have to change the way we think in order to put ourselves in a position of competence and prepar- edness to take actions on the problems we are confionting. Now, let me suggest to you what some of those organizing principles may be.

9 The first organizing principle is the “Purpose Principle.” We have to mobilize the most noble forces in the souls of ourselves and others. That cannot be done without a noble, galvanizing purpose. Now, the purpose can be whatever you design, but let me suggest one to you. Because the society itself is so dependent on justice and because the justice system is dependent on an organic system of relationships that exists within the organizations of justice, all of you and all of your employees and all of the people who contribute to the justice system, at whatever level and with whatever contribution, have an integral role in providing justice to a society, to a humanity, which is absolutely thirsting for it. The second organizing principle is the “Excellence Principle.” There is no excellence without right living. If we are committed to that understanding, we will begin to rethink the things that we do, not to make them good enough, because good enough won’t serve the critical needs of a wide constituency, but to make them excellent. Aristotle taught us that we are what we repeatedly do. He said excellence then is not an act but a habit. What I am saying is that each of us can begin to foster standards of excellence in the administration of justice, which are inspiring and galvanizing to the people we work with and to the systems we impact. The third organizing principle is the “Trust and Integrity Principle.” Integrity breeds the very trust that we are absolutely dependent on if we are to resolve the conflicts that have been so long-standing in the traditional relationships between the races in this country. Without it, we cannot foster the trust and the confidence that will be necessary for us to make the very critical steps that we will have to make in order to change our relationships, change our organizations, and ultimately change our community and our nation. Samuel Johnson said that there can be no friendship without confidence and no confidence without integrity. If we are resting this initiative on the assumption that there must be close ties of friendship and partnership, then integrity is absolutely essential to the development of the trust that will cement those ties. The fourth organizing principle is the “Service Principle.” If the problem is to be overcome, it will be overcome by people who teach themselves to look beyond their lives and what immediately benefits them, to lookfar beyond their lives and what immediately benefits them. There is nothing that exalts a sense of nobility and honor in the heart of a human being more than service to another human being. You know, all of the studies that have been done about changing self-concept and about fighting depression, anger, and rage indicate that of all of the alternative responses, from alcohol to drugs to “feedback,” service is the most effective and least-used means of transforming your condition. It will make you feel better faster than virtually anything else you can do. Creating a culture of service in your organization will sustain that environment, that breeding ground, to help people come together and begin to establish bonds of closeness, of communication, of understanding. The fifth organizing principle is the “Equality or Pygmalion Principle.” It is true in the classroom. If you tell a teacher that kids are smart, then the kids perform very well. If you tell a teacher that kids are dumb, kids don’t do so well. It has been documented time and time again. So, if “what you see is what you get,” whenever you don’t like what you see, review it carehlly and ask yourself if one of the problems is the way you see it. It may

10 not always be the problem, but, sometimes, you may find that if you see someone differently, you’ll approach them differently and you will get a different response from them. The last organizing principle that I would commend to your consideration is the “Unity Principle.” Unity is generally thought of as the outcome of a lot of other things. Its thought to be the inevitable result of doing everything right. If you live well and you do all the right things in a family, then the result is family unity. We are thinking about this backwards. The initial assumption must be unity and love. That must be the initial organizing principle of a relationship. Let us begin to view that as issue number one. Then let’s use our efforts to foster unity, understanding, cooperation, harmony, as agents for the transformation of how we see one another, how we work together, how we develop friendships, how we resolve our problems. Unity is a dynamic entity, constantly changing, constantly evolving. Just like a good marriage. You start with love and a lot of hope about the hture. If you are lucky and persistent and willing to tough it out over a lot of years, you refine it to the point that it is truly something special. The first stage of unity for people who don’t like each other may be that they can sit in a room and begin to talk. But as you progress, that unity will be more refined, and more productive. But instead of viewing unity as something that comes at the end, let us begin to view it as something that is essential to the beginning. I get tired of the conflict paradigm. I saw it over the last 25 years of the movement toward the elimination of racial and ethnic bias and the promotion of racial unity. But, frankly, we weren’t moving in a dramatically constructive direction, and we must have been missing something. I talked to my good fiend, who is the Commissioner of Human Relations in Chicago. I said, you know, there’s just got to be another way to go about this. Every year you have a press conference on hate crime, and you report that there’s more of it than there used to be. There is another reason to put bars on our windows. There is another reason to be afraid of everybody who is different from you. There has got to be another way to think about this problem because thinking of it as responding to riots and conflicts is simply not productive of the kind of transformation in the larger community that we got to have. I said, let’s do some studies on models of unity. Let’s find out if there is anybody out there who is getting along, how they are doing it, and what effect they are having. What we found was incredible. What we found was that there were models of unity in every single community, organization, and system-it didn’t matter. We found that two things were true: that wherever you look, you will find patterns of conflict and contention. But wherever you look, you also will find models of unity. We also found that the models of unity received virtually no attention at all, that it was the conflict and contention that received 98 percent of all of our attention and all of our responsibility. We found that the models of unity were generally intentional efforts that were designed to find some common ground around differences. They generally depended on somebody you never saw, somebody you didn’t know. That person was not a leader in any particular sense of the word. Generally, there were grassroots initiatives that embraced diversity, not from the standpoint of differences, but from the standpoint of unity and cooperation. We found that there was a growing desire in the midst of these models of unity to bring people together. Last, we found that models of unity tended to ask the question, “What’s going right here?’ as opposed to asking the question, “What’s going wrong here?” That is not to

11 say that it is not important to investigate things that are broken; it is simply that equal time is mandatory if you are going to find a balanced and effective solution. We found that the results of these models of unity were consistent changes in personal attitudes of people from one group to another. The growth of cross-cultural fiend- ships, the development of the ability to collaborate, and the resolution or reduction of intergroup conflict. Let me just tell what these models look like. First of all, we found them everywhere. We found them in business organizations, large and small. We found them in segregated neighborhoods and integrated neighborhoods. We found them in church communities, in government offices. We found them in court systems; One of the places that we looked was the federal court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where we implemented a small model of unity study. We found them in every conceivable area. In every one of those areas we found people who are learning to get along and who, in fact, embodied the spirit, the understandings, and the behaviors necessary to bring incredible and transformative change to the entire organization. What I want to tell you is that in offices like yours, if you begin to look where cooperation is growing, you will see models of unity all over your court systems. What you have got to begin to do is draw little circles around those things and begin to call them to the attention of the generality of people in your court systems and say: “Let’s begin to talk about why this effort is working or how you bridge this cooperation, because these understandings are the ones that most need to be shared. I didn’t need to know that you are alienated toward me. I knew that. I need to know how we are going to build a bridge of understanding and cooperation. That we need to learn together.” I would like to conclude with just a few thoughts. The first is this: Complex systems have always been built as the result of agreement, of shared concern, of the capacity to find points on which we could come together. The complex systems of justice will not be transformed by any other means. The plans we devise, the policies that we write, the organizational restructuring we do will rest on a foundation of the spirit and character of every one of the individual human beings that represent the soul of that organization. If we do not affect the foundation, we will not be able to hold up the structure. I want to leave you with the thoughts of Oliver Wendell Holmes. When I read this, I was so inspired by it, because I believe it. I think that in times like these, when we are forced to either relegate these problems to the level of platitudes and cliches or take them seriously, scared to death because we know how complex they really are. We have got to look inside ourselves and find some rich reservoir of strength and capacity to make things different and to make ourselves different. These words of Oliver Wendell Holmes seem particularly pertinent, and I’ll close with them. He said: “What lies behind us, and what lies before us, are but tiny matters when compared to what lies within us.”

12 “A Balance of Power and Rights”

When the history of these United States of America is written, it will reflect our peaks and valley, our renaissance and decadence, out triumphs as well as our tragedies, just as with other nations and other civilizations. We, too, have had our decades of glory and our years of infamy. It is difficult for most of us to imagine that nations perish or that even civilizations pass into eternity. Like unto Hitler’s dreams for the Third Reich, we are inclined to believe that America will “go on forever” as the leader of the free world and the Big Brother to the Third World! But in our more reflective moments, we realize full well that the rapid metamorphosis of our modem society moves us inevitably toward cataclysmic change, and it becomes increasingly difficult to harness our instincts for self- destruction in our quest to endure. Just as we have searched for peace by malung war, we have submerged our character in order to escalate our ambition. We have permitted our scientific achievement to outstrip our moral commitment. This we have done, knowing full well that “moral commitment must be the frame and the fiber upon which the progress of a nation, and its people, must stretch, if that nation is worthy of-xpected to-capable and determined, to survive!” The powefil thrust of Apollo engines may carry us to the planets and beyond, but is insufficient to propel us through another generation of indifference to our decaying cities, our insensitiveness to the needs of the poor and disadvantaged, our rehsal to extend dignity and justice to every American citizen, of whatever hue, for over a hundred years after the Emancipation Proc- lamation! Dark clouds of hopelessness invade our bright blue sky of national pride and progress. The thunder of violence on our streets shatters the tranquillity of our communities, and the lightning of our increasing crime rate among our youth ignites a fire of re- venge in the hearts of men and women-lawyers and judges caught up in a frenzy of “halt, now!” That frenzy has caused us to adopt code words which are so compelling, for the moment, that more rational views are muted by the cacophony of “retribution now.”

0 Crime is rampant; build more jails! (In 1994-95, California spent more on jail construction than on school construction.) The national budget must be balanced; increase our defense and eliminate funds for the arts and the preservation of culture! 0 Our public schools are failing; abolish this system of free access to an education, in favor of vouchers. (Give us our freedom of choice and of association again.) 0 The people have spoken; we have a mandate. (we pursue those objectives which are supported by “Magical mathematics.”) 0 Head Start has been a proven success for the disadvantaged, but it tends to demonstrate that when given an opportunity, poor children achieve and perform with equal curiosity and pursuit of ideas as do well-to-do children . . . but hot breakfast and free lunch have nothing to do with learning. (Cut off and you discourage or destroy.)

13 e The Constitution is color-blind, even to race, sex, and gender bias. (Blind also to the special prerogatives enjoyed by white males?)

These 1990s platitudes, in my view, are the real danger to our nation as the acknowledged bastion of constitutional freedoms and justice, as an institution and the system of choice-and the venerated protector of liberty-for more than 200 years. Although “republican” forms of government have persisted in varying guises from the time of Augustus-Emperor of Rome in 27 B.C.-it was not until the American Revolution that “the consent of the governed” and “the rights of the individual” became hndamental concepts of a form of government free from arbitrary and imposed authority; despotic and dictatorial! This republican form of government embodies principles of power and rights preserved by the people in pursuit of individual liberties. The English writer William Butler Yeats, known more in literary circles than in the stormy fraternity of politics, enunciated for our time and for those deliberations the only viable premise upon which the hture of our America rests: “All states depend for their health upon a right balance between the ONE, the FEW, and the MANY!” The Founding Fathers, and most especially James Madison, understood that a system of “direct democracy” or absolute majoritarian democracy was, as Montesquieu had predicted, “doomed to failure!” Madison detailed, in the Federalist Papers, his unshakable faith in a system of checks and balances against the inherent dangers of straight majoritarian rule. He, along with John Jay, guided our nation builders to design a system of “the legislature,” “the executive,” and “the judiciary,” as institutions of this republic to avoid the tyranny of a permanent majority. These two, more than Jefferson or Alexander Hamilton, understood better than most why “absolute majoritarianism” is inimical to the interests of fair and just governance, and they convinced their peers that men of vision must preserve as an absolute of this democratized republic the unrelenting pursuit of justice, through a system of courts, which are the ultimate arbiters for their faith that the constitutional scheme, as we know and cherish it, would be preserved for centuries to come! Our friend, Thurgood Marshall, spoke of the “constitutional scheme” as if it were “articles of faith”! Are there no valid responses to the frenzied feeding upon the prejudices and fears harbored by the multitudes, as they are encouraged to abandon the foundation stones upon which this nation was founded and the principles of freedom and justice which has brought us to the altar of indisputable world leadership and unprecedented admiration of nations and peoples around the world? Even as we witnessed horrifllng decades of deaths and discontent, those who see clearly the separation of powers and, more importantly, the orderly preservation of our democratic ideals, must have an unshakable determination that the “checks must be balanced on scales of justice.” Most of you have pridefilly participated in the preservation of the integrity of our court system. Some of us were privileged to usher in that new wave of democracy, when the federal courts were called upon (commencing in the mid-thirties) to give meaning to the 13th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The late Judge Loren Miller, of the Los Angeles Municipal Court, in a monumental historical tracking of the “path of

14 preservation of the U.S. Constitution” through the federal courts, reduced his thesis to one paragraph, which demonstrates in a factual and succinct manner that the principles enunciated in Marbury v. Madison in 1803 were alive and well in 1965, although that same institution had defaulted in 1883, when it reduced the efficacy of the Constitution in the civil rights cases to an almost calamitous result, until, as Judge Miller opined: “the Court was ultimately induced to assist to settle all issues involving slavery, and in the process of doing so, it took the lives and liberties of all Negroes, free and slave under it’s judicial wing.” In the first chapter of the book entitled The Petitioners, he recites:

The Negro has been the ward of the Supreme Court of the United States for more than a hundred years. As befits a dependent, the Negro has had to solicit the intercession of the guardian when he has sought to exercise rights and privileges enjoyed by grown-up citizens as a matter of course. It is such a commonplace that Americans see nothing remarkable in this fact that Negroes have had to secure Supreme Court decisions in order to do what white Americans can do without question, such as buy or rent homes, vote in primary elections, ride on Pullman cars . . . read daily newspapers in city libraries, roll around in public parks . . . eat in bus stations, or swimsin the ocean.

In this book, it is remarked: “Here, ‘for the first time is a picture of our changing society as seen fiom the viewpoint of those who were systematically excluded from it, and who had to become petitioners to change the course of our America! This was the United States Supreme Court speaking resolutely on behalf of a segment of the populace, without a vote of Congress or the people. As we deliberate, let us be mindfbl that in issues affecting the survival of the nation, Presidents have stepped forward at critical times in our history to demonstrate great moral leadership. Abraham Lincoln perhaps more than any other Executive changed the direction of this nation. Franklin Roosevelt moved the nation from the abyss of individual disillusionment to unparalleled economic transfiguration. John F. Kennedy appealed to the young to do for this nation, and a generation responded. Moral leadership, borne of conviction, at the very top, moved this nation closer to its ideal and only the niggardly convictions of a warped mind joined with the shadow of death to destroy it, just as a few months later it would destroy the Dreamer but not the dream! Neither has died in vain, if we who have ears to hear and minds to comprehend understand why Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner and the four little girls at Sunday School in Birmingham must not have died in vain! Instead of cliches, we might borrow a phrase fiom Harrison Tweed: Lawyers pos- sess “an historical perspective that enables us to preserve problems in their full context, a nose for detecting troubles in advance, and a talent as conceptual architects to design imaginative adaptations to head it off” The Executive Branch has sometimes vacillated in the struggle to make those words etched in stone, more than cold pronouncements but a living, viable means by which justice and fieedom are preserved for our progeny and the nation’s posterity.

15 While Franklin Roosevelt exercised great leadership in moving a nation gripped in economic repression through the tumultuous days of World War 11, with his unfaltering credo that “the Presidency is above all a place of moral leadership,” E. Frederick MOKOW, White House aide during the Eisenhower Administration, observed that President Eisen- hower found great difficulty “in taking a single bold step of courageous pronouncement” during the struggle to desegregate public education, which had really begun, you know, with the Supreme Court pronouncement in Murray v. Maryland in 1934. It was only after he left that office that he denounced those who “promoted an atmosphere of lawlessness.” Governor Oval Faubus directed vituperations at the President and his administration by embarrassingly declaring in the national media:

They would just sit back, fold their hands and let somebody else reap the storm. Well, hell, it was their storm. A bunch of goddam cowards for not coming in at the beginning and saying, “This is a federal court order. We are going to have federal authorities here to see to it that it’s obeyed and enforced.”

The very essence of our constitutional structure was preserved by the unyielding edict after edict of the U.S. Supreme Court: a unanimous court found time and again for- bidden state actions in support of racial discrimination. This is the imperative for the American judiciary-to protect and preserve the one, the few or the many! This is the core component of our democratic ideal and you lawyers, judges, and justices are important to preserve it! Most of you in this room and certainly the more than 600,000 members of the ABA, marvel at the preciseness of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States-two instruments expressing the will of a people to seek man’s highest and noblest stature in all creation, for himself and his posterity. It was an expression of an ideal, giving America the framework for a new vigorous and great society. For Presi- dent Johnson was not the original architect of America’s promise. The goals were es- poused with conviction by Webster and Hancock, Clay, Jefferson and Payne, and a thousand nameless souls, who sighed a sense of fieedom 200 years before. And each generation lived in hope that if not in their time . . . if not in our time . . . there was always the next generation . . , when America’s coming of age acknowledged liberty and justice as every man’s due! Yes, each generation was convinced that the fiamework for a dynamic lasting republic, adhering to principles of democracy carefblly preserved in these “instruments of faith” though not yet achieved, was a dream capable of a reality, at the next turn. But, mere patriotism of yesteryear is not altogether sufficient to sustain the “hope” or destroy the “fear.” Suddenly America must grow up. Suddenly we must now deliver for all Americans or be delivered out of our own hands into a new des- tiny. Suddenly, America must fulfill its promises or yield its leadership. Our America now stands alone as a “great power.” But too many of its citizens know only the stark reality of poverty and racism. And they are impoverished in ways that challenge the fundamental precepts upon which our nation’s greatness must survive. They now know that denial and poverty are i.mplements of an unjust and evil society. Suddenly there is an expectant generation-and America must respond right now. The District of Columbia “black bathe,”

16 the Rodney King riots, the standoff at Waco, the increasing number of incidents which get little national attention, but play havoc in local communities, are merely indices of the discontent that smolders, but are becoming increasingly difficult to gloss over, with platitudes of idealism following the catastrophe of decades of indifference! Most of you are too young to remember him as I do, but President Lyndon B. Johnson was tormented by the failure of “the keepers of the flame”-Presidents, con- gresspeople, judges, and lawyers who he declared had failed “to seize the moment of their time” to make the ideals of the Constitution a reality. Addressing the opening session of the historic White House Conference “TO FULFILL THESE RIGHTS,” he decried with impatience the need to act after decades of indifference and even calculated delays in according justice and fairness to a major segment of the American community:

But men of reason who are honest with each other know that there is so much to be done that we should have done a long, long time ago. If only then America had hlfilled these rights so precisely enunciated in the Constitution, if only then we had demanded equality for all Americans, if only then we had offered opportunity to enjoy hll freedom, if only then we had sought justice, we might have been spared the ordeal of conscience that has brought us to this place at this hour. But we did not act. For reasons of ignorance or prejudice or hate or greed or fear, of indifference, of blindness or whatever, we waited too long-too long have we waited. And the day of reckoning has come!

Just as we met in the spring of 1964, at the call of then ABA President Lewis F. Powell and a nation heard not, we listened but heard not the clarion call of President John- son in 1966. And, of course, Bill Ide and Judge Nathaniel Jones took us to great heights of conviction last spring, again at the fountain head of our democracy: as we had met three decades before, we met as the “Summit on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Justice System.” At that time, we agreed that the face of Justice in our America was too white and too male, and we should discover strategies to overcome racial and ethnic bias in the justice system. My friend, Bill Gossett, General Counsel of Ford Motor Company and a past President of the American Bar Association, frequently quoted Charles Evans Hughes: “Success in the democratic experiment lies in the extent to which the strong are harnessed, with bits and reins and blinders, and are induced to pull the democratic cart on a straight road without running away or upsetting it.” Two irrehtable premises upon which the conference proceeded were: (1) The justice system should reflect and be sensitive to the racial-and ethnic composition of the community it serves and (2) Psychological, cultural, linguistic, economic, and information barriers combine to make the justice system hostile and forbidding to large portions of the minority population. Having witnessed the metamorphosis of the American Bar Association from its ultraconservatism of yesteryear to its emergence as the strong force demanding that the

17 poor and the disadvantaged inherit the richness of an open and just society, the protectors of those without protectors must overcome the tyranny of a selfish majority-and it is the judiciary where promises are kept and faithfinds refuge! Either the words justice and equality shall ring true for a hundred million Chica- nos, Asians, Native Americans, and blacks in America or it shall be a hollow sound of “tinkling bells’’ for millions the world over. Either America has the ability, the will, and the courage to deliver all its citizens or it will be submerged by a developing society of the Third World that will. Unless this nation is capable of conferring dignity upon all human beings, for no other reason save that dignity and self-esteem are inextricably interwoven into our “humanity” and our “creation” and must be enjoyed by human kind, by right of birth, not by accident of birth, our America will become a society that could not opt for right, because it meant justice demanded equal access to America’s advantages. And we lawyers and judges were not able to impel in a noble direction of individual freedom, with dignity! We have struggled mightily for 200 years in America to convince all Americans that the system works best when all Americans work within the system. But our rhetoric fell on deaf ears for too many years . . . it has yet to become a reality. The poor and disadvantaged of our nation realize that they were no longer the beneficiaries of the laws which were enacted to protect them. To many, the law has become “the enemy.” We respectfully suggest to you, for example, that so long as the term “legal aid” is looked upon as a char- ity-service, of less significance than full access to justice, the poor are dehumanized and denied equal dignity. An orderly society must respond. And lawyers and judges must be in the vanguard to preserve what we have, the framework for a society which best serves with the hand of a merciful and wise Creator. Every heart must embrace an unfettered access to justice, not as our brother’s keeper, but as our brother’s brother! There must be “law and order,” if you please. The law must accommodate the spirit of freedom and justice, or rage will destroy the Order! The door to the courthouse is ajar-the crack is widening. One day it will be for the poor and disadvantaged, as it has been for the affluent, for the disadvantaged who seek a level playing field, as with those who own the field, for those who believe that justice is no longer only that which is printed in statutes and juridical reporter systems. It must become a state of mind and an individual’s conscience. If we are able-if we are willing- NAY, we who love the law and have an abiding faith in it must do it! Justice will then run down the mountain and join the rivers of waters, at peace. We will have at last cawed a niche unparalleled in the history of man-an archway to justice and opportunity of every American! And the glory of our America as a servant of the people and our God!

18 I

LUNCHEON ADDRESS BY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL ELEANOR D. ACHESON

“The Importance of Eliminating Bias from Institutions of the Justice System in an Era of Challenges to Remedies for Inequality”

I am delighted to be here representing the Department of Justice and Attorney General Janet Reno at this First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts. On behalf of the Department and the Attorney General, I commend the National Center for State Courts, the State Justice Institute, and all of you here for your leadership and the substantial investment of time and resources that have been devoted by all of you to these issues. The Attorney General is confident that your continuing commitment to and leadership in these matters of critical importance to the welfare of our justice system and to all of us, citizens and non-citizens alike, who seek its help and protection, will help develop a national consensus that eliminating bias fiom our justice system is a necessary threshold step toward more available and more equal justice. I know first hand of the work of many of you in this and related matters concerning, essentially, access to fair and impartial justice: Judge Nathaniel Jones, who organized the ABA Summit on Racial and Ethnic Bias; Judge Bernice Donald, former Chair of the ABA Task Force on Minorities in the Judiciary and now Chair of the ABA Commission on Oppor- tunities for Minorities in the Profession; Mr. H. T. Smith, President of the NBA and an unflagging worker for diversity on the bench; U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, John Kelly; Judge David Ramirez, whose work on juvenile justice issues is respected and followed nationally; my fellow New Englanders, Chief Justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court, Ellen Ash Peters; Chief Justice Paul Liacos and Justice Neil Lynch of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court; Charles Ogletree of Harvard Law School; and Justice Robert Yazzi of the Supreme Court of the Navajo Nation, with whom I have met on tribal justice matters. I am impressed with number of participants representing every fbnction and constituency of the courts and the great geographic scope. This audience certainly gives one great hope. Your undertaking-developing strategies and tactics for eliminating racial and ethnic bias in the courts-is all the more laudable because issues of race and ethnicity have confounded the nation since its inception. These uniquely “American dilemmas,” to para- phrase Gunnar Myrdal, present no less a concern for our social and political systems today, even though much and material progresshas been made since the days of slavery and Jim Crow, the Diaspora and repression of Native Americans, the initially legal indenture of many Asian-American and Hispanic immigrants, and the other than first-class status and treatment experienced by so many Americans because of their color, ethnicity, culture and/or language. We and the public and private institutions of our society continue to struggle with these differences among us as a people and with the contradictions in our history and in our current experience about what in the context of race and ethnicity con-

19 stitutes equality, fairness, justice, and appropriate remedies for injustice. Indeed, as you were planning this conference, yet another and troubling chapter in our struggle with racial and ethnic difference was beginning to build-a rising reaction to a popular perception that a catalogue of pernicious affirmative action programs favoring people of color are being chosen by public authorities, by legislatures, by public college and university systems or are being imposed by other public authorities like the courts, all to the detriment of those who are not of color. While already much has been written and said about the motivations, purposes, and goals of this reaction initiative and those who lead it, and while our worst suspicions and fears are provoked by some of those leaders’ rhetoric, this anti- affirmative action movement seems not so much an abandonment of commitment to civil rights and equality, as codhion and differences of view about what equality means or should mean as a moral as well as legal matter, including what are the appropriate jurisdiction and powers of public institutions, including the courts, in attempting to achieve equality and justice for all regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, sexual orientation, and any other such difference among us. Most people in this country favor, indeed celebrate, our pluralism and diversity, favor the dismantling of institutional discrimination based on race and ethnicity, and believe that the law and the courts should protect people fiom both public and private discrimination because of race and ethnicity. Many are concerned about the continuing legitimacy of the compensatory and remedial aspects of our response to this sort of discrimination that Congress has embraced as a matter of public policy and the Supreme Court has sustained under the Constitution. And others are concerned that the dismantling of institutional discrimination and providing remedies for individual acts of discrimination are insufficientto achieve equality because they don’t, in and of themselves, integrate our public and private institutions, provide equal social, educational, and economic opportunity or do anything else to remedy the tangible and intangible disadvantages that being shut out of those institutions and fiom those opportunities has caused. What does any of this have to do with courts and the justice system? Everything. Racial and ethmc bias-indeed bias on any basis other than the credibility of witnesses, the weight of the ’probative evidence, the burdens of proof assigned, and the fair and impartial application of the law-have no place in the courts or anywhere in the justice system. Eliminating such bias and ensuring its absence is the keystone of equal justice. And eliminating bias involves not just dispensing with systems or procedures or letting go individuals with a bad attitude, but includes some affirmative steps and commitment of resources as well. First, eliminating bias fiom the courts and other aspects of the justice system is critical becaude this country and the rights and obligations of all who live here are defined by law-the Constitution and laws passed by Congress, states, and localities. Lawyers and courts and the associated institutions are the elements and systems of that structure. They are the only access to justice. If bias exists in these structures or in the operations of this system for the enforcement and protection of rights, then a corruption exists that goes to the foundation of the nation. Therefore, it is essential for the effectiveness and credibility of the entire system of government that actual and perceived bias in the legal system be addressed. Given the demographic changes relating to the racial and ethnic composition of the nation that will be occurring in the next few decades, this mission of eliminating bias

20 takes on added importance. Because this nation continues its pluralistic tradition, language and culture can themselves become obstacles to justice and to access to the institutions of justice, as well as a basis for bias. Thus, those who are stewards of our justice system, including all of us, must be energetic in devising ways to ensure that the individuals who comprise this pluralistic whole can effectively take advantage of the rights to which they are entitled. Eliminating racial and ethnic bias from court systems is, therefore, not an exercise in political correctness. It is of fbndamental and structural importance to the viability of our system of government. Second, because we have developed into a society where almost all our relationships ultimately are defined in law-all of our domestic relationships, for example, hus- bands and wives, parents and children, nontraditional families, foster parenting, and adoption; our community relationships, such as with our neighbors concerning dogs, swimming pools as attractive nuisances, and house design; our chosen commercial relationships, for example, as consumers or as parties to contracts for the purchase of goods and services and real property; our relationships with those we don’t how, such as victims of crime or of tortuous conduct; our civil rights, such as voting and speaking out- and because our other social and political institutions sometimes fail to respond to problems in these relationships or are simply overwhelmed, people bring all sorts of broad social problems to the courts for long-term fixes as well as immediate resolutions. As a result, the responsibilities thrust on and the reach of the legal system and courts are comprehensive and involve or affect one way or another literally millions of rich, poor, and middle-income individuals in this country every year. So, what was the small, decorous, and quiet courthouse of only a generation ago in county after county across the country and even in many urban areas-with judges who had time for unhurried deliberation and reflection, with a small courthouse staff, with no security issues, and little need for professional or administrative staff-are now large complexes with harried judges supervising large and specialized staffs and assuming major and difficult budget, support, and administrative functions requiring increasing and varied resources in order to provide a semblance of modem-day justice. This is a fbnction not only of the increased responsibilities being thrust on courts and the justice system as a whole as far as the nature of the problems to be solved and numbers of people to serve, but it is also a fbnction of the increasing racial and ethnic diversity of those people, a diversity not significantly reflected in those who serve lawyers, judges, court personnel. So, in the face of these challenges-which are only growing-how do and should we go about eliminating racial and ethnic bias in courts and creating equal justice? Courts should undertake the exercise of self-examination. An essential first step is for leaders of any particular court-judges and administrators, prosecutors and defenders, plaintiff and defense counsel-to convene all constituencies of the court and listen to their experiences and perceptions. This is necessary not only tq identi@ actual prejudice, discrimination, and those practices that appear discriminatory, but it is also salutary in and of itself. Effective outreach and a willingness to listen and self-examine alone bring people into the system and create a confidence in the interest, concern, and goodwill of the system.

21 Next, we must be willing to act on what bias studies say about a particular court system. We must be prepared to abolish systems, procedures, and practices that are discriminatory, have a discriminatory effect, or are perceived as discriminatory or exclusive. We must be prepared to appropriately discipline and train individuals who are engaging in discriminatory conduct, and we must be ready to work together as judges, lawyers, clerks, and litigants to redesign those aspects of our local justice system that have operated in a discriminatory, exclusionary, or otherwise unfair way. And, equally important, courts, justice systems, and those that control, manage, and fbnd them, and those that appoint or elect judges must make affirmative commitments of resources ranging fiom fhds to time and energy, not just to eliminate the outcroppings of bias, but also to make justice equally available, fair, and impartial. This essential element of eliminating bias will mean different things in different places. Probably in all jurisdictions and types of courts it will mean fbnding legal services for those who cannot afford lawyers; in some places it will mean providing child care facilities at or near the courthouse; in others, translation services; and in others, the hiring of minorities in the clerk’s office and elsewhere on the courthouse staff and the appointment of minority or women judges. We may be spending more for those without resources, but otherwise justice is available only for the wealthy few. Are these initiatives affirmative action? Certainly in part, where greater resources are being spent to relieve the disadvantages of racial and ethnic diversity and to bring those disadvantaged to the same starting position in the justice system as those of us who have had advantages of income and status. And yes, it calls for some race and ethnic consciousness in choosing among the best candidates for appointment and hiring. With these things as with so much of our effort to achieve a fair and just society, there is no ultimate right answer to the appropriateness of such initiatives under the Con- stitution or any philosophic or moral code. They are value choices for Americans to make. We in this room and those we represent in our local, state, and federal justice systems have made them; we have chosen proactive and affirmative steps because we know the cost to us all-even the most powerful among us--of a system of justice that cannot or does not respond to the least powerful. Whatever happens in the debate over affirmative action, those of us who in effect constitute our justice system-law enforcement personnel, lawyers, judges, clerks, bailiffs, prison personnel-simply cannot pull back our efforts to have that system, the most critical to our democracy, respond to, and embrace, the diversity of the country.

22 Moderator Nathaniel R. Jones, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Faculty Justice Gerald Kogan, Supreme Court of Florida Judge Karen Hunt, Superior Court Judge, Anchorage, Alaska Judge Gerald Bruce Lee, 19th Judicial Circuit, Fairfax, Virginia Dr. Russell R. Wheeler, Deputy Director, Federal Judicial Center

Sheila Gonzalez, Executive Officer of the Ventura County Superior/ Municipal Courts and President of the National Association for Court Management, introduced the moderator and panelists. As the moderator, Judge Jones expressed delight that at long last there was commitment at the state and federal levels to cleanse the serious problem of racial and ethnic bias fiom the legal system. He noted that the Sixth Circuit had adopted a resolution to create a task force to study race, ethnic, and gender bias in the district, appellate, and bankruptcy courts, as well as among the judge magistrates and court staffs. Judge Jones told the participants that in his prior role as general counsel of the NAACP, he often encountered the myth that the struggle against racial and ethnic bias began with the Montgomery bus boycott or with Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech delivered at the March on Washington in 1963. This myth failed to recognize Houstonian Jurisprudence, founded by Charles Hamilton Houston, a civil rights attorney who traveled the country in the 1930s arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment could be used as an instrument of change to eliminate discrimination and segregation. In addition to litigating, Houston educated other attorneys in this theory. Charles Hamilton Houston and Thurgood Marshall, a civil rights attorney who was later appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court, refined this concept and made it a viable strategy, but few either know about or acknowledge this historical fact. Judge Jones added that recognizing history affects the ability of people to respond to contemporary problems, including bias in the legal system. There have been voices against bias in the legal system for years, including the voices fiom the National Bar As- sociation, the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, the Hispanic National Bar Association, the Native American Bar Association, and others. Unfortunately, the voices were there, but the ears were not there on the part of those that govern the legal profession, the American Bar Association, the state bar associations, and the state and federal courts. Now the state courts are listening and responding. Judicial and bar leaders at every level are beginning to join the common cause. In March 1994, the American Bar Association joined arms with the racial and ethnic bar associations and conducted the Summit on Race and Ethmc Bias in the Legal Sys- tem. While the Summit focused on the legal system, this Conference is focusing sharply on the courts, which represent a significant part of the legal system. Because we are zeroing in on what the courts, a discrete component of the legal system, can do to address the

23 problems of race and ethnic bias, this Conference is very meaningful. Judge Jones said that the panelists for this session have the perspectives of bar leaders and judges, as well as a variety of experiences in addressing bias. Justice Kogan, appointed by the chief justice to chair Florida’s gender bias task force in 1987, told the attendees about the accomplishments of a commisSion on racial and ethnic fairness that he later established. He stressed the importance of having the commitment of the chief justice, the involvement and commitment of the bar associations, and the attention and support fiom the media, through editorials and articles, in setting up such a commission. He also emphasized the importance of the commission’s composition. He explained that having legislators and influential citizens is essential because legislators can help with appropriations and legislation. Influential citizens, such as business persons, educators, and other community leaders, lend credibility. The accomplishments of the Florida commission include:

0 Greater diversity in the membership of the judicial nominating commissions 0 Inclusion of cultural competency training at all judicial conferences 0 Development of an affirmative action plan for the judicial branch 0 Establishment of a new civil rights division in the office of the state attorney general 0 Revising the code of professional responsibility for lawyers and judicial canons of ethics that prohibit discrimination 0 Appointment by the governor of a large number of African-Americans, Hispan- ics, and women to judgeships

In summing up, Justice Kogan stated that nothing will happen to eliminate racial and ethnic bias in the judicial system unless you get out and make it happen. Judge Karen Hunt spoke on Alaska’s efforts to eliminate racial and ethnic disparity fiom criminal sentences. No judicial function in Alaska has been studied as much as criminal sentencing. Judge Hunt identified three factors that played a part in Alaska’s effort:

1. A prosecutorial policy to abolish plea bargaining 2. The creation of a determinate sentencing scheme 3. The creation of the Court of Appeals

A 1975 report found racial and ethnic disparity in criminal sentencing. Within one month of this report, the prosecutor’s office banned plea bargaining. As an added meas- ure, the prosecutors ceased offering recommended sentences at sentencing hearings. These policies put sentencing fully within the discretion of the court. Mer these policies were instituted, criminal sentences were studied again. Sentences rendered one year before and one year after (1974 to 1976) the “no plea bargaining policy” were examined. This research found no racial disparity for violent and major crimes. For theft and drugs, however, there was racial disparity, but the identity of the judge was the variable that was most predictive of the sentence. A later study of criminal sentences for the years 1975 to 1977 found that racial disparities disappeared, except for African-American and Native Alaskan defendants in a limited number of heroin cases.

24 In 1980, the Alaska legislature revised the criminal code, including the presumptive sentencing scheme. Unlike the federal sentencing guidelines, the Alaska presumptive sentencing scheme renders the same sentence to all defendants with the same offense and similar criminal history. There are 27 statutory aggravators and 17 statutory mitigators that are applicable to the offense and to the offender. The presumptive sentencing scheme applies only to repeat offenders; however, most defendants are first-time defendants. In 1969, the Alaska Supreme Court started reviewing criminal sentences. Both the state and the defendant had the right to have a criminal sentence reviewed. Between 1969 and 1975, there were few appeals. Between 1975 and 1979, the number of appeals increased each year. In 1978, the Alaska Supreme Court asked the legislature to create an appellate court to hear criminal sentencing appeals. The Court of Appeals was created in 1980, with jurisdiction limited to reviewing criminal sentences. The Court of Appeals has made constant readjustments to sentencing practices through its interpretations of statutory aggravators and mitigators. The Court of Appeals has also provided guidance for sentencing first-time offenders because the presumptive sentencing scheme does not apply to them. First-time offenders must receive a sentence that is more favorable than a repeat offender would receive under the presumptive guideline, except in exceptionally rare cases. Finally, the court has established a range of appropriate sentences for first offenders. In closing, Judge Hunt said that the interplay of these three factors led to attention directed toward ethnic bias and to the dramatic reduction and virtual elimination of racial and ethnic bias in criminal sentencing in Alaska. Judge Lee spoke about the town meetings conducted by the courts of Fairfax County, Virginia. Fairfax County, a northern Virginia suburb of Washington, D. C., has approximately 900,000 people, 10 to 15 percent of which are people of color. The residents have a high education level, and the county is one of the most affluent counties in the nation. The county has about 30 judges. The Circuit Court for Fairfax County was a pilot site for the Trial Court Performance Standards (TCPS), so the judges there have an appreciation of access and fairness that comes from applying the TCPS measures. In the wake of the civil unrest in several cities after the announcement of the verdict in the People v. Powell case, the chief judge wanted to know if the community’s perception of the Fairfm County courts was unfavorable and, if so, what could be done to change that perception. Town meetings were planned by the county’s criminal justice planning committee, which includes law enforcement, corrections, the two levels of courts, and the magistrates. The town hall meetings did not have a budget. They were financed by each component of the justice system with in-kind contributions, primarily of staff. Through the town meetings, the courts were able to determine community perceptions of the court. The planning group identified community groups and worked with community representatives to conduct six town hall meetings at which the justice and court systems were explained, and the community had a chance to voice their opinion about the court. One meeting was conducted in Spanish, and another meeting was conducted in Asian languages. In addition to the hearings, a survey was conducted of the county’s jail inmates. The benefits of the town meetings include judges establishing relationships with community organizations; judges receiving information about they way the public is

A treated at the counters; and information that indicates where training is needed. As a result of the information gathered at these town hall meetings, multilingual signs have been posted in the court, dockets for traffic court have been changed so that they no longer arrange cases by the surname of the arresting police officer; and the court has a larger, better, and more diverse pool of people from which to recruit. Underrepresentation of people of color on juries was improved by using the driver’s license list as an additional source list. As a result of the improvements in jury administration, the length ofjury service has decreased from eight weeks to four weeks. Seven new magistrates have been hired from the new recruitment pool. The new magistrates include African-Americans, Hispan- ics, and a Southeast Asian. Six months after the six town hall meetings, a follow-up meeting was held. At this meeting, each of the components in the justice system showcased the changes that they had undertaken as a result of the community input. In closing, Judge Lee said that no one court could do everything, but every court could do something. Town hall meetings are a way for judges to come out from behind the bench, to listen to the community in a nonthreatening environment, and to receive suggestions. He also encouraged the participants to incorporate town hall meetings into their programs. Russell Wheeler said that four or five of the 13 federal circuits have active task forces examining racial and ethnic fairness. The first report of a federal race and ethnic fairness task force will be released a few weeks after the Conference. Six or seven task forces are in the initial stages of formation. It is less clear what two circuits are doing. In all the circuits except one, the task force reports to the circuit’s judicial council, which is composed of all of the circuit’s judges. Racial and ethnic bias is a good area for cooperation between the state and federal systems, especially in terms of research. First, the local legal culture is the same. Second, the worHorce demographics for the federal and state courts in any area are the same. Finally, in terms of perception, there is no difference between the two systems because most lay people do not distinguish between them. Alaska is an example of a joint state- federal effort.

26 The state teams began their work before they arrived at the Conference by preparing a bibliography of the documents, reports, articles, and other literature that identified or exemplified actual or perceived racial or ethnic bias problems in their states, as well as any literature on efforts to address bias. The team members were also to familiarize themselves with the literature. Since these bibliographies are a good resource on the topic of racial and ethnic bias, they are included in these Conference Proceedings. The state teams worked in facilitated groups. The project staff provided each state team facilitator with the findings from a preconference survey of all of the states. The state teams were asked to identifjl the existing conditions within their court system, to develop and prioritize the goals of the team, and to identifjl the factors that could help or hinder goal achievement. Taking these factors into consideration, state teams were asked to develop an action plan to help overcome barriers and achieve goals. The state teams were fiee to apply the six principles and the new paradigm enunciated by Dr. Robert C. Henderson in the opening session, ideas provided by Justice Or- tique or Assistant Attorney General Acheson, information provided at the plenary and concurrent sessions or through informal networking, such as the women of color discussion group, or from the public participants. Judge McBeth described the role of the state team members in her opening remarks. At the conclusion of the Conference, each team presented summaries of their plans to all the other Conference participants. These summaries are reported in the section “Conference Update and Where Do We Go From Here?”

27 PUBLIC PARTICIPANTS AND THE TOWN HALL FORUMS

The Conference enhanced the work of many national bench and bar associations by getting their endorsements and getting their representatives to attend and, in some cases, to serve as faculty. These organizations include the Hispanic National Bar Associa- tion, the Judicial Council of the National Bar Association, the National American Indian Court Judges ’Association, the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, the Na- tional Bar Association, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the National Judicial College, the American Bar Association and its Commission on Oppor- tunities for Minorities in the Profession, and the National Conference of Special Court Judges. Instead of preparing a state plan, the representatives of these groups and other participants who were not members of any state team took part in three town hall forums: “Racism and Justice: Perceptions and Realities,” “Juveniles in the Justice System,” and “Achieving Bias-Free Criminal Proceedings and Laws.” The reports fiom the three town halls were presented to the general body and identified issues that deserve further research and attention.

Racism and Justice: Perceptions and Realities

Moderator Judge David Rothman, Superior Court Santa Monica, California

Faculty Natsu Saito Jenga, Georgia Supreme Court Commission on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Court System Lennox Hinds, Professor of Law, Chair, Administration of Justice Program Rutgers University H. T. Smith, President, National Bar Association

The surveys of perceptions of the judicial system conducted by state court commissions uniformly find that close to 100 percent of judges perceive that their court system is fiee fiom bias and that the majority of law students perceive that bias exists. The surveys also find that the percentage of lawyers of color who perceive bias in the court system nearly matches the percentage of lawyers not of color who do not perceive bias in the court system. This perception of bias on the part of people of color has historical roots. The courts took an active part in defining the legal status and place in society for people of color. Further, nationwide, justice has been applied unevenly. For example, of the 455 people executed for rape, 405 of them have been African-Americans. The perception of

28 bias in the judicial system will persist for as long as the faces of the judicial work force do not reflect the diversity of the greater community. It should not be assumed that only people who are not of color engage in biased behavior. Since people of color are a minority on the bench and in the judicial work force, you can expect some minorities to adopt the values and to emulate the behavior of the majority, if for no other reason than mere survival. The often-heard statement that the courts merely reflect the norms (including racism) of the larger society and that the problem should therefore be addressed outside of the court was not acceptable to the attendees. Since the courts were instrumental in developing the society that we have today, they are a logical place to address bias. Furthermore, since a fbndamental principle of our society is that we are a nation of laws, the courts have to be examined for the good of the society. An international participant remarked that he has been amazed at the absolute centrality of racism to the lives and well-being of people of color and the absolute invisi- bility or denial of the issue on the part of white people. As a white judge he finds himself explaining racism to other white judges. A study in Ontario found that the most robust variable impacting on a judge’s awareness of bias is the number of years a judge has been on the bench on the provincial court. The provincial court has converted to a nonelected system of judicial selections that could be described as similar to the American merit selection system. Under the new system, the number of judges who are women and people of color has risen. The moderator noted that awareness is important. Before he was appointed to a gender bias commission, he had never been aware of any gender-biased conduct in his courtroom. Shortly after becoming involved with the gender bias commission, he suddenly became aware of instances of biased conduct. One panelist likened this phenomena to the increased awareness a purchaser of a new car has for other cars of the same make and model. Socializing between people of color and people not of color is one way for the different communities to get to know each other and to become aware of biased conduct and the daily indignities that confiont people of color. This experience, as well as experience re-created in the classroom, is a valuable educational tool.

29 Juweoriles in the Justice System

Moderator Judge David Gray Ross, Deputy Director, Deputy Director Office of Child Support Enforcement, Department of Health and Human Services

Faculty Judge David Ramirez, Juvenile Court, Denver, Colorado Gerald Richard 11, Chairman, Arizona Committee on Minorities Paulette Brown, Esq., Vice Chair of the American Bar Association Council on Racial and Ethnic Justice and Women of Color Liaison to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals Task Force on Equal Treatment in the Courts Ada Pecos Melton, Executive Director, American Indian Development Associates

Judge Ross recounted his court’s history of abolishing the family court and system of magistrates, 1 closing several family court facilities throughout the county, moving juvenile cases to the court of general jurisdiction, and motivating judges to hear the juvenile and other family cases. There is almost a one-to-one correlation between the amount of uncollected child support and the amount of funds paid in Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). Another correlation has been established between the failure to pay child support and juvenile delinquency. The courts have to attend to gender bias on the part of some judges that is a residue of the maternal preference doctrine. Judge Ramirez stated that one of the most pressing issues is the move to abolish juvenile courts. The trend of addressing gang violence by charging juveniles as adults and sentencing them as mini-adults is a factor contributing to the demise of juvenile courts. Other issues that must be addressed are the overrepresentation of minorities, competent staff, and treatment. Paulette Brown stated that minorities are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. One survey of all New Jersey detention facilities found that 92 percent of detain- ees were people of color. Turning to the question of how women of color are affected by the juvenile justice system, Ms. Brown noted that there are no detention or residential facilities for adjudicated female juveniles in New Jersey, a problem that is receiving little attention. Adjudi- cated female juveniles are housed in the same physical facility that was constructed for male juveniles who have been adjudicated for the most serious crimes. The males and females in this facility have set up a communication mechanism, so these males have some influence on the females. In addition, the female offenders are not provided encourage- ment to succeed. They are encouraged only not to get pregnant. Ms. Brown is working with the Subcommittee Chair of the New Jersey Committee on Minority Concerns for ways to address this problem. Ada Melton, a member of the Jemez Pueblo, which is located about 50 miles from Albuquerque, said that a problem for indigenous people is their inability to access pro-

30 r-

grams and hnding fiom the state. Funding for indigenous juveniles is very low in all states. Indian children are denied services merely because the offense occurred on Indian land. Remedies to jurisdictional conflicts are necessary. For indigenous communities located in rural areas, the hll range of service options is not available, just the options at either extreme. Thus, the approach is either outpatient services or institutionalization. The lack of effective options early in the life of a juvenile results in the juvenile committing an offense for which he or she is institutionalized. This lack of options is one reason people of color are overrepresented in juvenile institutions. The dominate society needs to listen to culturally different people when they talk about their juvenile justice needs. Community-based services and alternatives are necessary in indigenous communities because the children are most comfortable within their own communities. Until children stop being last in the hnding pool and in legislative priorities, juvenile delinquency will continue. Gerald Richard discussed gangs in the juvenile justice system. Not all gang members are juveniles. A study in Arizona found that 83 percent of the gang members in Ari- zona are adults and that 65 percent of the gang members in Phoenix are adults. He discussed the history of gangs in the United States and the motivation for juveniles to join and belong to gangs. Juveniles have different motivations for joining gangs. For example, a gang can satis@ their need for money, turf, territory, pride, loyalty, anti- authoritarianism, cult activity, satanic activity, and toughness. Females are participating in gangs at an increasing rate. Gangs are growing in Indian Country. Some juveniles have asked their tribal elders to teach them their traditional culture because knowledge of their traditional culture would fill needs that they were seeking to hlfill through gang activity. Judges should be aware that there are several multicultural gang prevention and intervention programs geared at rehabilitating juveniles. Judges and court staff need to be aware of gang culture. Uniform criteria for identifylng gang members is necessary so that everyone in the justice and law enforcement system is talking about the same thing when they say “gang.” This will help to cut down on mischaracterization of juveniles. Mr. Richard also encouraged the attendees to make sure that biased legislation is not enacted. As an example, he cited the disparities in the treatment of the use of a weapon in committing a delinquent act and manufacturing and discharging pipe bombs. Pipe bomb activity is more often engaged in by juveniles who are not of color. Public education about the juvenile justice system for juveniles and their families is also important. Maricopa County has a videotape that orients juveniles to the juvenile justice process, informs juveniles of their rights, and talks about proper courtroom de- meanor. These videotapes are available in Spanish and Vietnamese, as well as in English, and can be obtained at the local videotape rental stores. The panelists engaged in an exchange with the attendees about the resources that are available fiom the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (hnds for projects that address the overrepresentation of juveniles of color), the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (judicial training), the juvenile justice committee of the American Bar Association, the Annie B. Casey Foundation (to reduce the number of juveniles in facilities), and the Black Community’Crusade for Children project of the Chil- dren’s Defense Fund (Afiican-American judges).

31 Judge Ross closed by stating that this is an exciting time. He added that based upon his own experience, he recommended that all judges get out of the courthouse and visit the high schools and see the wonderfid things that the kids are doing. This experience will help judges keep a proper perspective on juveniles.

Achieving Bias-Free Criminal Proceedings and Laws

Moderator Judge Candace D. Cooper, Superior Court for Los Angeles County

Faculty Rose Ochi, Associate Director, Office of National Drug Control Policy Chief Judge Garrett Penn, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Rudolph A. Diu, Rio Hondo Municipal Court, President, California Judges’ Association Leo Romero, Dean, University of New Mexico Law School

The focus of this session was on the policy questions raised by bias in criminal laws and procedure. Earlier in the Conference, a concurrent session focused on bias in the decision points in the criminal justice process, fiom incidenthon-incident to parole. Judge Cooper noted that in preparing for this session, she found sources fiom as far back as the 1930s that discussed the same bias issues that are being discussed today and that used the same language of inclusion and exclusion as being used today. Chief Judge Penn opened by stating that he believed that the general public does not realize how racial and ethnic bias impacts the justice system. One example of the way race impacts the justice system is the federal sentencing guidelines. Since 1986, the sentencing guidelines have imposed a degree of uniformity in sentencing throughout the country. Under the sentencing guidelines, a base sentence is first determined. Then the sentence is affected by the defendant’s criminal history. Based on the defendant’s criminal history, the case will be set in one of six grades to determine which sentence within the range of possible sentences will be used for this case. The determination of the sentence may be fbrther affected if the defendant has been convicted of a sentence that caries a mandatory minimum. If so, the mandatory minimum must be adhered to. Finally, a sentence of incarceration will be served, since parole has been abolished in the federal system. One glaring disparity in sentencing is for possession with the intent to distribute crack cocaine. The mandatory minimum sentence for possession with intent to distribute five grams or more of crack cocaine is five years of incarceration. In contrast, it takes 500 grams of cocaine in powder form to achieve the sentence. To illustrate his point that sentences under the guidelines for crack cocaine are disproportionate when compared to powdered cocaine and when compared to the harm to society, Judge Penn offered two cases.

32 The first case involved Karen, an 18-year-old resident of New York. She comes from a poor community and was naive. A drug dealer offered Karen $300, plus train fare, to transport a package to the District of Columbia. She suspected but was not told that the package contained illegal drugs. In fact, the suitcase contained 100 grams of cocaine in crack form. As the train pulled into Union Station, officers assigned to a drug interdiction task force approached her and introduced themselves. When they asked her if she was carrying drugs, she said no. When they asked her if the suitcase in the overhead rack over her seat was hers, she said yes. They next requested and received permission fiom Karen to search the suitcase. She was arrested when the drugs were discovered. Karen was seated in the center of the train car, but the officers did not question everyone in that train car. Karen was selected for questioning because she was one of the few African- Americans on the train. Since Karen was charged with carrying 100 grams of crack cocaine, she faced a mandatory minimum sentence of ten years in prison with no parole, notwithstanding that the crime was her first offense. If Karen had been charged with possession of powder cocaine, the court would have had the discretion to place her on probation, if that were appropriate. The second case involved Tom, an attorney who practiced before the Federal Communications Commission. Tom’s use of cocaine affected his performance as an attorney and his judgment. Over a period of three or four years, he had engaged in behavior such as submitting false documents to the FCC, failing to pursue a client’s case and to cover his ineffectiveness as counsel, and forging an administrative law judge’s signature on an FCC order that purported to grant his client the right to build a radio tower. This for- gery was discovered, and Tom was convicted of six charges. Tom had been convicted in four other states. The maximum sentence that the court could impose in this case was 37 months. Judge Penn indicated that given the degree of willfkl involvement and the criminal history of each of these defendants, the sentence in the drug case was out of proportion. Judge Penn stated that there is a perception that there are great discrepancies in the treatment of different persons in the criminal justice system based upon the type of illegal drug they use and whether they are approached by law enforcement. Judge Penn said that he was not optimistic that this problem would be corrected by the political process since Congress is reluctant to do anything that will make it look soft on crime. He added that he was confident that it will be a long time before the disparity between the sentencing for the possession of powder and crack cocaine is abolished. Judge Diaz stated that while it is important to document bias in the judicial system, it is just as important to give credence to your perceptions and instincts that tell you when racial and ethnic bias is present. He predicted that the new California “three strikes and you are out” statute will show its impact on people of color. He estimated that over 150,000 people in Los Angeles already have two strikes against them. Since most inmates are incarcerated on drug-related charges, he offered the Los Angeles Drug Court program as one way to promote the knowledge that drug addiction is treatable. However, the statistics show that people of color are not placed in the drug court program at a rate corresponding to their rate of eligibility. For example, 33 percent of African-Americans are eligible for entry into the drug court program, but only 17 percent of those that enter the drug court program are Afiican-American.

A Another area needing attention is the laws defining eligibility criteria. Judge Diu closed by stating that he was confident that the goal to eliminate bias can be achieved if the participants have the courage and commitment to do it. Dean Leo Romero said that some of the areas where racial and ethnic bias creeps into the criminal justice process are with the police, prosecutors, and juries. He added that an effort must be made to ensure the impartiality of jurors. One problem is that defense attorneys feel that judges are reluctant to allow them to exercise for cause strikes to re- move biased jurors. Bias comes into the process through the prosecutor's office by charging minorities with greater offenses and in plea bargaining decisions. Uniformity and guidelines are needed to correct this bias. Public defenders are overworked and underfunded. Rose Ochi presented a policy perspective on drug law enforcement and case processing. Starting in 1982, bias towards minorities in the justice system and the judicial system has been documented by officially convened task forces and commissions, but this bias continues. Two major criminal justice policies that have backfired are the just desserts and the mandatory minimum sentences laws. Judge Cooper closed the session by stating that that she found it incredible that it is necessary to document the existence of bias to the extent that it has been documented by the federal and state task forces and commissions. She noted that a precedence in the legal system for not requiring such a rigorous standard of evidence is found in capital cases, where circumstantial evidence is sufficient to convict. Judge Cooper added that the courts have a unique role in eliminating racial and ethnic bias since fairness and justice is at the heart of the court system.

34 Establishing and Operating a Commission or Task Force to Study Bias in the Coupts

Moderator Justice Charles Z. Smith, Cochair, Washington State Supreme Court Minority and Justice Commission

Faculty George Logan 111, Project Director, Arizona Committee on Minorities Shirley Mark, Former Director, Massachusetts Supreme Court Commission to Study Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts Arline Tyler, Program Manager, Advisory Committee on RaceEthnic Bias in the Courts, Judicial Council of California Judge William W. Baker, Court of Appeals, Division One, Washington State

Getting Started The panel stated that the conference participants are responsible for taking the action necessary to establish a commission and that one of the ways to accomplish this is to get others to help in this endeavor. The support of the chief justice is critical. The attendees will encounter apathy, indifference, and denial in their states. Resistance is difficult to overcome, but it can be overcome with information, persistence, and knowledge. One panelist found that demonstrating the underrepresentation of minorities in the judiciary is an easy yet convincing way to show people that a problem exists.

Gender, Women of Color, and Race and Ethnicity The panel discussed how the gender bias task forces in some states did not have the time and resources to focus on issues of women of color and supported the establishment of a racial bias commission that would give women of color a particular place and also investigate racial and ethnic issues generally. While race and ethnic bias commissions have been established in several states, they generally have not focused on issues affecting women of color. The Moderator gave a historical perspective stating that while at one time there may have been a potential competition between gender and race and ethnic commissions for resources, this is no longer true. The gender movement has also been viewed by some as a white woman’s movement that excluded and overlooked the bias against women of color. There was some sentiment that the differences between the two issues have also presented some implementation problems. Some panelists and attendees supported having separate gender and racial and ethnic commissions in spite of the overlap in issues because

35 one commission can only do so much and because each commission has a different ultimate direction. In Massachusetts, the commission terminated upon issuance of the final report. Implementation is the responsibility of the established structures. Washington State has a new ongoing commission. California has a post-commission body, a standing advisory committee that is examining access in its broadest sense, including implementation of gender task force recommendations, sexual orientation, and disability issues.

Early Planning Is Critical The panelists all agreed that another factor critical to the success of a commission is early planning to resolve or to develop recommendations about such questions such as the age, racial and ethnic representation on the committee, the issues the commission will address, the structure of the commission and of its leadership, hnding, and staffing. The lack of early planning may result in a dyshnctional commission with no clear mandate.

Group Dynamics The committee members as a group should take cultural sensitivity or diversity training. Do not assume that because the group is racially and ethnically diverse and interested in the topic that they will not have problems in understanding and communicating. This training is also a good trust- and team-building exercise.

The Approach to the Problem All of the panelists were fiom states that approached the issues with preliminary research, empirical research, pilot projects, and final recommendations. The panelists emphasized the need for public hearings and focus groups. The anecdotal experience fiom public hearings helped prioritize the research and proactive pilot projects, humanize the empirical data that is collected later, and generate considerable public support for the commissions. Valid research, however, cannot be conducted by public hearings alone.

Researching the Existence, Extent, adEffects of Racial and Ethnic Bias in the CouPOS

Moderator Judge Theodore Z. Davis, Immediate Past Chair, New Jersey Commission on Minority Concerns

Faculty Judge Gerald Bruce Lee, Fairfax County Circuit Court, Virginia Dr. Keith 0. Boyum, California State University at Fullerton Dr. Molly Johnson, Researcher, Federal Judicial Center

36 Be Prepared for Criticism The judicial leadership and the court should prepare for the results of the self- examination and for public criticism to avoid public embarrassment once findings have been released. The court should use the expertise of its media relations office. The public and media must be educated to understand that the court’s willingness to engage in the self-examination shows its concern about the quality of justice and its responsiveness to the community. Rather than viewing the media as a bogeyman, realize that it can help the court get its story out to a greater audience.

How Extensive Should the Research Effort Be? If there is a deep, broad consensus among judicial leaders of what is needed, an approach with quicker implementation and less detailed study would be possible. If the consensus is shallow and fragile, more detailed research would be necessary. If there is absolutely no consensus or antipathy toward the study, the research will be attacked, so extensive research would be necessary.

Relying on Existing Research from Other States or Collaborating with Other States The panel discouraged states from relying on existing research from other states because no court system is identical to the courts of another state on race or other issues. Nor is it methodologically sound to use the research from another state. An attendee from a geographically large upper mid-western state spoke about the possibility of conducting research with an adjacent state since the populations of the two states are demographically similar. This novel approach would not be the same as relying on another state’s completed study.

The Researcher To turn the policy questions into research questions, a researcher who is familiar with courts and race and ethc bias issues is needed. Involve the researcher as early as possible. Consider whether hiring a staff researcher is more advantageous from a budget- ary point of view than hiring a consultant. In building the candidate pool, use your net- works, consult the dean of the social science department at the universities, and use the resources of and in the minority communities. During the interview process, weed out individuals with their own political agenda. Define with the researcher what the product will be and what the researcher’s relationship to the product will be.

Establish Review Mechanisms The commission.must not delegate the entire process to a researcher. To avoid criticism, the committee should subject the research to the type of peer review that is used in the academic community. The peer review can be structured in various ways ranging from informal peer. review by a committee member with the appropriate expertise to a formal peer review structure. The feedback should be given all along the way, not just on the findings. Many states have a mix of formal and informal peer reviews. Some task forces use university political science department professors as well as specialized survey institutes to review their survey instruments. Be sure to budget for consultants to review the final products.

37 Choosing the Research Methods Each research method gathers a different type of information-quantitative, fie- quency prevalence type of information, or detailed anecdotal information. Using a variety of research methods is advisable so that you can get a feel for what the problems are about.

The Fairfax County Experience The trial courts of Fairfax County, Virginia, did not wait for the state to take action; they conducted six different town forums in various communities. Some of the town forums were conducted in other languages. The law enforcement and judicial systems were explained and a mechanism was established to either take complaints or refer them to the appropriate entity. Six months later, a follow-up meeting was held to report to the community the specific changes that had resulted fiom the hearings. In a discussion about whether this method of collecting data met social science standards, some saw the Fairfax County experience as a means to frame and form the questions and as a means for getting consensus among the stake-holders. Apparently, the consensus was strong that there were problems, and the Fairfax County courts were able to move more directly to action plans without much fbrther research.

The Need for Evaluation Without monitoring and evaluation, a court will not know whether it is doing better or worse, or whether there is no change at all. Evaluation is important and should be recommended by the commission. Since evaluation is an ongoing process, the interim and final reports should include the benchmarks. Some of the ways of monitoring include using an in-house researcher, hiring an external consultant, making it a routine administrative task, and forming a review committee. Here, as in the initial study, research provides a mechanism to ensure that the recommendations are being attended to.

The Court as Employer: Eliminating Bias in Recruitment and Employment

Moderator Judge Benjamin Aranda 111, South Bay Judicial District, California

Faculty Carmen Flores, Aflirmative Action Officer, New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts Frederick Ohlrich, Court Administrator, Los Angeles Municipal Court Maurice White, Policy Division, Administrative Office of the U. S. Courts

38 Judicial Leadership Equal access to the courts includes equal access to the court as employer. Im- proved access to the court’s workforce is not an accident. The judges must set the tone and make sure that the staff‘ is carrying through the vision of ensuring access. If the judges make it clear that they are going to have a diverse workforce in court, they have it. It re- flects poorly upon the judges if the court’s workforce is not diverse.

New Jersey Outreach The minority communities were not aware of the court as an employer. The court had to systematically reach out to the minority communities through their bar associations, job listings, and the media. Resume banks of interested minority candidates were developed, leading to an increased number of applicants for each job and a better pool of qualified candidates.

Training in Los Angeles Public confidence in the courts demands training. Although essential, training is always cut at times of scarce resources. The training should be broad, not just “diversity” training (for example, team building, Myers-Briggs test). Different types of training help the workforce to understand differences and the different ways people tackle problems. New employees take a five-day orientation program. All employees must take the full program in order to gain an appreciation of all court operations.

Training in New Jersey New Jersey mandates one-day training on understanding differences (developed by the Administrative Office of the Court’s training unit) for all 10,000 court employees and judges. They have specialized training on African-American, Hispanic, and Asian cultures, and the affirmative action and equal employment opportunity programs are explained. As people became aware of their rights, they availed themselves of formal and informal discrimination complaint procedures. Not all of the complaints were from minorities; some were from white males. The rise in complaints was viewed as legitimate since it showed that people were not afraid to come forward and that a mechanism had been established to resolve the complaints, which will decline over time. Complaints make managers more aware.

Incorporating Diversity in Work Life Do not make diversity “a thing”-make it part of your court’s culture, of your way of doing business, and of living. Court newsletters should have articles on diversity cele- brations held to celebrate various ethnicities. Look around and examine the signs and symbols and language of your organization and how people operate. Is there self- segregation? Cross-assignments should be examined. NCSC’s Trial Court Performance Standards give 75 ways to assess how you are doing in the Standard areas. Use tools like the diversity profile self-assessment for managers.

39 “We need to flnd ways to make certain we bring our employees together. When a customer who doesn’t know very much about what we do or how we do it enters a courthouse, he or she expects to flnd Justice. if that customer immediately sees signs of dlfferent ‘treatment, possible bias, or even Injustice (for example, employees of one ethnic group all silting in one section of the office, or a sign that says ’if you don’t speak English, you must bring an interpreter with you’), the perceplion conveyed wlli be difficult to overcome.” Frederlck K. Ohirich

The Federal Court Experience The federal judicial workforce has about 30,000 employees. In 1966, the federal courts adopted policy to comply with the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Act. Under the federal policy, there is heavy reliance on dispute resolution. Title VI1 does not apply to federal court employees since court employees do not have civil service status. In 1979, the judicial conference adopted a voluntary program giving employees the right to an administrative procedure culminating with an appearance before the chief judge of the court. The chief judge and the EEO coordinator make the plan work. The federal EEO and personnel systems are decentralized. For example, federal law clerks are not recruited nationally. More advertisement is encouraged. Minorities and women do not always know the benefits oflbeing a law clerk and so do not apply in very high numbers. The emphasis is on recruitment efforts. The Policy Division examines the demographics of the local population around the courts and assist the court in increasing the diversity of the workforce. The EEO coordinator at the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts does not have enforcement power. All vacancies are advertised. The plan covers new employees, including the law clerk and secretary of a new federal appointee.

“Discrimination and prejudice are anti-compelitive and, therefore, un-Amerlcan.” Maurfce White

Under .the model plan that is adopted by each court, an employee files a complaint with the EEO coordinator within 15 days. The EEO coordinator reviews the claim, conducts an investigation, and makes a decisiodrecommendation within 20 days. Either party can appeal to the chief judge. The final decision lies with the chief judge, with no hrther right to appeal. The chief judge gives a decision within 45 days if no hearing was held and with 30 days if there was a hearing.

40 Institutionalizing Change: Translating Findings and Recommendations into Sustained Implementation

Moderator Yolande Marlow, Project Director, New Jersey Supreme Court Commission on Minority Concerns

Faculty Judge Lewis Douglass, Chair, Franklin H. Williams Judicial Commission on Minorities, New York Edna Wells Handy, Former Director, New York Commission on Minorities Vicki Toyohara, Executive Director, Washington Minority and Justice Commission

Different Approaches to the Post-Recommendation Stage The major theme of this session was that implementation is ongoing and must be considered even before a task force is formed. It is not necessary to wait for the final report to start implementation. The three states represented at this session have different approaches to the post-recommendation stage. New York has a permanent task force, with the same name as its first task force. It conducts research of the first impression, monitors compliance, and serves as a complaint or grievance mechanism. New Jersey has established a commission that tracks and monitors implementation of the 63 recommendations of its first commission. Washington State’s commission was built on the recommendations of the state’s first commission. Judge Douglass, Chair of the second New York commission, views the court system as a complex that has many issues competing for the attention of the leadership. The role of the commission is, therefore, to maintain a level of concern about racial and ethnic bias in the court system. He does not suggest that these activities institutionalize change, but that they allow you to do something now. By getting others involved in these activities, you develop support, whch will allow you to engage in other activities. Immediate results should not be expected. Judge Douglass does not suggest that in two years things will improve to the extent that anyone will be able to objectively say that the system is more fair than it was. Washington State’s initial task force was created by the state legislature. A permanent supreme court commission was established by judicial order, with a five-year sunset provision. The permanent commission took the task force recommendations, categorized them into four types, and formed four subcommittees, each having jurisdiction over one area: education, workforce diversity, research, and bar liaison. The permanent commission is not a monitoring commission, but a working commission. The permanent commission develops and reviews a yearly business plan.

41 Diversity on the Commission Is Important A diverse commission and a diverse support staff are critical because representation is one way of increasing the number of stake-holders in the success of the commission. One panelist from New York viewed diversity as critical, but said it was still important to balance representation with the practicalities of keeping the size of the commission manageable. In Washington State, the 22 slots provided for in the judicial order that establishes the commission is insufficient, so a “technical support group” of 34 additional, de facto members has been formed. While commissioners may belong to organizations, no commissioner is a representative of any entity. The factors that are considered are race, ethnicity, gender, geography, court level, and court management. Diversity also gives the commission access to a variety of minority communities, thus providing different perspectives and information. For example, while most minority groups are concerned with inclusion, one commission learned that for the Native Ameri- can nations adjacent to its state, the major issue is sovereignty.

Four Initiatives Four initiatives were presented that can be undertaken even if the court system has not established a commission. Judge Douglass’s objective in presenting this information was to make the point that the focus should not be entirely upon the establishment of a commission. He also indicated that people generate enthusiasm so long as they are doing something and that when they are not, they become discouraged. Involving others in these immediate measures will build alliances with those who will support you in the establishment of the commission. The first suggestion was a mentoring program, in which the mentor is an established nonminority lawyer and the protege is a minority attorney that will give minority lawyers access to decision makers, those within the system, and networking opportunities. The mentors become concerned with diversity because it is no longer an abstract concept since they are concerned about their proteges’ careers. The second method exposes nonminority judges and attorneys to minorities in the profession by bringing minority lawyers together in places such as the bar association office and the supreme court rotunda. When the nonminority judges and attorneys see that there are so many minority attorneys in the community, they will begin to focus on diversity by asking themselves why these lawyers are not in their court or office and why there are so few minority lawyers in certain institutions. The third suggestion is to have gatherings of minority persons, who may or may not be attorneys, who are engaged in positive activities to combat the effects upon judges of seeing a steady stream of minority defendants. Court employees of color can bring their children to court. Activities for school-aged children, such as debate competitions and mock trials, should be conducted in the court building. The last suggested method was to conduct a survey. Surveys have an indirect way of generating support by making the respondent focus on the issue and research the answer.

42 Effectiveness of the Commissions and the Four Initiatives One attendee questioned the effectiveness of these options. The response was that some of the recommendations of the first commission were so costly to implement (for example, build more small-claims courts) that it would take the lifetime of more than one commission to accomplish. They should not be discouraged if a measurable improvement cannot be made.

Public Hearings Have Several Functions The value of conducting public hearings was a theme of all three presenters. The hearings serve several functions. First, they provide information. Second, they validate the existence and the work of the commission, especially when they are conducted early in the process. Third, public hearings tend to increase the number of stake-holders. Many commissioners were astonished at the perception that the justice -system is biased and were thus converted into champions. In holding periodic public hearings, a commission will always learn something. Once issues come to light, the commission can craft a solution. The commission also has annual meetings with the chief judge and periodic meetings with the chief administrative judge. The commission serves as a mechanism for minority employees and the minority bar associations to express their concerns, to meet and clear the air, and to channel rage con- structively.

Staying Vigilant Against Bias: Informal Feedback, Formal Grievance Procedures, and Ethics

Moderator Dolly Gee, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association

Faculty Judge Carl Character, Cochair, Commission on Racial and Ethnic Fairness, Ohio (Planning Committee) Judge Ken Kawaichi, Superior Court, Oakland, California Justice Yvonne Lewis, Supreme Court, Kings County, New York

This session examined formal and informal mechanisms for informing the court about real or perceived bias and for correcting the bias or sanctioning the perpetrator of the bias. The mechanisms that were explored in an interactive session between the panelists and the session participants included methods that did not necessarily involve the formal grievance process; i.e., surveys, grievance procedures, canons of conduct, and judicial and staff ethics rules. Using a videotape prepared by the ABA with vignettes and case studies, the panelists elicited ideas for complaint mechanisms and methods of resolutions and addressed the attendees’ concerns about the viability of certain mechanisms.

43 The Framework for figdance, a handout prepared by the panelists, emphasized that education is the primary tool for eliminating biased conduct in the court and, to the extent that biased conduct occurs despite the existence of a complaint procedure, provides accountability, demonstrates a commitment to rooting out biased conduct, and fosters early intervention. Some of the elements of an informal complaint procedure are its availability to all participants in the judicial process, confidentiality, and the applicability of the process to all forms of bias. Data, including the underlying facts or anecdotes, should be kept on the complaints received, but no written record of the complaint itself should be retained. Routine or periodic surveys of the litigants and other participants in the judicial process will enable the court to assess the perceptions they have of the court.

Diwersity Training in the Courts

Moderator Judge June Cicero, Supreme Court Continuing Education, Minnesota

Faculty Judge Janice Brice Wellington, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, Virginia Denise Glover, Court Education Division, Federal Judicial Center Peggy Nagae, Diversity Consultant, Oregon

Do You Have to Be a Minority to Ask for Diversity Training? You do not have to be a member of a minority group to request diversity training. All people of color do not necessarily want to be labeled as championing the “minority issue,” especially when they are a minority in the workplace or on a work group. They may not want’to be labeled as a single-issue person. Having a European American bring up the issue can have a huge impact.

Getting Started Before getting started, the training designer and the training decision maker, who is guiding the aevelopment of the training, need self-awareness of their own trouble spots. It would be very easy for them to design the training so that it detours around the areas that make them feel uncomfortable. Another question that should be answered is what measurement activities will help assess what the learner gains. This is helpful not only to the designer of the training but also to learners when a way to assess their own gains is built into the training. This gives learners an opportunity to reflect upon where they are and it gives the trainer feedback. Off-the-shelf training is discouraged. In order to design your training, you must first assess the need for diversity training so that you will have the court-related data about specific concerns and problems. Like other types of research, this assessment sends a message that diversity issues are very important, gives the learners an opportunity to have input in the process, and helps to raise awareness of the issues. The types of needs assess-

44 ment methods for diversity training and their important aspects are the same for other research.

What Is Diversity Training? Diversity training is not about eliminating all of one’s assumptions and biases. It is about making you aware of them. In becoming aware of your own biases, you are em- powered to choose how you are going to react. Diversity training concerns values and a values system, and it is not something that can be accomplished in one time slot. Rather, it must be revisited and incorporated into all that you do. Diversity training should be given to groups, such as a commission or a workplace task force. Do not assume that because a group of people are interested in and concerned about the same set of issues, including addressing bias in the judicial system, that they do not have any biases. The diversity session should be at least one day, and ideally two days, long.

“Human beings ail have biases and assumptions by virtue of our life experiences, world view, and our culture. Each of us sees the world differently. in the purest sense, diversity training is not about other people. it is not information about racial, ethnic, or cuitumi groups different from your own, making you culturally competent. The essence of diversity training Is about finding out more about yourself. Diversity training gives the learner an opportunity to find out how they treat people different from themselves. Once the learner understands how they treat people who are different from them, then they understand their assumptions. Then they see the connection between their assumptions and their behavior, decision making, and view of people. And how ail of these pieces impact upon the ultimate ruling in a case. Certainly, one of the goals of diversity training is to have a culturally competent court. The culturally competent court has the ability to honor and respect the beliefs, interpersonal styles, altitudes, and behaviors of litigants, their families, and the multi-cultural court staff who are providing court services. In doing this, the court incorporates these values into policy, adminlstratlon, and practice.” Judge Janice Brlce Wellington

Some Elements of the Diversity Training pt.ocess People need time to express themselves and to process their emotions. You cannot terminate a session if people are upset. Closure is needed. Closure is a part of every exer-

4 cise that is conducted and is an ongoing process. Emotions may start to come out days later. It is necessary to have someone available to support you at that time. This means including training or some related aspect of training, such as needs assessment or closure at stafF meetings, at judicial meetings, and during the ordinary course of business. You must create a safe environment by having ground rules that are set out at the beginning. Diversity training is not about “blaming, shaming, jamming, or causing people to feel guilty”--especially white men. Many white men that come are apprehensive about diversity training.

Content of the Training If the content is not relevant, the learners, especially judges, will turn off Diversity is just arriving to the court system. Many diversity trainers, not having worked in the courts or having developed a curriculum specifically for the court, are still “till-oriented,” that is, they are oriented to the commercial sector. They take the curriculum that they use in the business sector and change the words and labels and apply it to the court system. But the court system is very different in terms of the issues, the decision-making process, the cases, etc.

How to Choose a Diversity Consultant The diversity trainer should be knowledgeable of court culture, be able to give examples that reflect the culture of the court, and be able to make the learners feel that, “Yes, this is relevant to who I am and to what I do.” If the consultant is weak in this area, it is possible for the consultant to learn about the culture of the court system in the needs assessment process. As part of the interview process, ask the trainer to conduct part of the training. Videotape his or her performance and have the hiring committee review the video. Sit in on a training session for another organization if one is being conducted nearby. A good trainer, like a good psychologist, has worked his or her own issues so that they will not come out during the training.

The1 Impact of Interpreters on COW^ Proceedings: Protecting the Rights of Linguistic Minorities

Moderator William Hewitt, NCSC, Project Director, Court Interpretation: Challenge for the 1990s project

Faculty Judge Charles M. Grabau, Superior Court, Massachusetts RoberbJoe Lee, Director, Court Interpreting, Legal Translating, and Bilingual Services Unit, New Jersey Patricia Michelsen, Federally Certified Court Interpreter (Spanish), Virginia Esther Yazzie, Federally Certified Court Interpreter (Navajo), New Mexico

46 Introduction More than 20 states have established task forces. One recurring theme at the public hearings conducted by the task forces is that language is a barrier to the judicial system for non-English speakers. In a criminal case, a defendant has the constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel, including the ability to communicate with his or her attorney. The skills needed in interpreting a language are complex. Because of the use of un- qualified court interpreters, linguistic minorities have experienced difficulties and injustice in state court judicial systems. Communication, speaking the language as well as understanding it, is at the heart of the judicial process.

Bilingualism Two popular misconceptions is that an educated bilingual individual is able to interpret in a courtroom and that appointing a bilingual attorney will solve the language problem. The court setting is not the appropriate place to rely on a nonprofessional interpreter. A bilingual person usually does not have the same degree of proficiency in both languages for all the various levels and aspects of language. Canon 1 of the Code of Pro- fessional Responsibility for Interpreters in the Judiciary, Accuracy and Completeness, provides that “Interpreters shall render a complete and accurate interpretation or sight translation, without altering, omitting, or adding anything to what is stated or written, and without explanation.” An attorney cannot interpret and represent a client at the same time. Also, like any other bilingual individual, the attorney should be qualified as an interpreter.

The Role and Responsibility of the Judge Equal treatment for all includes language access to the judicial process. A person does not have access if he or she does not understand the proceedings. The judge must be sensitive to language issues to protect those without strong language skills. Studies have shown that second-year, college-level English is the level of language spoken in the courtroom. When an interpreter is used, judges have an obligation to ensure that the person is a certified court interpreter. Sometimes a judge accepts the services of an individual as an interpreter, not knowing the individual’s ability or awareness about his or her role as an interpreter. A valid and reliable test is necessary to assess the ability of the interpreter. A judge’s voir dire and reports from others will not be sufficient. The court interpreter should be appointed as early as possible in the process. The judge should conduct a brief voir dire with the person who may be in need of the interpreter and engage in a brief colloquy so as to avoid directly asking whether the person speaks English, because it does not take much proficiency to understand the direct question and to respond “yes.” The judge should look for indications of lack of language ability.

Culture and the Language Process Culture can affect the way a person perceives the judicial process as well as influence interpretation. For example, the cultural differences between Navajo and mainstream American culture is the cause of some linguistic obstacles. Esther Yazzie demonstrated these cultural differences by introducing herself in the traditional Navajo manner by first giving her own name and clan, then the clans of her father, paternal grandfather, and ma-

47 ternal grandfather. Since traditional Navajo culture is matrilineal, the clans of the grand- mothers is understood. The traditional Navajo introduction places the individual in the context of a much larger community than the western introduction of stating one’s first and last name. Preparing the Navajo-English glossary required the invention of new terms. Be- cause concepts in the American legal system are foreign to Navajo culture, equivalent terms did not exist. All of the terms in the glossary were invented. The dchitecture of the courtroom and courthouse has cultural implications to the traditional Navajo people. The sacred circle is important to the Navajo. The traditional Navajo home, hooghun dijool or hogan, is built within the sacred circle. The Navajo legal process is traditionally held in a hogan. The door to the hogan faces east toward the rising sun. The medicine man or decision maker sits facing the door. In western courts, all persons face the same direction; therefore, fiom the Navajo perspective, barriers exist among the people attending court and between those attending court and the decision maker. In the traditional Navaho proceeding, everyone is seated in a circle so that everybody can see each other’s faces. In the American court, the judge is seated higher than all others in the courtroom, which symbolizes a hierarchy. In the traditional Navajo proceeding, everyone is on the same level, which symbolizes being among equals. To demonstrate the impact of culture on court interpretation, one faculty member said in English:

“The jury will hear what happened on February 3rd, 1995.”

This statement, in English, is 19 syllables long. In Navajo, it is translated as:

KIad Ci Naakitsriadah dah ndinibijhigii 6dahootIiidigii deidoo+tsIjj+ dii Atsa Biya6zh taaagoo yoo+ka+&d$aa, nihistr4itsIaadahd i neeznidiin do6 biIqq nahastICdiin do6 biIqq ashdlargo yihih$qd$$a.

The Navajo translation has 55 syllables. There is no one word for “jury” so the interpreter must say, NaakitsIiadah dah hdinibijhigii. The literal translation back into Eng- lish is, “The 12 people who sit and listen to the testimony.” “February” is translated, Atsa Biyaazh. “When the baby eagles are born.” For the Navajo language, the federal court interpreter test has modified the simultaneous translation section to allow a running summary.

The Skills and Tasks Involved in Interpreting Interpreting requires more than 22 different cognitive skills:

Listening Understanding Abstracting the message (words and order) Storing the message

48 0 Matching concepts and semantics 0 Reconstructing the message in the other language Speaking 0 Listening to the next bit of input 0 Monitoring the interpreter’s own output, and

0 Writing, such as numbers and names

All of these tasks are performed under the stress created by the speed of courtroom speech, which at 200 or more words per minute, is faster than conversational speech. Other stressors are that the interpreter cannot forget, change, or explain anything.

The Role of the Interpreter The interpreter needs to stay in the role (i.e., being the eyes and ears of the defendant, without adding an opinion, filtering or omitting material, or simplifj.lng, summariz- ing, or giving legal advice). A trained interpreter will facilitate the conduct of the trial by having fewer interruptions, and the non-English speaker will understand the proceedings.

Testing Testing addresses the issue of who is a qualified interpreter. Interpreter testing is new, having been started in 1980 by the federal court system. Only five jurisdictions have certification: Washington State, New Jersey, the federal courts, Massachusetts, and Cali- fornia. The appearance model for determining the competency of an interpreter is that a court interpreter shows up on time, seems bilingual, looks professional, has not been the subject of complaints, and is bilingual in the opinion of bilingual court personnel, such as bailiffs and law clerks. Studies have shown that this is the prevailing model. In addition to identifllng who is competent, a test can also identi@ training needs. Testing has three major components: simultaneous interpretation, consecutive interpretation, and sight interpretation. Some jurisdictions have a screening test that is administered before the certification test. Federal courts use a written test like the standardized GRE.A certain score must be obtained (demonstrating bilingualism) to take the performance test. Another method, used in New Jersey, is to use the simultaneous section of the exam as the screening test.

Racial and Ethnicity Issues in Criminal Law and in the Criminal Justice Process

Moderator Rose Ochi, Associate Director, Office of National Drug Control Policy

Faculty Judge Candace Cooper, Superior Court of Los Angeles County, California Judge Tommy Day Wilcox, Jr., Superior Court, Macon, Georgia

49 The Effects of Discriminatory Policies Racial disparities have worsened since the adoption of drug control policies, and this outcome was predictable. Sentencing reforms were intended to decrease racial disparities. Two recent sentencing reforms backfired-the use of “just desserts” as a primary rationale for sentencing and the adoption of mandatory minimum penalty laws.

“The greatest cause of worsening racial disparities in incarceration rates for African-Americans has been the proliferation of mandatory minimum sentencing laws for dfug crimes.” Rose Ochi quoting Professor Michael Smith, Wisconsin law School

Sentencing policies alone will not significantly reduce unwarranted racial disparities. It will require hndamental changes in crime control practices. Law enforcement efforts have not been evenly applied; so while African-Americans are a minority and a minority of users, the war on drugs has focused on poor minority neighborhoods. Street arrests are easier than suburban law enforcement.

Bias in Criminal Legislation While the only laws remaining on the books that criminalize certain activities for specific racial or ethnic groups are archaic, obsolete statutes, some laws that are racially neutral on their face have a disproportionate impact on minorities. To identifjt the substantive laws that have a disproportionate impact does not require an in-depth analysis of each law. First, decide which specific areas need more work in your community. If there is a disproportionate impact find out why. Determine if it is not an anomaly. If there is no anomaly, find the cause of the disproportionate impact. The presenters explained the disparate treatment of crack and powdered cocaine under the federal sentencing scheme. Federal law requires a mandatory minimum of five years with no parole sentence for five grams of crack, which is worth about $400. It takes one hundred times that amount, or 500 grams of powered cocaine, valued at $10,000, and a second conviction for the same sentence. The statute was not enacted with a racial intent. Sixty-five percent of the crack users in the U.S.are white; however, 88 percent of those convicted for crack cocaine are minorities. Minnesota had a statute similar to the federal sentencing statute. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled the statute as unconstitutional based upon the fact that African- American convictions represented 96 percent and white convictions represented 4 percent of the convictions for crack offenses in that state. Minnesota’s minority population is under 3 percent. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia did not use statistics. The federal court concluded that all forms of cocaine are smokable and that penalizing one form of the smokable cocaine more severely than its other forms is irrational, thus viola-

50 tive of the equal protection clause. This decision is on appeal to the 1 lth Circuit. This is an issue in other states. It was suggested that the results were predictable because crack was available in $5.00 quantities, enabling low-income minorities to purchase the drug.

Bias in Substantive Criminal Laws Some of the substantive laws that result in biased treatment identified by the attendees were:

Charging aggressive panhandlers with robbery. 0 A residential burglary statute with a mandatory minimum sentence of four years for the first offense that is enforced unevenly among offenders of the same racial group and even more unevenly for people of color. 0 A statutory scheme whereby the mandatory minimum sentence is determined by the weight of the drugs and the weight determination is within the prosecutor’s discretion. If the weight is the statutory amount, the judge is locked into imposing the mandatory sentence. 0 The use of the tax stamp law by the prosecutor as a bargaining chip. The penalty for not paying the tax on one’s illegal substances is an additional five years. 0 Gang-related murder statutes, which are unevenly applied.

Bias in Criminal Proceedings The next presenter walked through the criminal justice process and discussed the points in the process where bias plays a roll in decision making. At every level and at almost every decision point, racial issues can come in overtly, covertly, directly, or indi- rectly. The presenter noted that the diagram included the nonjudicial aspects of the criminal justice system because the public does not isolate the court from the other parts of the system and because the court is the best venue to resolve the problems in other parts of the justice system. The attendees were active participants by sharing some of their own experiences and observations.

The Incidenmon-incident Bias is evident in the reporting of crimes. There have been recent notorious cases in which offenders have accused an African-American man of committing their crimes. Some of the shared experiences were:

0 Use of pictures in the news of minority arrestees even though they ultimately may not be the person convicted of the crime 0 Random gun fire being viewed and reported as a problem and criminal activity when it occurs in areas with a African-American population, such as urban areas, but not when it occurs in rural areas with a white population, such as the rural south

Police Contact An attendee who rode with police officers when he was in law school experienced the officers referring to the people in African-American communities as “animals.”

51 Hispanics in cars coming from Texas are stopped without probable cause so that the police canisearch for drugs. A judge has noticed that the number of Hispanics as defendants in criminal cases is disproportionately high and that the initial arrest grows out of a minor traffic infrac- tion, such as having a burned-out taillight or improper tags. An attendee said that the “Big Three” for which Ahcan-American males are arrested in his state are disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, and assaulting a police officer. A man fiom Boston said that on more than one occasion, he was arrested, held, and ultimately released because he was misidentified as another Afhcan-American. A man fiom New Jersey said African-American youth run when they see the police. Until the court ruled that the police do not have the right to chase yo ooung African- American males just because they are black, the police arrested them without any ar- ticulable suspicion. The attendee noticed that since this ruling, the police testifjling in suppression hearings are coming with the exceptions that justif) why they chased the youth.

“There are hardly any Afrlcan-American males who , have not been checked out or had encounters In which they were subJect to arrest In circumstances when they had done nothing. As a judge who has appeared In traffic court, the only people that I see there are Afrlcan-Americans. . . . There Is no explana- 1 tion for that, other than some disparate treatment problem relative to who Is cited and who Is not.” JusRce William Cousins, Jr.

Post-A rrest Investigation Criminality on the part of the victim, such as involvement in a large drug transaction, is never suspected. Once a minority suspect is apprehended, there is no follow-up to identif) another suspect or to interview an alibi witness. The Jefiey Dahmer case had language difficulty issues during the post-arrest investigation.

Chargng Allegations In capital cases, the race of the victim is taken into consideration.

Prosecution: The Decision to Charge and the Choice of Charges 0 If the victim in a theft case is a person of color, the charge is for a lesser offense than if the victim is not a person of color. 0 There is a controversy over the lack of prosecution of Native American crimes committed on the reservation as opposed to Native American crimes that are committed off the reservation in New Mexico.

52 The choice between federal or state jurisdiction is important. The federal prosecutor has the power to elect a state charge, such as conspiracy for a party to a crime, since the state charge was more powefil and not likely to be changed by a parole board. (Wisconsin) Sometimes the prosecution files every count possible to use the number of charges as leverage in plea bargaining. The prosecutor’s decision to prosecute or not to prosecute a case can be influenced by bias.

Arraignment (the First Advisement of the Charges Against the Person) The decision by the bench officer to require bail or to release the defendant on his or her own recognizance. Persons who are not U.S. citizens and persons who have an illegal immigration status do not get bail in some parts of the country, regardless of how long they have been in the U.S., their family ties, etc. The availability and capacity of indigent defense counsel may have a disproportionate impact on people of color. A defendant’s access to early disposition or plea-bargaining programs may be im- pacted by bias.

Trial The jury panel, what are the criteria for the pool? Can the minority juror afford to miss work by serving on a jury? What about areas like Los Angeles, where the citizens sit on cases near their homes? The jury composition will change according to where the trial is held because of residential segregation and the geographic vastness of the county (for example, the Reginald Denny trial being moved fiom downtown central). Publicity about the trial is much more pervasive and more inflammatory in trials involving white victims and defendants of color. Minorities as victims and witnesses have issues very separate and distinct fiom the issues of minority defendants. The victims and witnesses are not always extended the courtesies, such as being put on call, because of a lack of trust that they will come back. Their first names are used to address them instead of using “Mr.” or “Ms.” with their last names.

The Defendant ’s In-Custody or Out-of-Custody Status In some states, the judge elects whether jury voir dire is recorded on the official record. This decision affects the record for appeal.

53 Uhe Onterrelatioors of State, Urilbal, adFederal Courts

I Moderator Joseph A. Myers, Executive Director, National Indian Justice Center

Faculty Judge William A. Thorne, Third Circuit Court, Utah Chief Justice Robert Yazzie, Chief Justice of the Navajo Nation John J. Kelly, U.S. Attorney, New Mexico Joseph A. Meyers, Executive Director, National Indian Justice Center

The Tribal Justice Act Enacted in 1993 to improve conditions for tribal court operations, the law was debated for about four years. An important ingredient was that tribes participate in the policy-making of how training, technical assistance, and resources for tribal courts were to be dealt withiin Indian Country and not leave it up to one person in the Bureau of Indian Affairs PIA) to make the policy decisions for everyone. As a consequence, the BIA’s branch of judicial services was elevated to the Office of Tribal Justice. Just the name changed. Funds for tribal court operations were increased fiom $12 million to $50 million, but there has been no advocacy for appropriating the $50 million; the actual increase in FY 1996 was $6lmillion, not for tribal justice hnds, but for BIA. There was no increase for the two prior fiscal years. There is a special courts hnd, which is part of the $12 million; $1.4 million for training and technical assistance in the operation of the BIA was zeroed out by the House because the hnds were not obligated.

0 The law calls for a survey of tribal court needs. 0 The survey of tribal court needs was to have been completed in June of 1994, but no one has been selected yet to conduct the survey. 0 A formula must be developed to distribute the $50 million BIA hnds to the tribal courts in a fair and reasonable manner.

The Tribal Court Perspective “Non-Indian litigants are afraid to come into Navajo courts, fearing bias against them and favoritism for the Navajo party.” Some state courts have found ways to reject tribal court judgments. Contradictory rulings have been issued by the three court systems. Indians can point out the bias against them; for example, Indian inmates are overrepresented in the jails and prisons. Other areas of disagreement and conflict include jurisdiction, comity, extradition, and hll faith and credit. In response, policy to address the problem has been initiated. The traditional Navajo approach is to devise a solution. In the Navajo tradition, a person respects someone outside of the clan, including a non-Navajo, until that person fails to respect the Navajo individual. This is called k-eh. The state and tribal judges started to talk about problems and solutions. These meetings were successhl

54 F

as the participants developed respect for the different judicial systems and the people in them.

“in our Navajo justice thinking, anythlng that gets in the way of a successful life is called Naaydd, a monster. . . . We have these monsters; the Na-yeg- is here to hurt people. And we say that bias is a monster. That discrlminatlon is Na-yee-. And the question is how do we fight this monster, bias and discrlmination? We say that we do it with knowledge, with communication, with talking things out, with respect. The respect way is the successful way in the Southwest. I know that some of you are probably here wondering, ‘That sounds wonderful,’ and you might ask the questlon, ‘I don’t deal with reservation Indians in my court; I deal with urban Indians. What about them?’ And you might have another question, ‘I don’t have Indians In my court. I get black people, all kinds of other people, Latinos, but no indlans.’ Well, whoever you deal with, whatever color, the answer Is the same. If you build a climate of respect like the way that we are doing it, you can respond to bias and dlscrlmination. You can through communication. The Navajo tmditionai justice method is to talk things out in a climate of equai- ity and respect.” Chief Justice of the Navajo Nation Robert Yank

The Federal Perspective One reason for the problems that we have today is that for the last 50 to 75 years the criminal justice system as it operates in Indian Country has been neglected. The justice system infiastructure is not a quarter of what it needs to be to provide effective justice, to respond effectively to criminal activity, to provide the services that victims require, and to handle the defendants in an appropriate way, since the federal government has a tendency to take a “one size fits all” approach. The U.S. Attorney has the responsibility to remind the federal government to be flexible and to be openminded. For example, some tribal courts do not want to assume jurisdiction over nontraditional domestic, internal tribal matters.

A History of Neglect by the Federal Prosecutors There is a cry coming fiom Indian Country for law enforcement to respond fairly, promptly, and effectively to criminal activity. The current U.S. Attorney General has identified Indian Country justice issues as one of the top five issues that U.S. attorneys will be charged with addressing. This has resulted in more interest and concern among the U.S. attorneys. Under prior administrations, the Indian affairs subcommittee of the U.S. attorneys association was inactive. Now, they meet every quarter for three to four days. One of

55 the major issues is that the only facility in the federal system for incarcerating juveniles is located in California. Recently, U.S. Attorney John Kelly and the chiefjudge spent the day with the Navajo law enforcement officials to discuss the handling of non-Indian perpetra- tors on the reservations.

The State Court Perspective The state court trainer suggested that the state, federal, and tribal courts start first with the noncontroversial issues on which there is common ground, thus building a history of good relations and success, and then tackle the issues on which there is disagreement. The trainer gave four indisputable propositions: Everyone should have an equal opportunity to serve on the jury. Victims of all races should be protected. People ought to be held accountable for their actions. Court intervention should be avoided when it causes, rather than solves, problems. The trainer went on to discuss some of the problems that Indian people have when addressing these four propositions.

Jury Duty How do you get Indians into court to serve on state court juries? How do you get non-Indians in tribal court to serve on tribal juries? An equal opportunity to serve on the jury in Indian Country does not happen because of legal requirements:

0 State courts do not have jurisdiction to issue subpoenas to tribal members on reservations. 0 Traditionally, Indians do not vote in high numbers in state elections; likewise, Indians do not own state driver’s licenses, so many are not called to serve on statejuries.

Addressing these issues requires working agreements between the tribal and state courts to get the summons issued, share accurate source lists, and enforce jury summons. Jurors who travel great distances need overnight accommodations. The current rules were designed for urban dwellers. In order to get to the court building, Navajos have to travel 120 miles from Utah, into Arizona, and back into Utah, over back roads. Statutory re- quirement of ability to read and write in English are sometimes used by reservation members as a convenient excuse to get out of jury service because many reservation members do not read or write English. Some judges will release, without inquiry, any Indian who does not want to serve on the jury.

Protectionfor Victims of all Races Protective orders do not get enforced across reservation boundaries. An order can protect a woman at home, on the reservation, but not protect her when she goes to work in town. If she is married to a non-Indian, the tribal court does not have the criminal jurisdiction to enforce the order even on the reservation. The state court does not have the jurisdiction to issue a civil order affecting the reservation, unless the complicated process of establishing that jurisdiction is invoked. To establish civil jurisdiction over non-Indians, the Supreme Court has established a four-part test. If the state court has established civil jurisdiction, the court may be able to enforce the order if the man shows up at work or

56 somewhere else off the reservation to harass her, but it still cannot enforce a criminal order if he shows up on the reservation to beat her. One solution is to have the judge of the issuing court perform the fhctions of all three courts, federal, tribal, and state.

Accountability If someone has been convicted of four DUIs in the reservation tribal court, is the individual a first-time offender in state court for the fifth DUI? How can the state court judge even know about the existence of the tribal court convictions since the different systems do not communicate with each other? What about vice versa? Is the tribal court a fresh start? Should the tribal court ignore the family violence history in the state courts? Some states have laws that block tribal court access to information on domestic violence.

Court Intervention Should Be Avoided When It Causes Problems Rather Than Solves Problems The three court systems do not coordinate. For example, a child abuse and domestic violence situation was worked out in the tribal court. All parties agreed to its terms and workability. Then, a federal case was brought against the father, who, as a result, was incarcerated. The mother started drinking, and the child was put into foster care and later ran away, never to be seen again.

Recommendations for Systemic Things That Can Be Done in the Short Term The three systems need to eliminate duplication and share resources: jails, juvenile detention centers, juvenile services, counselors, probation officers, probation services, treatment and rehabilitation centers, and foster homes. There is no need to ship a juvenile off to California. Share information and access to records among the courts. Service of process. Post-judgment collection remedies. Subpoenas. Protective orders. Restraining orders. Education on the Indian Child Welfare Act. Law since 1978, but still not understood by juvenile and domestic attorneys and judges. Information services. Child support enforcement.

Recommendations for Things That We Can Do as Individuals Sensitize others in your culture. Cross-cultural sensitivity is needed not only by judges, but by jurors, attorneys, and others in the judicial system.

57 Achieving a Diwerse SMS~: And Then What?

Moderator Judge Harold Hood, Michigan Court of Appeals

Faculty Judge Janice Gradwohl, Secretary, Board of Directors, State Justice Institute G. Thomas Munsterman, Director, Center for Jury Studies, National Center for State Courts Indira Rampersad, Executive Director, Ohio Commission

Public Perceptions This session started with a showing of a videotape that compiled some of the testimony from the 12 public hearings held from September 1994 to November 1994 by the Ohio Commission on Racial Fairness. The comments raised in the video were representative of the comments raised in public hearings and focus groups around the country, especially from those people who were excluded from juries. Among the questions and issues raised by the persons testifjrng were the type of training the jurors had received; the lack of awareness of intercultural issues by jurors; the number of minorities on the panel and on the jury; and the lack of awareness on the part of the jurors of what it is to live in a racist society as a person of color.

ABA Standards Relating to Jury Use and Management The jury standards were developed under a 1980 grant to the Center for Jury Studies. The ABA adopted the standards in 1983. In an Sn grant to the NCSC in 1991, the standards were reviewed and the commentary was updated to reflect new statutes, new case law, and new technology. The revised standards were published in 1994. The jury standards are usehl for the inherent worth of their content. They are used as guidelines in some states that have not officially adopted them. They are also usehl because they constitute a national standard. Louisiana and Virginia have adopted standards based upon the ABA standards.

The Public Education Campaign The court may have to conduct a campaign to get the message to people that if they want to see more racially, ethnically diverse juries, they must be willing to serve. Inform the public about the randomness of the selection process. Some of the ways that courts around the country inform the public about jury service include using the public access channel on cable TV for preliminary orientations and information; advertisements and slogans on buses; interactive video programs for use by judges in getting students to deliberate as jurors after watching a trial; brochures and posters displayed in public offices; and juror education in public schools.

58 The Juror Source List The issues are, first, representiveness and, second, inclusiveness. Good coverage will not be achieved relying on the voter registration list alone. For example, in Nebraska, the voters list encompasses 66 percent of the population, and the driver’s license list encompasses 88 percent. Inclusiveness will lead to greater representativeness. Eighty percent of the adult population is regarded as a reasonable goal; however, there are methods of achieving more than 90 percent. Some states have had voter registration available at the Department of Motor Ve- hicles and other government offices before federal legislation required increased coverage and registration. However, these efforts did not increase participation. The racial and ethnic breakouts on those lists may not have been studied. It is assumed that greater racial and ethnic diversity will come with more inclusiveness. Therefore, inclusiveness is promoted more than representativeness. Demography gets complicated with multiple lists.

Eligibility One-half of the states have eliminated all exemptions to jury duty. It is better to have guidelines that do not exclude anyone. If it happens that someone is ineligible (for example, because of blindness) to sit on a particular case, that person is still eligible for another. Instead of using the phrase “read and write the English language,” the standards stipulate that the juror must be able to communicate in the English language.

Hardship and Medical Excuses Hardship and medical excuse provisions still exist. Sole providers and women with children are often excused under the hardship provision. One judge commented that because there are so few minorities on jury panels, he has to deny requests for hardship excuses fiom minorities at a higher rate than he does for whites. One way to help mothers with child care responsibilities is to have a day care center in the court. Some court-based day care centers are hnded by the jury fees returned by jurors. Minnesota now pays child care costs in addition to the mileage and fee. An NCSC survey showed that a small percentage of jurors have child care costs, but those who do have a large amount. Instead of excusing them fiom service, defer the jury service until you can make the appropriate arrangements. Since many people of color are shift and hourly wage earners, a provision prohibiting employers fiom “double-shifting” an employee who is called for jury service will help to encourage participation. “Double-Shifting” is the practice of scheduling an hourly worker so that he or she will have to work a full shift immediately preceding or following jury duty.

One Day/One Trial Makes Jury Service More Accessible Jury service can be burdensome for some, such as mothers with small children and the owners of small businesses. The one daylone trial approach is one way to increase access. One day/one trial is a more practical approach to access than raising the amount of the fee paid to the jurors each day. However, one day/one trial is administratively burdensome, and automation is a necessity. Another approach is to reduce the term of service. For example, jury service in Cincinnati is three weeks long. However, the jury commis-

59 sioner encourages participation by promising to limit jury service to one week, which is less than the full term.

Preemptory Challenges The topic that generated the most interest was preemptory challenges. The topic was not examined in depth because of time limitations. Preemptory challenges are an important issue with the Batson line of cases. Standard 9 recommends use of a struck jury system or alternate striking of the jurors rather than requiring the person to make the entire selection then moving on to the other lawyer.

“Talking about preemptors, In my state one of the things that concerns me greatly is that wlth all the good things that we have done, we, by judicial decl- slon, have permitted minorities to be excluded because we will not Implement Butson. So all of these cases where we have gotten these wonderful jury panels, yet the jury wlth three or four mlnorlties, the prosecutors zealously are excluding them. And we simply permit It. The prosecutors explain that, ‘I excluded her because she had dangling earrings.’ ‘I excluded him because he had a patch on his shirt.’ The trlal judge says, ‘That’s a nonracial reason.”’ Comment from an unidentified attendee

Juveniles in the Justice System: The Overincarceration of Minority Youth in the Juvenile Justice System

Moderator Judge David Rarmrez, Juvenile Court, Denver, Colorado

Faculty David Gamble, National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges, Nevada Ada Melton, American Indian Development Associates, New Mexico

Cultural Sensitivity Not ignoring a child’s culture is in the best interest of the child. Cultural preservation is important. A people have a right to perpetuate themselves through their children. One’s culture is a basic human right. Program faculty explained how in daily life we go through the same perceptual blocks and how stereotypes limit the ability to see because we devalue some other information that is available. The information may be there, but the recipient does not know

60 how to bring it together and synthesize it so that it can be used. In addition, we sometimes place too many constraints on ourselves. We need to see things fiom the point of view of others. It is also possible to reach saturation, the point at which one has so much information that one ignores things that one is used to seeing. For example, in New Mexico there are Indian designs and clues of Indian culture all over, but Indians are “invisible” people. Either consciously or unconsciously, the majority does not see the Indian people’s needs or issues, which leads to crisis. For example, an Indian child commits suicide in an off- reservation detention center, and there is finger pointing: “You did not take care of this kid, you ignored this kid, you falsely arrested this child, you were discriminating.” People use their own backgrounds to determine how they look at and hnction in the world. An important factor that has been ignored in administering justice, culture plays a signtficant role on three levels: First, the agency personnel need to be culturally sensitive. Second, cultural proficiency or cultural competence of individuals need to be assessed when you are providing service to culturally different people. Third, interventions and programs need to develop the most appropriate way to handle the needs of the culturally different child, youth, or adult. People working in this field need to be aware of the cultural differences versus the stereotypes. They need to know the culture they are working in. Cultural ignorance is not an excuse. It inhibits communications, understanding, and empathy, which limits service providers from developing the best plan for intervention. The differences need to be viewed as a source of options and additional resources rather than as constraints on effective intervention. If you do not know where an Indian child is coming tiom, you cannot be of help. You need to recruit professionals and paraprofes- sionals from the same cultures as the children who are being treated. Language interpreters and creative and assertive outreach are required. Culturally different people often have two people within. In the world at large, the individual embraces mainstream society’s views. At home, the person undergoes a gestalt shift. The home community may have a different philosophy, different values, different beliefs, but these are embodied within one person-the culturally different person. We often try to ignore and minimize culture rather than use it as a resource. This approach establishes minimal standards and procedural safeguards. Some of these are mandated in the New Mexico children’s code. Having a law will mandate action if the system does not voluntarily account for cultural differences in the services and treatment that it provides.

The Large Incidence of Minority Youth in the Juvenile Justice System African-American and Hispanics comprise 75 percent of the juvenile inmate population in California. This pattern has been noted in many other jurisdictions throughout the country. Minority youths are arrested at higher rates. FBI crime statistics from 1987 show that nonwhite juveniles are arrested five times more often than white juveniles. Seven of ten African-American youths face at least one arrest, but only three of ten white juveniles face at least one arrest. There is currently a trend to reduce the age at which juveniles are remanded to adult courts. This trend includes treating juveniles like adults in court and eliminating judicial discretion, giving it to the prosecutors.

61 The attendees had varying opinions on why there is such a high incidence of minority youth in.thejuvenile justice system:

Selective enforcement; for example, police identie a minority child as a delinquent and a white child as a prankster The lack of faith in the criminal justice system, the lack of hope, and the lack of knowledge of the consequences of the criminal justice system Inadequate and inappropriate intervention The schools suspend minority children more often; higher incidence of single-family homes Socioeconomic factors Unavailability of a parent, guardian, or other person to take charge and custody of the child The perception that minority children are more often involved in crime Lack of resources on the part of the parents

The trainer explained that a cross-section of all of the issues that were mentioned contribute to the high incidence of minority youth in the juvenile justice system. His research found no one cause. Some other reasons are:

0 The close correlation between socioeconomic class and presentation in the juvenile justice system Segregation and stagnated socialization: the inability to move outside the boundaries established for people of color Lack of cultural perspective and competence Subjective aecision making in the juvenile justice system: once the juvenile has passed the arrest point, the system tended to be fair. The other point of subjectivity is at the end, where the disposition decision is made. Minority youth tend to be arrested more, and at the end at the disposition, minority youth are placed in public facilities at a much higher rate than nonminority youth, who tend to go to private schools and to the psychiatric and psychologically based facilities. Absent or poor legal representation Underrepresentation of racial and ethnic members in administration and as direct sew ice providers Overt discrimination and racism

The trainer summarized the recommendations in eight key points in the juvenile justice process: arrest, detention, intake, judicial transfer, adjudicatory stage, dispositional and court services stage, public correctional institutions, and transitiodafler-care services. Trainink and parental responsibility are key. The community has a responsibility to have facilities available for the returning juveniles. Ongoing research will allow us to monitor and determine the nature and extent of the problem.

62 Recommendations The recommendations that emerged from this session were similar to recommendations set out in the book The Over-Representation of Minority Juveniles in the Justice System.

Judges, court administrators, juvenile justice practitioners, and legislators should continuously and regularly monitor juvenile court to ensure that minorities and ethnic youth are not incarcerated at disproportionate rates simply because of their minority status. Judges, court administrators, juvenile justice practitioners, and legislators should un- dergo regular cultural sensitivity training. Minority practitioners must be represented in the direct service delivery and critical decision-making ranks of the juvenile justice process. Juvenile court judges should take a leadership role to ensure that community services and programs that are concerned with public safety are developed and implemented.

Equal Access to the Justice System

Moderator Judge Jon M. Mayeda, Municipal Court of Los Angeles County, California

Faculty Judge Severiano Lisboa 111, Superior Court, Hudson County, New Jersey Rene M. Landers, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Policy Develop- ment, Department of Justice Judge Charles R. Cloud, Presiding Judge, General District Court, Norfolk, Virginia

Access Issues Some solutions to equal access to the justice system are language, money, culture, legal representation, education, and court personnel, but there are others. One is to recognize the “hidden race biases,” that is, the failure to distinguish within a group. For example, there are at least 20 Asian racial groups that are all different from each other. Generational differences are also important to some ethnic groups. For example, a first- generation Vietnamese immigrant who has lived in the United States for seven years is different from a fourth-generation Japanese-American. While they both may have an access issue, the resolution is different. Court staff need to be aware of the issues, be trained to handle them, and have the authority and the direction fiom judges to resolve conflicts.

63 Study of Minority Perceptions of; Need for, and Use of the Courts The New Jersey Task Force viewed the law as an empowering resource in our democratic society and as a resource that should be available to all. A study was initiated to determine whether minorities utilize the courts differently fiom nonminorities; to describe the current legal needs of and use among minority and nonminority populations; and to identify the lack of access that was attributed to cultural, social, or economic reasons. Six hundred interviews were conducted in four urban northern counties. The interviews touched on 100 situations, including neighborhood disputes, consumer problems, housing, employment, public organizations, medical, government programs, discrimination, and family.

Findings of Minority Perceptions, Need, and Use Study The New Jersey study found a substantial need for the law, as measured by the number of potential legal problems that minorities experienced. The respondents did not appear hesitant or unwilling to use the law or government agencies when they identified a need. The level of need by citizens does not vary by race, ethnicity, or social class. Women were significantly more likely to have problems related to their gender roles as mothers, wives, and consumers. Women were also more likely than men to have experienced gender-related problems on the job, such as sexual harassment and unequal wages. There were significant racial and ethnic differences in perceptions toward the legal system. Mi- norities were less likely to perceive the courts and the law as conforming to the ideal of equal justice. Minorities were not any less likely, however, to see the court as effective in resolving problems and disputes as were whites, but minorities were significantly more negative than whites about the justness and fairness of the law. Minorities were confident that the court system would come up with a just decision, but the result is not always what they would like.

Policy Implications of Minority Perceptions, Need, and Use Study The findings of the New Jersey study suggest that the legal system must be atten- tive and responsive to not only the level of need, but also the diversity of the life experiences of its citizens and the diversity of the disputes and problems that emerge from these experiences. The resources and process should respond to varying types of legal needs in the community if the law is going to be equally available to all of its citizens.

The Cultural Sensitivity of the Researchers Can Affect the Research The New Jersey study included problems and experiences that reflected the life- styles of lower- and working-class people, as well as middle- and upper-middle-class citizens; however, it still had some problems. The researchers were not people of color and lacked understanding of or sensitivity to the minority cultures, which is reflected in the interpretation of the data, the conclusions reached, and the recommendations made. To prevent this, anyone who conducts a study should scrutinize the credentials of the researchers and not rely solely upon their paper credentials. The researchers should be in- terviewed to assess any bias they have that may affect their research. Take an active part in sensitizing the researchers to cultural issues. This can be done by a subcommittee.

64 Civil Domestic Violence Cases In pursuing domestic violence claims, employment and family responsibilities, such as child and elder care, make it inconvenient or impossible to wait for hours for a case to be called by the court. These barriers may have a disproportionate impact on members of racial and ethnic minority communities because of their disproportionate representation in hourly wage jobs and the difficulty in obtaining affordable child care.

Child Care in Civil Domestic Violence Cases One approach to child care is establishing predictability in calendaring domestic violence cases by hearing them at a fixed time every day or at fixed times certain days of the week. This approach would allow people to arrange for day care or to make arrangements at work to take time off and to work for a portion of the day. Another approach is providing a child care center in the courthouse. The children would not be disruptive in the courtroom, and the parent could focus on the proceeding if safe, affordable child care was available. The children would not be exposed to the testimony and other events in the courtroom. A recent BJA-fimded project studied implementation of court-based child care in California and New York.

Access to Counsel in Civil Domestic Violence Cases Petitioners achieve better results in the ancillary issues such as child support, child custody, and child visitation if they are represented by an attorney or a trained nonlawyer representative/advocate. Gender and race commissions urged the bar, the law schools, and the courts to develop innovative ways to fill this gap. The now dehnct office in the Mas- sachusetts Supreme Court that was established to implement the gender bias study recommendations published a program guide that describes different model programs of bar associations, law firms, and law schools, such as clinical programs, to assist in advocating domestic violence programs.

Representation of Victims in Serious Misdemeanor Cases Judge Cloud believes that the Canons of Judicial Conduct require judges to speak out on issues concerning fair trials and the improvement of the administration of justice. Therefore, he is vocal about law enforcement assistance for victims of serious misdemeanor crimes. In some courts of limited jurisdiction in his state, public prosecutors do not prosecute cases that have been initiated by citizen warrant. By statute, rules of evidence must be followed in these cases. Untrained citizens often lose their cases to lawyer- assisted defendants for technical and other reasons, which could have been easily avoided with assistance from a public prosecutor. Most of the victims and defendants in these cases are African-American. According to Judge Cloud, in too many of these cases, the alleged victims who were alone when the violence was committed are forced'to face, without assistance of counsel or law enforcement, the defendant, who is usually represented by counsel, retained or court-appointed. This gives rise to the perception, if not reality, of unfairness. Often the guilty are not convicted, and the number of no shows by the alleged victims is increased. Since legal representation is one-sided, there is no guarantee of a level playing field.

65 Judge Cloud said that public prosecutors sometimes say that they lack the resources to prosecute these cases. However, public prosecutors are usually present in the courtroom when these cases are called, but refuse to take part in the proceedings. Victims of serious misdemeanor crimes have problems getting their cases investigated by the police department. Police officers do investigate minor traffic matters and appear in court to prosecute those cases. No such assistance is available for cases of battered women or victims who have been threatened by handguns unless there is a death or commission of a felony. As an example of how law enforcement and the judicial system are out of balance, Judge Cloud told of an animal control case in his court in which the animal control officer was assisted by a public prosecutor. The owner of a pet Vietnamese pot-bellied pig was charged with animal cruelty because of overfeeding. The public prosecutor admitted in court that the facts could not sustain a charge of cruelty, and the charge was dismissed. The public prosecutor obtained fiom the owner a private agreement to put the pig on a diet that the city would oversee. The case was the object of a great deal of humor and received a great deal of national and international publicity. Judge Cloud contended that the pig’s access to justice and the court is perceived as being greater than the access given to people of color, women, and the poor.

“it is disturbing, degrading, and frlghtenlng when law enforcement assists and prosecutes animal cases, but refuses similar asslstance to battered women and other good citizens who are afraid and who are victims of serious violent misdemeanor crime. What frlghtens me the most is watching young people grow up in areas where they first learn to believe that they are second-class citizens only to later be convinced that the dominate society ranks . them even beneath animals. I continue to see some of them reach adulthood seething with anger at a Justice system and Its people perceived to be unfair and biased against them.” Judge Charles R. Cloud

To provide equal access to justice, Judge Cloud recommended that judges be alerted to identifjl even the perceptions of racial and gender bias; move away fiom the tradition of silence; begin to speak out against the reality and perception of bias, including subtle discrimination; exercise the court’s inherent powers in all ways necessary to ensure that each trial is fair without even a perception of racial and gender bias; adopt orders and procedures to make certain that even perceptions of racial and gender bias are eliminated and that equal justice for all is assured; and encourage the bar to provide pro bono legal services and assistance to people of color, women, and the poor.

I CONFERENCE CLOSING

The Conference concluded with a plenary session consisting of three events: a panel of chief justices examining implications for the courts; the Conference Update and a summary session, “Where Do We Go from Here?”, moderated by Professor Ogletree; and the concluding remarks of the Planning Committee Chair, Judge Veronica Simmons McBeth.

Documenting Bias in the Judicial System: Are There Any Implications?

Moderator Chief Justice Ellen Ash Peters, Supreme Court of Connecticut; President, Conference of Chief Justices Faculty Chief Justice Joseph F. Baca, Supreme Court of New Mexico Chief Justice Paul J. Liacos, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer, Supreme Court of Ohio Chief Judge Annice M. Wagner, Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia

The panel was introduced by Justice Charles 2. Smith, who noted that no commission to document or address racial and ethnic bias has been effective without the support of the chief justice. Chief Justice Baca stated that a distinction between affirmative action and the conference goals is necessary. Chief Justice Moyer stated that the debate over continuing or dismantling affirmative action programs has absolutely nothing to do with the court’s obligation to be fair and impartial and to generate an atmosphere that meets the public’s expectation of fairness. The other panelists agreed. The chief justices noted that they have the unique role of being in the best position to make this known in their states. The chief justices felt that it is not only appropriate but also obligatory for the chief justice to take a stand on issues involving the administration of justice and to educate legislators about the potential impact of proposed legislation, such as legislation with a discriminatory impact. The chiefjustice and judges have a perspective and knowledge that are not shared by others. When the legislature uses the lack of fbnding as the rationale for not fbnding judicial initiatives (such as a commission to address racial and ethnic bias in the courts), chief justices and judges should realize that what the legislature is saying is that the issue does not have enough priority. The court should view this as a challenge to explain the issue so that it is better understood by the public and by the legislature. Legislators must understand that eliminating racial and ethnic bias is, by definition, part of the court’s work to improve the public’s confidence in the judicial system.

67 Sometimes it helps to remind legislators and other judges that the court is the one institution that holds our society together and maintains the peace. Even if there were no actual racial or ethnic bias in the courts, the mere perception of bias held by many segments of the community would be a problem. Legislators must realize that establishing a commission to address racial and ethmc bias does not mean that the court is bowing to a special interest group, but that the court is actively ensuring the hture viability of the judicial system and our society, which is founded on the principle of the rule of law. Chief Justice Peters noted that not all problems lie with the legislature. The chief justices must address barriers within the judicial system, such as defensiveness and denial. Admittedly, the task of capturing the mind of an unwilling judge is difficult; therefore, innovative approaches will be necessary to touch the diehards. The panelists suggested some strategies to reach judges who are not receptive to recognizing the problem. These strategies include using nonaccusatory approaches, getting judges to realize that they are accountable, encouraging introspection so that judges examine how they treat people, and making it known that the chief justice is personally committed to and persistent in eliminating racial and ethmc bias. The chief justices identified some of the nonaccusatory methods with which they were familiar, such as mandating judicial education on the subject; incorporating fairness and inclusion across the judicial education curriculum; including diversity on the agenda of the mandatory all-courts conferences; great American literature seminars that include dis- cussions about bias or perceptions of bias in the stories; skits that use humor and parody to react to the court and to the behavior and personalities of actual judges; provocative town hall meetings and forums; incorporating a discussion of bias into the mandatory ethics course; holding a national conference, like this Conference, that is nonthreatening and that provides interaction with experts from all over the nation and with international ob- servers. Chief Justice Peters said that the courts want to build models of unity like the ones referred to by Dr. Henderson at the conference opening. While models of unity may not be easy to find, the chiefjustices need to look for them. She was impressed with the conflict resolution techmques used by some tribal courts that those in the state court system would call alternate dispute resolution. Chief Justice Peters added that courts need to recognize what other cultures have to offer because they can learn from them. Chief Judge Wagner liked some of the ideas presented by Judge Douglass (pertaining to actions judges can take that do not require any additional hnding) at the concurrent session on implementation. One of the suggestions that she is going to try when she returns is to have the arts trust, which already displays multicultural art in the court buildings, start displaying the artwork of children. Such a display would expose the judges to creative and positive activities by juveniles of color. Chief Judge Wagner observed that in many instances, implementation mechanisms are already in place in the budget and staff. The only question is how to use them effectively. The panelists identified areas where research is needed. One area is the effectiveness of the different approaches and educational techmques that they referred to during their discussion. They also suggested that the NCSC produce a registry of successhl diversity training programs and good trainers.

68 Chief Justice Liacos said that judges do not listen well enough to what the community is saying. One of the many benefits of the commissions is that they bring the judges out into the community to listen to what the public has to say about the courts. Contact with the public leads to learning opportunities for both judges and the community. Elimi- nating racial and ethnic bias is just another way for judges to carry out their responsibility to be impartial. Eliminating racial and ethc bias in the judicial branch will put the courts in a better posture to deal with future challenges. Chief Justice Baca stated that he was honored by the fact that the Conference was held in his state, at a site not far from where he was born. He hopes that the Conference will be like a garden from which blossoms bloom and that Albuquerque becomes synony- mous with that garden in which courts gathered to discuss fairness and access.

Conference Update and “Where Do We Go from Here?”

Moderator Professor Charles J. Ogletree, Jr

On Sunday, March 5, 1995, the Conference opened with the plenary session, “Conference Update.” Professor Ogletree asked each group to share how it identified and plans to address anticipated barriers. Later, in the session “Where Do We Go from Here?”, Professor Ogletree asked a representative of each team to highlight the most significant aspects of their respective state plans. Presentations were made at these two sessions by the teams from Alabama, Arkansas, California, Delaware, the District of Co- lumbia and the D.C. Circuit, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Florida, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington State, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Addressing Barriers One team suggested that one way to avoid some barriers is to not limit the discussion of bias to disparities in criminal sentencing. Another approach is to frame the discussion of bias narrowly, that is, not as addressing the general topic of bias, but addressing specific issues that are a part of the more general topic, such as underrepresentation of people of color in the judicial workforce. Addressing the court’s relationship with the legislative branch, a state legislator stated that in her state the courts approach the legislature every year for fhding. The legislator said that legislators need the courts to lobby them because that is how legislators are educated. When the courts submit a proposal to the legislature, the courts must send someone who can explain it and who has hard data to support it. By participating at the Conference, she got some data that she can use to support legislative initiatives to address bias. The state legislator also observed that terms that are political red flags should be avoided.

69 Another participant added that the courts must address oversensitivity to racial and ethnic bias. Some segments of the community feel that the mere establishment of a body to address the issue assumes that racial and ethnic bias exists.

Recurring Themes in the Stale Plans Some of the major themes that emerged from the discussion were: 0 Improving state court relationships with tribal courts 0 Establishing a racial and ethnic bias commission in jurisdictions where no formal action has been taken to address bias 0 Improving access to the courts for non-English speakers through court interpreters, certification of court interpreters, and multilingual signage 0 Putting into place a commission for implementation, a new round of follow-up activities, or assessment in the jurisdictions where a final report has been issued 0 Providing education, including diversity training, for judges and court staff 0 Providing intercultural training for judges and court staff in jurisdictions where people of color are not a minority 0 Addressing the underrepresentation of people of color on the bench and in the judicial workforce 0 Raising community awareness of the problems caused by racial and ethnic bias in the judicial branch 0 Improving the administration of juries, including obtaining an inclusive jury 0 Establishing formal working relationships with other states and looking to other states in order to learn fiom their experiences 0 Encouraging cross-cultural friendships 0 Getting the judicial leadership (i.e., the chiefjustice) involved in the process 0 Establishing informal feedback mechanisms and a formal grievance procedure 0 Addressing bias in organizations that are large users of court services, such as the offices of the prosecutor and the public defender 0 Building the base of external support that the courts need to address the problem

Report from the Women of Color Discussion Group A participant fiom California remarked that the Conference offered a unique opportunity for exchanges between men and women from across the country on the racial and ethnic bias issues that women of color must address. She added that der prioritizing its research agenda, California made a deliberate decision not to conduct original research into this area because of the costs. Arline Tyler presented the report of the women of color discussion group, “Women of Color Exploring the Agenda,” that took place on Friday evening at the La Placita Restaurant in Old Town Albuquerque. Both male and female Conference participants of various racial and ethnic backgrounds attended the women of color discussion group. The discussion group set an agenda for addressing the barriers faced by women of color. In a report titled “La Placita Manifesto,” the discussion group declared that women of color encounter the compounded bias of racism and sexism in the justice sys-

70 tem. The experiences of women of color have been neglected or inadequately addressed by the commissions established to address gender or racial and ethnic bias in the courts. The report states that the dual barriers of sexism and racism present themselves to women of color who are judges, as well as other officers or employees of the court, and to court users, such as witnesses, litigants, defendants, and law students. The discussion group called for the inclusion of women of color in all aspects of commission work, including research, recommendation formulation, and implementation. Other actions called for in “La Placita Manifesto” are the implementation of strategies to address bias, inclusion in planning other conferences, collective support for research, outreach efforts to and coalition building with organizations and individuals with similar interests, a national conference on women of color in the courts, and implementing strategies to eliminate the sexism and racism burdens imposed on women of color in all aspects of the justice system.

Professor Ogletree’s Observations on the Conference Professor Ogletree remarked that inclusion is a major theme of the state plans and of the Conference in general. He observed that 40 percent of the chief justices in the closing panel were women. He continued by stating that while this was not necessarily the endpoint, it did indicate progress, because not long ago a panel with as many women chief justices would not have been possible. Professor Ogletree then charged the participants to be part of the solution to the problems of racial and ethnic bias in the courts. He made the following observations:

The state plans stressed inclusion and the promotion of fairness, not quotas, imbalance, or favoritism. When the state teams return to their home states they should contact their chief justices and discuss the issues. The chief justices must take personal responsibility for eliminating racial and ethnic bias. Each state team should prepare a public statement of its goals. Who will respond to the challenge? Focusing on the positive means taking personal responsibility and not blaming others for inaction. The community must be directly involved in what the court is doing. One way to get community involvement is to survey users of court services. The Conference participants have to go to the community. Judges and court officials must get out of the courthouse. While success cannot always be measured, actions can be monitored. Data collection instruments to assist courts in monitoring implementation are needed. The states should collaborate and consult with other states. Vigilance must be continuous. The state teams and the state commissions must not rest on their accomplishments and must move on to the next phase. Education and training are very important. The appropriate boundaries must be observed. The court system is not the proper venue for solving all of society’s problems. When necessary, build coa- litions with other organizations that can take action.

71 0 Addressing bias as a united effort does not mean uniformity from state to state.

0 Attacking bias is a difficult struggle. Addressing racial and ethnic bias will not be easy. Planning and putting on this Conference was not easy, but it was held in spite of adverse forces, such as the current political climate. 0 The state legislature can be an ally with the courts in addressing bias. 0 In the discussion of racial and ethnic bias, there are a lot of intersections of race or ethnicity with gender, language, and culture. 0 Goals, timetables, and budget are important when setting up formal mechanisms and other strategies to address bias planning. n Professor Ogletree concluded that he found his three days in Albuquerque incredi- bly rewarding. He noted that the Conference was the first professional gathering of judges or attorneys that he had ever attended that did not have a golf or tennis tournament on the agenda. This indicated to him that the participants came to the Conference to work diligently and not to engage in the traditional, more comfortable conversation.

Judge McBeth urged the Conference participants to meet with their chief justices, not only to urge them to take personal responsibility, but also to thank them for what they have done in supporting their state's participation at the Conference and for the other activities addressing fairness in their judicial system. Judge McBeth noted that the chief justices are courageous because they are not only struggling with the state legislatures, but are also at the center of the struggle within their state court system for scarce resources. She noted that the chiefjustices are dedicated to what we are doing and should be encouraged and thanked. And even if the chief justice were not willing to make changes, the conference participants as individuals can do so. Judge McBeth then acknowledged all of the persons and organizations that contributed to the Conference. Following the acknowledgments, Judge McBeth remarked that judges can become isolated on the bench. She found it refreshing to come to the Conference and to have met so many who have been struggling for access and fairness for a very long time. When people have given their whole lives for our system of justice, it is very hard to give up or to become cynical. Judge Nathaniel Jones reminded her that the weekend of the Confer- ence is the 30th anniversary of the civil rights march on Selma, Alabama, March 3-4, 1965. The conscience of our nation was shocked when the peaceful, multicultural assem- blage of people was met with violence. While it is important to talk about changing institutions and organizations, it is also important for each person to change inside. This was one of the reoccurring conference themes, which was raised by Chief Justice Ellen Ash Peters, Judge Rudolph Diu, Chair of the California Presiding Judges Association, H. T. Smith, Dr. Robert Henderson, and others. Judge McBeth closed by telling the participants that she hoped to see them at the next conference and that, until then, she wanted them to remember that the true joy in life

72 is not complaining that you are not happy with the world; rather, it is making your own contribution to the world. The more that you contribute, the brighter the candle of your life bums. It is up to you to make your candle bum as bright as a splendid torch that can be handed down to future generations.

73 APPENDICES BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES

ELEANOR D. ACHESON is currently the of the United States District Court in Portland, Assistant Attorney General for Policy Develop- Maine. ment in the U.S. Department of Justice, appointed by President Bill Clinton and confirmed BENJAMIN ARANDA ZII has been a trial by the US. Senate in August 1993. judge in the South Bay Judicial District of Cali- At the Department, Ms. Acheson is re- fornia for 16 years. During this period, he has sponsible for a broad range of policy initiatives received numerous assignments from his state’s assisting Attorney General Janet Reno with de- chief justices-he has sat on the California fining and implementing new policies regarding Court of Appeals for two years, the Los Angeles crime, welfare reform, and access to justice. Superior Court for two years, the Avalon Among others, Ms. Acheson also is responsible (Catalina) Justice Court, and numerous munici- for the Administration’s judrcial selection proc- pal courts. ess, working with the White House and the Sen- Judge Aranda was elected a Trustee of the ate to ensure a highquality federal judiciary. Los Angeles County Bar Association, is a past Prior to her nomination, Ms. Acheson was President of the Mexican-American Bar Asso- a partner in the Boston, Massachusetts, law firm ciation, and is the only three-term national of Ropes & Gray, where her practice focused on President of the H~spanicNational Bar Associa- civil litigation. At the firm, she served as the tion. He has also served as Chair of the 188- originator and later coordinator of an active pro member Los Angeles County Municipal Court bono program. Her own practice included a Judges Association, which coordinates the ac- wide range of pro bono representation on behalf tivities of the 24 independent municipal courts of women and minorities. She served on the of Los Angeles County. Board of Directors of Women, Inc., a residential An experienced judicial lecturer having rehabilitation program for drug- and alcohol- taught numerous courses in California’s Judrcial addicted women and their children; was ap- Education program on the subjects of civil and pointed by Governor Dukakis to serve as a criminal case settlement, media and the law, Trustee of Roxbury Community College, Massa- alternative sentencing, and court management, chusetts’ only public college for racial, ethnic, Judge Aranda has also lectured to judicial col- and language minorities; served on the Board of leagues in New Mexico; Colorado; at the Judi- the Volunteer Lawyers’ Project and on several cial College of Reno, Nevada; and on behalf of committees of the Boston Bar Association that the American Bar Association in El Salvador. addressed issues concerning legal representation Judge Aranda is the Chair-Elect of the for the underrepresented. She is the founder of Judicial Administration Division’s National the New England Women Leaders group, now Conference of Special Court Judges, a founding known as the Massachusetts Women Leaders, member of the ABA Commission on Opportu- which supports political dialogue on issues and nity for Minorities in the Profession, a past elections important to women candidates in member of both the Standing Committee on Massachusetts. Membership and the Standing Committee on Ms. Acheson received the Boston Bar As- Judicial Selection, Tenure and Compensation, sociation’s Pro Bono Coordinator of the Year and currently is a member of JAD’s Task Force Award in 1991; the Massachusetts Women’s on Opportunities for Minorities. He served as Political Caucus Abigail Adams Award in 1993; Chair of Blue Cross of California, a six billion and a recent award from the Women’s Statewide dollar corppration. He is a Regent of Loyola Legislative Network in Massachusetts for her Marymount University and the founder of the “lifelong commitment to the issues of women American IM of Court for the South Bay Area and poverty.” in California. Ms. Acheson was raised in Washington, Prior to his appointment to the bench, D.C., and graduated from Wellesley College in Judge Aranda was a litigator and name partner 1969 and the National Law Center at George with the firm of Harris & Aranda in Marina del Washington University in 1973. She served as a Rey, California, specializing in civil litigation. law clerk to the Honorable Edward T. Gignoux Judge Aranda was educated at Loyola High 77 School and Loyola University of Los Angeles consultant for the office of the Secretary of De- and received his J.D. from Loyola Law School. fense on Planning and Recruitment Strategies for the Year 2000. JOSEPH F. BACA, Chief Justice of the As a consultant and trainer, Dr. Beaty has New Mexico Supreme Court, began his career in designed and delivered training programs for 1965 as a law clerk for the New Mexico High- executive and mid-level managers in the follow- way Department. In 1965, he became Assistant ing areas: total quality management; statistical District Attorney in Santa Fe and was made process control; leadership; teamwork; customer Chief Judge of the Second Judicial District of service and innovation; career development; New Mexico in 1982. He was elected to an communications; diversity; and human resource eight-year term as Justice of the New Mexico management. Supreme Court in 1989 and to a two-year term Widely published in several national pro- as Chief Justice in 1994. fessional journals, Dr. Beaty has written about Among the many honors and awards Chief such topics as gender differences; management Justice Baca has received during his career are challenges; cross-cultural research; job satisfac- the Albuquerque ,Outstanding Alumnus Award tion; and ethics. His publications have appeared from the University of New Mexico Alumni in such prestigious publications as The Harvard Association (1990); the Qulncentennial Com- Business Review, Calfornia Management Re- memoration Achievement Award from the New view, and Journal ofManagement Development. Mexico Hispanic Bar Association (1992); and Dr. Beaty has also coauthored a chapter in the the J. William Fulbright Distinguished Public book Individual Career Planning and Develop- Service Award from the George Washington men! in Organizalions. University Law Alumni Association (1994). Chief Justice Baca received his B.A. in KEITH 0. BOYUM is Professor of Politi- education from the University of New Mexico; cal Science at California State University, his J.D. from George Washington University Fullerton. The author of a large number of books National Law Center in Washington, D.C.; and and articles, Boyum has focused principally his Master of Laws from the University of Vir- upon the administration of judiciaries and Cali- ginia Law School. fornia government. Boyum is the immediate past Editor-in-Chief of The Justice System Journal, a WLLW W; BAKER is a graduate of peer-reviewed and indexed publication in the Stanford and the University of Washington area of judicial administration. His consulting School of Law. He clerked for the State Supreme activities have featured work for the Judicial Court, then had an active trial practice in Ev- Council of California, especially concerning erett for 23 years before his appointment to the long-range planning for the courts. Boyum won Court of Appeals, Division I, where he has the 1994 Warren E. Burger Award from the served since January 1990. In his private prac- National Center for State Courts, given annually tice, he was active in professional and commu- in recognition of outstanding contributions to nity activities, and as a judge he has served on the field of court management. As a member of the Gender and Justice, and Minority and Justice Cal State Fullerton’s faculty since 1972, he Commissions. He chairs the Planning Commit- teaches juniors a class that surveys law and tee for the full Court of Appeals. politics, “Public Law,” and seniors and graduate students “Judicial Process,” “The Politics of DAWD BE4TY, Ph.D., Consultant and Education Policy,” and “Sacramento Policy Trainer for C&W Associates, Inc., received his Seminar.” doctorate in organizational development from the University of Port Elizabeth, South Africa. PAULETTE BROW, a former municipal Currently a Professor at Hampton University, court judge for the City of Plaintield, New Jer- Hampton, Virginia, Dr. Beaty has extensive sey, is managing partner of the East Orange, experience as a consultant and trainer for both New Jersey, law firm of Brown Lofton Childress public and private organizations. He designed & Wolfe, which is noted for its community and has managed since 1990 the Department of service and for the highquality legal services the Army’s Civilian Personnel Administration that it provides for its clients. Before going into Program Managers Course. He also serves as a private practice, Ms. Brown served as an attor-

78 ney for a number of institutions, including Buck cial agent for the Central Intelligence Agency Consultants, Inc., Prudential Insurance Com- and worked in Washington, D.C., and the San pany, and National Steel Corporation. Francisco Bay area. A graduate of Howard University and Se- She received her B.S. in psychology from ton Hall University School of Law, Ms. Brown Ohio State University and her M.B.A. from San has a record of continuous community service Francisco State University. and is aliated with several local and national organizations, including the National Bar As- CARL J. CHARACTER was appointed in sociation, the American Bar Association, the 1976 to the Cuyahoga Court of Common Pleas Garden State Bar Association, and the Associa- by Ohio Governor Richard Celeste. In 1990, he tion of Black Women Lawyers of New Jersey. In was elected to the bench and continues to serve 1993, she was named New Jerseyan of the Year, in the General Division, where he is the only and in 1986, she received the New Jersey State black male of the 34 judges. Bar Association’s Young Lawyer of the Year Judge Character is a native Clevelander. Award. She became the first fican-American He attended Cleveland Public Schools and to ever receive this award. graduated from Glenville High School in 1948. For the Bar Year 1993-1994, Paulette As a youth, he was a dedicated Boy Scout and Brown served as the President of the National became one of Cleveland’s first black Eagle Bar Association (NBA). She is also active in and Scouts. He attended the 1947 World Jamboree in a past officer of the NBA’s local regional affili- Paris, France, as a result. ate, the Garden State Bar Association. Judge Character graduated Ohio State An active advocate of civil rights, University with highest honors in accounting women’s rights, and the rights of all ethnic mi- and went on to attend the University of Michi- norities, Ms. Brown served as an international gan Law School on an academic scholarship. In monitor for the first alldemocratic election in 1965, he earned a Master of Law from Cleve- South Africa and has been invited to consult land Marshall College of Law of Cleveland State nationally and internationally on constitutional University. issues. She currently serves on the American As a trial attorney for over 30 years, Judge Bar Association’s Steering Committee on Un- Character appeared in person or by brief at every met Legal Needs of Children and serves as Vice level of the state and federal court system. He Chair of the American Bar Association’s practiced before various administrative and Council on Racial and Ethnic Bias. She is a quasi-judicial bodies, representing a variety of member of the New Jersey Supreme Court clients, including welfare recipients, profes- Committee on Minority Concerns in the Judici- sional athletes, Fortune 500 companies, and ary, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals Task offenders, for crimes ranging from from minor Force on Equal Treatment in the Courts, and the misdemeanors to aggravated murder. Advisory Board of the Carter G. Woodson Judge Character is an honorably dis- Foundation. Ms. Brown is also an active mem- charged veteran of the U.S. Army, having ber in a number of other civic and legal organi- served during the Korean War. He is a past zations and a master in the c. Willard Heckle President of the National Bar Association and Inn of Court. A lecturer for numerous organiza- has many years of service in his community, his tions and educational institutions, Ms. Brown state, and his country. He has earned an excel- has a special interest in addressing all levels of lent reputation for integrity, knowledge, and students. Recently, she founded the Jr. Law So- fairness. ciety of St. Philip’s Academy. JUNE H. CICERO is the Director of the MARILYN CALLA WAY is the Director of Minnesota Supreme Court office of Continuing San Diego Juvenile Court, a position she has Education. Judge Cicero also sits on the Mu- held for the past five years. Previously she nicipal Bench in River Falls, Wisconsin, a posi- worked for the National Center for State Courts tion she has held for ten years. Judge Cicero for two years and was involved in several re- obtained a B.A. degree from Wheaton College gional and national projects. and a J.D. degree from William Mitchell Col- Ms. Callaway began her career as a Police lege of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota. In addition, Oflicer in Columbus, Ohio. She later was a spe- Judge Cicero has a Master of Judrcial Studies

79 degree from the University of Nevada. Judge Chef Justices. Cicero has a life-long career in education at the An invited speaker at the 1992 National public school system, the University, and the Annual Conference of the National American law school levels. As Director of the Minnesota Indan Court Judges Association, held in Supreme Court Office of Continuing Education, Washington, D.C., Judge Cloud has also been a Judge Cicero is responsible for the continuing faculty member for several Sovereignty professional education of the Minnesota judici- Symposiums sponsored by the Oklahoma Supreme ary and state court personnel. Judge Cicero sits Court, the Oklahoma Indian Affairs Commission, on a number of national judicial education advi- and the Oklahoma Sovereignty Symposium, Inc. sory committees as well as acting as an educa- He is a member of the coordinating Council, under tional consultant to various states. direction of the Conference of Chief Justices (funded by the State Justice Institute), which is CIL4RLEs RILEY CLOUD is a judge from responsible for idenmg and resolving problems Norfolk, Virginia’s general district court and is an of conflict and jurisdiction between tribal and state enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation of courts. Judge Cloud is also Cochair of the Native Oklahoma (sometimes called the Western American Tribal Cow Committee of the National Cherokee). His grandfather, Reverend Heruy L. Conference of Special Court Judges for the Cloud, a Methodist minister, was a full-blooded American Bar Association. A goal of this Cherokee Indian, born near Tahlequah, Indian committee is to educate the public as well as the Temtory (Oklahoma). Although orphaned as a courts about the substantial contributions of Native child, Reverend Cloud was one of a few Indians to Americans to our democracy, includmg their be elected to serve as a delegate to the influence on our Constitution and Bill of Rights, as Constitutional Convention when Indian Territory revealed in pnmary source documents. became the State of Oklahoma. Judge Cloud’s Drafted into the United States Army in 1953, Cherokee relatives were among those removed by Judge Cloud sewed as an enhsted man and was force from their homes in the eastern United States honorably discharged in 1955 to return to college. to western Indian Territory during the mfknous His last eight months were sewed in Korea. Having Trail of Tears.‘ Judge Cloud’s late father, Riley received his B.A. from the College of William and Hamilton Cloud, returned his fam@ to the east in Mary in 1957, Judge Cloud went on to receive his 1941, settling in Norfolk, Virgma His late mother, B.C.L. [Bachelor of Civil Law, now Doctor of law] Gertrude Maxtin Cloud, was Scotch-Irish. from Marshall-Wythe School of Law, College of Origmlly, elected to sewe as a judge of the William and Mary, in 1959. General District Court of the City of Norfolk, Virginia, in 1986, Judge Cloud was later elected to CANDACE D. COOPER has been a judge serve a two-year term as its Chief Judge in 1990. since 1980, sewing first on the Los Angeles Judge Cloud actively improves the administration Municipal Court and continuing on the La An- of justice as well as promotes Native American geles Superior Court from 1987 to present. She considemtion and support in many ways. He was is currently assigned to civil trial court, and her the first Native American member of a recogxuzed principal assignments have been in the criminal Indian Nation to be elected to serve on the Board of area. She has participated in numerous panels Trustees of the ,National Judicial College, and he relating to handling high-publicity cases, child was the lirst member of a recogxuzed Indian nation witness/victims, and, more recently, in the area to serve as a Trustee of the Jamestown-Yorktown of increasing diversity among the judiciary. An Foundation, a Virginia Agency that oversees active judge, she previously served as the Presi- museums at Jamestown and Yorktown, Virginia. dent of the 2000-member California Judges As- Judge Cloud has worked closely with such sociation and has participated on numerous renowned Native Americans as Wilma Mankiller, boards and commissions, including the Califor- kcipal Chief of the Cherokee Nation; Ross 0. nia State Bar Commission on the Future of the Swimmer, former Principal Chief of the Cherokee Legal Profession and the State Bar, the Judicial Nation and former Assistant Secretary of the Council Select Committee on Judicial Retire- Interior Department, Bureau of Indian Affairs; ment, and the Judicial Council Advisory Robert Yazzie, Chief Justice of the Nmjo Nation; Committee on Private Judges. She currently and Tom Tso, Chief Justice Emeritus of the Nmjo serves on California’s Judicial Council Advisory Nation and Honorary Member of the Confmce of Committee on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the

80 courts. a member of the State Superior Court and is pres- Judge Cooper received her B.A. and J.D. ently the presiding judge of the Chancery Division, from the University of Southern California General mty, sitting in Camden County. Judge (USC). She is involved in alumni affairs, serv- Davis’s carer, in addition to the practice of cop ing on the Board of Councilors for the Law rate tax law, took him to the classroom of Temple Center at USC and assisting the black alumni University’s School of Law as a lecturer for Seven association (Ebonics) for the University. She is years, chairman of the New Jersey Superior Court active in numerous professional associations that Board of Bar Examiners for seven years and a host are concerned with issues confronting minorities of other positions related to the law. in the’ profession of law and people/women of color in general. She has received a number of LEWIS L. DOUGLASS, after attending distinguished awards for her judicial perform- Boys High and Brooklyn College, graduated ance including: Los Angeles County Bar Asso- from St. John’s University in 1956. He practiced ciation, Outstanding Trial Jurist 1992-1993; law for several years in Brooklyn prior to serv- Century City Bar Association, Criminal Judge of ing as an Assistant United States Attorney, as the Year 1992; California Association of Black the Deputy Director of the Bedford-Stuyvesant Lawyers, Bernard Jefferson Award 1991; Redevelopment Corporation, and general coun- Women Lawyers of Los Angeles, Ernestine sel to a national organization that provided as- Stalhut Award 1989; USC, Alumni Merit sistance to community groups building low-cost Award 1994. housing. From 1972 to 1975, Judge Douglass served CAROL DA VANAY, Program Specialist as the Executive Deputy Commissioner of the for the First National Conference on Eliminat- New York State prison system. He has been a ing Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, is re- judge since 1978 and now presides over major sponsible for conference logistics, worhng felony prosecutions in the Supreme Court of the closely with hotels, the Albuquerque Convention State of New York. Center, and faculty. A program specialist for the Judge Douglass has written extensively in Institute for Court Management, Ms. Davanay criminal law, and many of his opinions are re- coordinates the phases of the Court Executive ported in the official State Reporter. He is the Development Program, a program encompass- first judge in New York State to allow the prose- ing over 700 graduates and over 250 current cutor to introduce evidence on rape trauma syn- participants, and ICM national program work- drome to show the effects of rape on victims and shops. was the first judge to accept the results of lie Ms. Davanay has been with the National detector tests in a criminal prosecution. Center since 1990, when she took over adminis- Judge Douglass has taught in several col- trative staff duties for three of the Center’s Sec- leges in New York City, including York, St. retariat organizations: the Conference of Chief John’s, and John Jay College of Criminal Jus- Justices, the Conference of State Court Adminis- tice. He is currently Chair of the Franklin H. trators, and the National Association of Women Williams Judicial Commission on Minorities, a Judges. Among her other duties, she is &tor of commission of judges and lawyers appointed by the Court Executive Development Program the Chief Judge to develop various strategies for (CEDP) Fellows’ newsletter, CEDP Monitor, a improving the treatment of minorities in the quarterly publication for graduates of the pro- judicial system. gram. Before completing graduate work at the CARMEN FLORES is the Affirmative College of William and Mary’s Department of Action Officer for the Administrative office of Education, Ms. Davanay received her under- the Courts,.Judiciary of the State of New Jersey. graduate degree in English and business ad- She is a graduate of the University of Pennsyl- ministration (cum luude) from Sam Houston vania and possesses 15 years of experience as a State University in Huntsville, Texas. seasoned administrator with broad-based expertise in human resources, equal employment op- THEODORE Z. DAWS is the former portunity/afXxmative action compliance, chairman of the New Jersey Supreme Court Task program developmenthmplementation,training, Force on Minority Concerns in the Judiciary. He is recruitment, and marketing.

81 With the Administrative Office of the ongoing professional education of judges and Courts since 1986, Ms. Flores has successfully other juvenile justice professionals. He is also implemented programs affecting close to 10,000 the Council’s Project Director for the project “A court employees, which have enhanced the New Judicial Response to the Disproportionate Incar- Jersey Judiciary’s statewide visibility as an em- ceration of Minority Youth in America.” ployer and doubled its minority workforce from Mr. Gamble received a B.S. degree from 13 percent in 1987 to 27 percent in 1995. Ms. the Pennsylvania State University, an M.A. de- Flores also spearheads the New Jersey Judici- gree in administration of justice from the Uni- ary’s Minority Law Clerk Recruitment Program, versity of Pittsburgh, and an Educational which is recognized nationally as a unique and Specialist degree from the University of Nevada, innovative model. Over 400 law clerks are hired Reno where he is currently a doctoral candidate annually at all levels of the court system. With in education administration. this program, the Judiciary has been able to at- tain the dual goals of excellence and diversity in DOLLY M. GEE is a partner at the law its law clerk workforce. firm of Schwartz, Steinsapir, Dohrmann & Sommers in Los Angeles, California, whch MARGARET J. FOMYER serves as an specializes in the representation of labor organi- Administrative Secretary for the Research De- zations and jointly administered pension and partment of the National Center for State Courts health and welfare trust funds. Ms. Gee handles (NCSC), currently assigned to support the First matters for a variety of private and public sector National Conference on Eliminating Racial and labor organizations in state and federal court Ethnic Bias in the Courts and the Court Statis- and before administrative agencies such as the tics Project. Ms. FOnner joined the National National Labor Relations Board, the Equal Em- Center for State Courts staff in January 1995. ployment Opportunity Commission, the Public Her responsibilities include administrative sup- Employment Relations Board, and the Com- port to project directors. mission on Professional Competence (which Ms. Fonner brings four years of experience deals with certified employees of school dis- in governmenthonappropriated fund service to tricts). the NCSC, with a background in financial man- Ms. Gee is a past President of the Southern agement and personnel-related areas. She holds California Chinese Lawyers Association and a a B.B.A. (business administration) from Camp- member of the National Asian Paaiic American bell University (1989), with two minor concen- Bar Association. She is currently serving as a trations in management and marketing. member of the Board of Trustees of the Los An- geles County Bar Association and is a member DAnD J. GAMBLE started his career in of its Judicial Appointments Committee. She is juvenile justice as a Juvenile Probation Officer a Lawyer Representative for the Central District for the Allegheny County Juvenile Court in of California to the Ninth Circuit Judicial Con- Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. There he was respon- ference. She also serves on the Board of the sible for the caseload management of approxi- Western Center on Law and Poverty. Recently, mately 50 youths adjudicated by the courts. she was appointed by President Clinton to serve In an effort to broaden his experiences and on the Federal Service Impasses Panel in contributions to the juvenile justice system, Mr. Washington, D.C. Gamble accepted his current position with the Ms. Gee attended the University of Cali- National Council of Juvenile and Family Court fornia, Los Angeles (B.A. 1981, J.D. 1984). Judges, located in Reno, Nevada, as Manager of Following law school, Ms. Gee served as a law cuniculum Training. There Mr. Gamble plans, clerk for two years to the Honorable Milton L. organizes, and directs the curriculum develop Schwartz, United States District Judge, Eastern ment and training functions of designated District of California. Council training programs. Mr. Gamble is responsible for the Council’s juvenile probation DENISE M. GLOYER is an educa- management programs, the core college pro- tiodtraining specialist for the Court Education gram for new juvenile and family court judges, Division of the Federal Judicial Center, where the family law program, juvenile detention pro- she has worked for over three years. In this grams, and other programs that deal with the position, she researched and wrote a guide

82 c

entitled Diversity in the Courts: A Federal law review article on court interpreters and Judicial Center Guide to Assessment and language barriers in the courtroom. Training. The purpose of the guide is to assist courts to systematically plan, assess needs, and JANICE L. GRAD WOHL presently serves develop diversity education programs for court as a Visiting Adjunct Professor of Law, Uni- personnel using outside experts. In addition, she versity of Nebraska College of Law, teaching serves as a resource person to federal courts that judicial administration at the University of Ne- are planning diversity programs, provides braska campus and comparative criminal law in limited training to the courts on diversity issues, the People’s Republic of China for the Univer- and is developing a diversity faculty database. sity of Nebraska College of Law International Ms. Glover received her Ph.D. in library Programs. She is also a judge of the county court science from the University of Michigan in for the State of Nebraska on active retirement, 1982, where she specialized in library having previously served as judge of the county administration and the administration of special court for the Third Judicial District of Nebraska collections of African-American materials. She from 1985 to 1990 and judge of the Lincoln worked for over ten years in academic libraries (Nebraska) Municipal Court from 1974 to 1985. and in a museum and research center, where she She was presiding judge of both courts. held various positions from archivist and Judge Gradwohl is Secretary and a mem- librarian to assistant director. She also con- ber of the Executive Committee of the Board of ducted training programs and seminars for Directors of the State Justice Institute, having faculty, staff, and students. been appointed by President Reagan and reap- Ms. Glover’s publications include Voices pointed by President Bush. She has served as of the Spirit: Sources for Interpreting the Chair of the National Conference of Special Afiican-American Experience, a book published Court Judges of the American Bar Association by the American Library Association (January and as Chair of the Committee on Jury Stan- 1995). dards of the Judicial Administration Division of the American Bar Association. Judge Gradwohl CHARLES M. GRABAU received his was a member of the National Jury Standards B.A. degree from Tufts University and his J.D. Task Force, which drafled the American Bar from the National Law Center, Washington, Association Standards Relating To Juror Use D.C. Judge Grabau worked for the Boston Legal and Management, adopted by the American Bar Aid Society and the Massachusetts Defenders Association in 1983. She has been a member of Committee and was in private practice before the faculty of the National Judicial College. Her being appointed to the Boston Municipal Court publications include materials on jury standards, in 1979. He was the first Hispanic judge criminal law, and evidence. appointed in Massachusetts. In 1985, Judge Prior to her appointment to the bench, Grabau was appointed to the Superior Court, Judge Gradwohl was a deputy prosecuting attor- where he presently sits. He has served as a ney for Lancaster County, Nebraska. Her other member of the Supreme Judicial Court Gender legal experience includes the private practice of Equality Committee and is a member of the law with Kier, Cobb & Luedtke, Lincoln, Ne- Trial Court Committee on Court Interpreters. braska; a position as Assistant to the Director, Judge Grabau is a member of the Supreme Court World Tax Series, Ward Law School; and as Committee of the Hispanic National Bar a civilian legal advisor for the United States Air Association. Force. Judge Grabau is an Adjunct Professor of Judge Gradwohl has served as a member of Law at the Boston University School of Law. He the Advisory Board for the Multicultural Coun- has lectured for the International Institute of seling Center at the Lincoln Indian Center and Buffalo, New York, on the issue of court as a member of the Advisory Committee for the interpreters; has been a member of the Ad Hoc Nebraska Judges’ Cultural Diversity Training. Work Group on Court Interpretation at the She has received the Franklin N. Flaschner National Law Center, Williamsburg, Virginia; Award of the American Bar Association, “as the and was a member of the Planning Committee outstanding trial judge in the United States on a for Judicial Training (Flaschner Institute) on trial court with special jurisdiction for distin- Minorities. In 1985, Judge Grabau coauthored a guished service in improving the quality of jus-

83 uce in special courts”; the National Center for demia after a rich and rewarding career in pub- State Courts’ Distinguished Service Award for lic service. Her most recent position was that of outstanding service as a state trial judge; the General Counsel and Vice President of Legal Nebraska State Bar Association Award of Spe- Affairs for the New York City Health and Hospi- cial Merit; the Lincoln Council on Alcoholism tals Corporation, the three billion dollar public and Drugs Silver Anniversary Award for leader- benefit corporation operating the city’s vast ship in combating drug and alcohol abuse in the public health system. community; and other awards for the quality of Before entering the field of health care, her judicial service. Professor Handy was the Executive Director of the New York State Judicial Commission on H. CLIFTON GRANDY is the Project Minorities. She has consulted for both federal Director of the First National Conference on and state courts and for numerous commissions Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the and task forces on gender and race fairness and Courts project. He has also directed the Denial is one of the authors of “Establishing and Op- of Federal Benefits, the Judicial Education in erating a Task Force or Commission on Racial Child Support Enforcement, Improving the and Ethnic Bias in the Courts.” Recently, Pro- Courts’ Responses to Drug Cases, and Felony fessor Handy was selected by the Federal Judi- Dispositions in Limited Jurisdiction Courts proj- cial Center to advise staff on the development of ects. a research guide on diversity in the federal His publications at the National Center for courts. State Courts are on eliminating bias from the After graduating from Georgetown Uni- courts, felony case processing, and child support versity Law Center and New York University, enforcement. Other publications include Report Edna Wells Handy began her legal career as a of the Symposium on the Periodic Review and federal district court clerk to the Honorable Modification of Child Support Orders and Ju- Lawrence W. Pierce, followed by her appoint- dicial Responsibility in Expediting Child Sup- ments as an Assistant United States Attorney for port and Paternity Cases. the Southern District of New York and Bureau Mr. Grandy has been faculty for the Insti- Chief and Assistant District Attorney for Kings tute for Court Management; the National Judi- County. Professor Handy is a nationally recog- cial College; the National Bar Association; the nized expert on the Bar exam, having recently National Council of Juvenile and Family Court published, “You Can Pass the Bar Exam,” a Judges; the American Association of Family and step-by-step guide to success. Conciliation Courts; the Maryland Institute for the Continuing Professional Education of Law- TERRY J. HATTER, Jr., was appointed yers, Inc.; the Texas Association for Court Man- to the United States District Court for the Cen- agement; and several other organizations. tral District of California in 1979. Prior thereto, Before joining the NCSC, Mr. Grandy was he was a judge of the California Superior Court a Master for Domestic Relations Causes for the for Los Angeles County. He received his law Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, degree from the University of Chicago Law Maryland, and conducted hearings for the es- School in 1960 and his undergraduate degree in tablishment of paternity and child support and government from Wesleyan University in Con- the modification and enforcement of support necticut. orders. His illustrious law career has included Prior to becoming a judicial officer, Mr. service as an Assistant Public Defender in Cook Grandy gained experience in personnel and civil County, Illinois; Assistant United States Attor- rights law as an associate county attorney, asso- ney in the Northern District of California; Chief ciate corporation counsel, and as the executive Counsel for the San Francisco Neighborhood director of a county agency. Legal Assistance Foundation; Regional Legal Mr. Grandy has a B.A. from Wesleyan Services Director of the Office of Economic Op- University in Connecticut, a J.D. from the portunity; Executive Director of the Western Georgetown University Law Center, and is a Center on Law and Poverty; Associate Professor Fellow of the Institute for Court Management. of Law at Loyola University of Southern Cali- fornia Law Center, and Professor of Law at EDNA WELLS HANDY returns to aca- Loyola University School of Law.

84 I Judge Hatter has been active in numerous for Humanity, and a participant on the Religion, community programs involving legal services Morality, and Violence panel of the “Anatomy and defense. He also served the City of Los An- of Hate: Saving Our Children” Conference co- geles as the Executive Assistant to the Mayor sponsored by Eli Wiesel and Governor Mario and Director of Criminal Justice Planning, and Cuomo. later as Special Assistant to the Mayor and Di- Robert C. Henderson currently serves as rector of Urban Development. He presently the Secretary-General of the National Spiritual chairs the Board of Councilors of the University Assembly of the Baha’is of the Unites States, the of Southern California Law Center and sits on governing body of the American Baha’i com- the Board of the Western Justice Center and the munity. The Baha’i Faith is an independent Board of Overseers of the Rand Institute for world religion whose pivotal principle is the Civil Justice. oneness of humanlund.

ROBERT C. HENDERSON is a manage- WILLIAM E. HEWITT is a Senior Re- ment consultant who has taken an active role in searcher in the Research Division of the Na- eliminating prejudice from all aspects of society. tional Center for State Courts. Mr. Hewitt’s A consultant to the California Supreme Court, recent work at the NCSC has focused on lan- he led meetings of Supreme Court members, guage interpreting in the courts. He is the author judges, and lawyers to create a plan for the es- of a forthcoming publication entitled Court In- tablishment of a California State Supreme Court terpretation: Model Guides for Policy and Commission on Race and Ethnic Bias. At the Practice (NCSC, 1995). He is also the author of invitation of the Governor of the Common- several research monographs previously pub- wealth of Kentucky, he was a member of the lished by the NCSC, including Computer Aided environmental equity panel of the 18th Annual Transcription: Current Technology and Court Governor’s Conference on the Environment, Applications (1 994); Courts That Succeed: Six “From Rio to the Capitols,” and discussed race, Projles of Successful Courts (1992) and Video- poverty, and the environment. Dr. Henderson’s taped Trial Records: Evaluation and Guide expertise in thts arena was called upon also by (1 991). the Diversity and Racism Organization Commit- In addition to his work on court interpre- tee of the Western Justice Center Foundation in tation, Mr. Hewitt is participating in research Pasadena, California. He conducted a series of related to the relationship between court organi- interviews with Pasadena officials and other zation and performance and is serving as a staff citizens to help them gain deeper insight into member on the Trial Court Performance Stan- racial conflict in Pasadena and to recommend dards Project, funded by the Bureau of Justice courses of action. He assists in diversity training Assistance. Before joining the NCSC in 1986, at Amoco, AT&T, General Electric, Hallmark, he was a member of the staff of the Office of the and Xerox, among other clients. Administrator for the Courts in Washington Dr. Henderson is a former Senior Vice State and was the Administrator of Juvenile President for Air Atlanta and former Managing Court Services for San Juan County, Washing- Director of Tarkenton & Company, a manage- ton (1973-1980). Mr. Hewitt received his M.A. ment consulting firm providing productivity degree in philosophy from the University of improvement services, management develop- California (Davis), and he is a Fellow of the ment training, and executive assessment and Institute for Court Management. feedback to top managers. His initiation of the study “Models of Unity-Racial, Ethnic and LENNOX S. HINDS is a Professor of Law Religious” resulted in a landmark analysis of and Chair of the Administration of Justice Pro- intergroup unity in the Chicago metropolitan gram, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New area. That model is being replicated in dozens of Jersey. A graduate of Rutgers Law School, he American cities. He is a Federal Commissioner was the Chair of the Association of Black Law of the Martin Luther King, Jr., Federal Holiday Students (ABLS) and was awarded the law Commission Foundation of the Buck Trust. He school’s J. Skelly Wright Award for Contribu- was a conference participant in the “Education tion to Civil Rights. He was a Charles H. Revson Against Hatred” seminar at Haifa University in Fellow, Center for Legal Education and Urban Israel, sponsored by the Eli Wiesel Foundation Policy, City College of New York (1979-1980).

85 In addition to practicing as a criminal defense tional Council on Alcoholism and Drug and internationiil human rights lawyer, Profes- Dependence, of which he is inundate past sor Hinds is also counsel in the United States to Chair of the Board, and the Old Newsboys- the African National Congress (ANC) of South Goodfellows of Detroit, of which he was 1988- Africa and the newly liberated nation of Na- 1989 President. He is Chair of the Elizabeth mibia and is a permanent representative to the Copeland Glass Scholarship Foundation, which United Nations for the International Association awards scholarships to disadvantaged youth. An of Democratic Lawyers. instructor at the Detroit College of Law, Central Before joining Stevans, Hinds & White as Michigan University, and the Michigan Judicial its senior partner, with law offices in New York, Institute, Judge Hood has served as faculty at the New Jersey, Great Britian, and Sierra Leone, National Judicial College. Professor Hinds served for many years as Na- tional Director of the National Conference of UREN L. HUNT, Deputy Presiding Black Lawyers of the United States and Canada Judge in Anchorage, came to Alaska in 1973 and has represented a number of politically un- after completing law school at the University of popular clients, including Assata Shakur Southern California. She was on the Law Re- (Joanne Chesimerd) and victims of police bru- view, graduated in the top 10 percent of her law tality and other governmental lawlessness, in- school class, and was inducted into Order of the cluding COMTELPRO. Coif. Prior to her appointment to the Superior Professor Hinds has written and lectured Court in 1984, she was a partner in a private extensively in Africa, Europe, Asia, and North law firm in Anchorage. America on international human rights issues Judge Hunt served as President of the and on the impact of racism on the operation of Alaska State Bar Association from 1981 to the law and pahcularly on the criminal justice 1982. She was also the founding President of the systems of the United States. Anchorage Association of Women Lawyers. She is a member of the American Bar Association HAROLD HOOD received his J.D., with and a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation. distinction, from Wayne State University Law She served as a member of the Board and Dis- School in 1959. He has been a member of the trict Director of the National Association of Michigan Court of Appeals since 1982. Prior to Women Judges from 1988 to 1990. From 1978 joining the Court of Appeals, he served as a to 1982, she coordinated the Women and the judge on the Third Judicial Circuit of Michigan Law course offered for credit at the University of (1978-1982); the Recorders Court of Detroit Alaska. She served as Vice President, Women (1977-1978); and the Common Pleas Court of Judges Fund for Justice, from 1990 to 1992. Detroit (1973-1977). He also previously served Judge Hunt was visiting faculty for the as Chief Assistant United States Attorney for the Civil Trial Advocacy course at the University of Eastern District of Michigan (1969-1973) and as Puget Sound Law School, 1988 and 1990 sum- an Assistant Corporation Counsel for the City of mer sessions. She regularly teaches classes at Detroit. the National Judicial College, University of Ne- Judge Hood currently serves as Chair of vada, on employment law, products liability, Michigan’s Supreme Court’s Committee on contract law, and judicial writing. She is a fre- Standard Civil Jury Instructions and previously quent lecturer and speaker on legal subjects, served as Chair of the Michigan Task Force on having made presentations in Alaska, Washing- RacialEthnic Issues in the Courts. He is imme- ton, Nevada, California, Washington, D.C., diate past Chair of the Michigan Judicial Tenure Florida, and Hawaii. She moderated the Com- Commission. He also serves as President of the mercial Litigation Section program at the 1990 Wayne State University Law School Alumni annual convention of the American Academy of Association, on the Board of Directors of the Trial Lawyers Association. Her article on em- American Judicature Society, and as a Trustee of ployment law was featured in the winter 1992 the American Inns of Court Foundation. He is Judges’ Journal published for judges by the also a member of several national and local bar American Bar Association. associations. Prior to attending law school, Judge Hunt Judge Hood is active in numerous charita- was a counselor and teacher in the Los Angeles ble and civic organizations, including the Na- city schools. She is the author of two published

86 grammar textbooks, which are most widely used Dr. Johnson received her B.A. from in foreign nations to teach English as a second Hamilton College in 1985. Her graduate train- language. ing was in a dualdegree program in psychology In 1994, Judge Hunt was selected by the and law offered by the Johns Hopkins University Alaska Bar Association to receive its and the University of Maryland School of Law. “Distinguished Service Award.” In 1992, she She received her M.A. in experimental psychol- was chosen by the YWCA to receive its ogy from Johns Hopkins in 1988, a Ph.D. in “Woman of Achievement Award.” She has experimental psychology from Johns Hopkins in served on many community boards, such as An- 1990, and a J.D. from the University of Mary- chorage Arts Council, Untied Way, Soroptimist land in 1990. International of Anchorage, Anchorage Concert Dr. Johnson has authored and coauthored Association, KAKM Public Television, and papers and reports on a variety of topics, includ- Booth Memorial Home. She currently serves as ing eyewitness testimony, memory and the law, a Trustee of Alaska Pacific Uiversity. She is a the federal court pilot program on “cameras in frequent speaker to various community groups the courts,” and the research guides mentioned interested in the judicial system and legal sub- previously. She has also served as a panelist and jects. presenter at a number of academic conferences and at Federal Judicial Center educational pro- NATSU SAITO JENGA is a member of gr-. the Georgia Supreme Court Commission on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Court System. An NATHANIEL R JONES, a native of Assistant Professor at the Georgia State Uni- Youngstown, Ohio, received his A.B. in 1951 versity College of Law, she teaches public inter- and LL.B. (later converted to J.D.) in 1956 from national law, international human rights, and Youngstown State University after serving in the immigration law. United States Air Force in World War 11. He ’ After graduating from Swarthmore College was admitted to the Ohio Bar in 1957. in 1977, Ms. Jenga moved to Atlanta, Georgia, From 1956 to 1959, Judge Jones served as where she worked for a community center, or- the Executive Director of the Fair Employment ganized a community-based education program, Practices Commission of the City of Young- and participated in fair housing, prison reform, stown and the Mayor’s Human Relations and school desegregation efforts. She received Commission. Attorney General Robert Kennedy an M.Ed. from Georgia State University in 1982 appointed Jones an Assistant United States At- and taught English to adult refugees from south- torney of the Northern District of Ohio at east Asia. Cleveland after his first year in private practice. Ms. Jenga completed her J.D. at Yale Law He held that position until his 1967 appointment School in 1987 and practiced law at the Atlanta to serve as Assistant General Counsel to Presi- law firms of Arnall Golden & Gregory, Powell, dent Lyndon B. Johnson’s National Advisory Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, and Troutman Commission on Civil Disorders, also known as Sanders. She began teaching full-time at Geor- the Kerner Commission, which studied the gia State University’s College of Law in 1994. causes of the urban riots of the 1960s. Following She was the founding President of the Georgia this work, Judge Jones returned to Youngstown Chapter of the National Asian Pacific American to continue his practice with the law firm of Bar Association (NAPABA) and works on the Goldberg and Jones. Civil Rights Committee of NAPABA. In 1969, Roy Wilkins, the distinguished civil rights leader and Executive Director of the MOLLY TREADWAY JOHNSON is an National Association for the Advancement of AttorneyResearcher at the Federal Judicial Colored People, invited Judge Jones to New Center in Washington, D.C. One of her respon- York to serve as General Counsel of the sibilities at the Center has been overseeing the NAACP. He held the position from 1969 to development of research guides to assist courts 1979. There he became the fourth Chief Counsel and task forces studying gender, race, and eth- for the NAACP since its founding in 1909. nicity in the courts. She also provides ad hoc During his tenure there, Judge Jones coordi- consultation to federal task forces studymg these nated the attack against northern school segre- issues. gation. He directed the national response to the

87 attacks against affirmative action, which led an The firm became Yonemwa, Yasaki & Kawaichi inquiry into discrimination against black serv- three years later. icemen in the military, and supervised the Judge Kawaichi practiced general business NAACP’s defense in the Mississippi Boycott and civil law for several years, with a substantial Case, which led to a landmark Supreme Court amount of pro bono work, including projects and decision that declared the right of indwiduals representation for the National Lawyers Gudd, the and organizations to engage in protests under A.C.L.U., the Berkeley Tenants Union, and the the First Amendment. On May 17, 1979, Presi- Third World movements at San Francisco State dent James Carter announced his intentions to College and at U.C. Wey.He also volunteered appoint Nathaniel Jones to the United States for the West Oakland Legal Switchboard and for Supreme Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. several legal projects. Judge Jones took his oath of office on October For several years, Judge Kawaichi was an 15, 1979. Assistant Professor in the Ethnic Studies Judge Jones is also an Adjunct Professor at Department at the University of Woha, the University of Cincinnati College of Law and Berkeley. During that time, he helped start and did the Criminal Law Institute of Altanta Univer- work for the Asian Law Caucus. Since that time, he sity, and an instructor in the trial advocacy pro- has been a faculty member with the Oakland gram at Harvard Law School. In April 1994, College of Law, CJJ3R the National Judicial Judge Jones traveled to South Africa as Cochair College, California Continuing Education of the of the Lawyers Committee Observer Team to Bar, N.I.T.A., and for the State Bars of Nevada and observe the first South African democratic elec- California workshops. He has taught evidence, tions. products liabdity, damages, settlement techniques, Judge Jones has authored numerous arti- equal justice, and fairness courses. He was cles and papers, including “Yearning to Breathe appointed a Judge in 1975. He also holds Free,” a report of the South African treason memberships on judicial council committees in trial; “Federal Power As Used to Protect Minor- Access & Fairness and Race & Ethnic Bias. ity Rights,” published in the Brigham Young Law Review 815 (1987); “The Justification For JOHN J. KELLY was appointed United Race-Conscious Remedies,” Harvard Journal of States Attorney for the District of New Mexico Law & Public Policy 71 (1986); and “The Bill by President Clinton and took office on Decem- of Rights-Then and Now-An Ever Present ber 1, 1993. Prior to that time, he was in private Challenge,” Ohio Northern University Law Re- practice, most recently as the partner-inzharge view 499 (1 992). of the Albuquerque office of Hinkle, Cox, Eaton, Judge Jones has been the recipient of sev- Coffield, & Hensley, one of New Mexico’s old- eral honors and awards, including honorary de- est law firms. Mr. Keliy’s areas of private law grees from Youngstown State University in practice include federal civil litigation, banking 1970; Syracuse University in 1972; University of and commercial lending, environmental law, Akron School of Law in 1988; Indiana Univer- real property, government flairs, and adminis- sity School of Law (Indianapolis) in 1990; Les- trative practice before local, state, and federal ley College in 1991; and William Mitchell agencies. College of Law in 1993. Judge Jones also re- Mr. Kelly began his legal career as a civil ceived the National Bar Association’s Equal rights attorney in New York working for a fed- Justice Award in 1978. erally funded legal services office. In 1977, he moved to New Mexico and began litigating civil KEN M. ZUWAICHI, an Asian-American rights, environmental, and Indian natural re- judge fiom Los Angela, California, was interned source issues for the National Indian Youth at the age of five months, along with his family, in Council. Ths work took him to Washington, a relocation center in Poston, Arizona. In order to D.C., where he lobbied the Congress on behalf leave the center, his father joined the United States of tribal interests. In 1979, he helped establish a Army, being sent to Europe fiom Kansas, where regional public interest law firm in Albuquerque they stayed for over ten years. He graduated from specializing in Native American and environ- Pomona College with a major in psychology. He mental issues. then received a J.D. from Boalt Hall (V.C. Mr. Kelly is a graduate of the Georgetown Berkeley), joining the lirm of Yonemura & Yasaki. University School of Foreign Service and the

88 Cornel1 University Law School. He is a member Justice Kogan is a member of the faculty of of the New York and New Mexico Bars, the the American Academy of Judicial Education, Albuquerque Bar Association, and the American teaching constitutional criminal procedure and Bar Association. He is published in the Cornell trial procedure. He was a member of the adjunct Law Review and the University of Michigan faculties of the University of Miami School of Journal of Law Reform. He is active in civic and Law and the Shepard Broad Law Center at Nova public affairs, having held a number of appoint- University, where he taught criminal evidence, ive and elected offices in New Mexico over the trial advocacy, and professional responsibility. last 15 years. He is currently on the faculty at the Florida State University College of Law, where he teaches GERALD KOGAN, Justice for the Su- trial advocacy. preme Court of Florida, attended the University of Miami where he received his bachelor’s de- RENEE M. LANDERS is a Deputy gree in business administration and his J.D. Assistant Attorney General in the Office of degree. While at the University of Mami, he Policy Development at the U.S. Department of served as President of the Student Senate and Justice, where she is involved in a variety of was listed in Who’s Who in American Colleges matters, including the selection process for and Universities. He served as Chief of Iron federal judges, developing positions for the Arrow Honor Society (the highest honor society Department on Alternative Dispute Resolution, at the University of Mami) and in 1955 re- and implementing the Violence Against Women ceived an Ibis citation, which is given annually Act. Ms. Landers is a 1977 graduate of Hmard- to the outstandmg student at the university. He RadclifFe and earned a J.D. cum laude in 1985 also won the National Intercollegiate Debate from Boston College Law School, where she was Championship and is a charter member of the Editor-in-Chief of the Boston College Law Southern Debate Hall of Fame. Review. In law school, Justice Kogan won the Before joining the Department of Justice, Southern Law Moot Court Championship and Ms. Landers was an Assistant Professor at became a National Moot Court Finalist. Upon Boston College Law School, where she taught graduation from law school, Justice Kogan en- constitutional law, administrative law, health tered the United States Army, graduated from care law, and introduction to lawyering and the Army Intelligence School, and served on professional responsibility. Previously, she had active duty as a special agent in the Counterin- been an Associate at the Boston law firm of telligence Corps. Ropes & Gray and law clerk to the Chief Justice Upon his discharge, Justice Kogan entered of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. private practice in Miami. In 1960, he was ap- She also served as a Deputy Secretary of State in pointed an Assistant State Attorney in the Dade the Office of the Massachusetts Secretary of County State Attorney’s Office and rose to the State, having responsibility at various times for rank of Chief Prosecutor of the Homicide and the State Archives, the Massachusetts Historical Capital Crimes Division. In 1967, he left the Commission, ahnistration of the Massa- State Attorney’s Office to resume the private chusetts Freedom of Information Act, and the practice of law, specializing in criminal trial and Corporations and Securities Divisions. appellate law. He served on the Criminal Courts A former President of the RadclifFe Committee of the Dade County Bar Association, College Alumna Association and an alumna gnevance committees, and the Florida Bar Trustee, Ms. Landers was a member of the Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of RadcliEe Presidential Search Committee and is Law. He was a prosecutor and referee on behalf currently a member of the Board of Overseers of of the Florida Bar in disciplinary procedures. Hmard University. She was a member of the Justice Kogan was special counsel to the Florida Massachusetti Supreme JuQcial Court’s Legislature’s Select Committee on Organized Committee to Study Racial and Ethnic Bias in Crime and Law Enforcement. In 1980, he was the Massachusetts Judicial System, and the appointed administrative judge of the Criminal Gender Bias Study Committee. She is a Director Division, and he served in that capacity until his of the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary. She appointment to the Florida Supreme Court in was a member of the Governor’s Advisory January 1987. Council on Women’s Issues, a Vice Chair of the

89 Watertown (Massachusetts) Democratic Town as a hquent lecturer to lawyers and community Committee, and an Associate Commissioner of groups. His most recent work is the article “How to the Metropolitan District Commission, a Vice Deal with S.O.B. Lawyers and DifEcult Judges? President of the Big Sister Association of Revisited.” 41, No. 3, Virginia Lawyer, Smember, Greater Boston, and a member of the Council of 1992. the Boston Bar Association, where she chaired the organization’s Committee on Gender and ROBERT JOE LEE is Supervisor of the Justice. Court Interpreting, Legal Translating, and Bi- Selected as one of “87 Faces to Watch in lingual Services Section at the Administrative 1987” by Boston Magazine, Ms. Landers is office of the Courts in Trenton, New Jersey. He listed in Who’s Who in American Law. She oversees that state’s efforts to assure equal ac- received the Radclif€e College Alumnae cess to the Courts for linguistic minorities. He Association Distinguished SeIvice Award in holds a B.A. degree in religion with a minor in 1992. Spanish from Abilene Christian University, Abilene, Texas; an M.A. in criminal justice GERALD BRUCE LEE, a 1976 graduate of from Rutgers Graduate School of Criminal Jus- the Washugton College of Law, American tice; and two graduate degrees in theology from University, is a trial court judge for the Fairfax Princeton Theological Seminary. He has com- county (Virginia) circuit Court. worlang with pleted ten graduate courses in linguistics, psy- Chief Mags&& Karen Decker, Judge Lee chometrics, and ethnolinguistic and provides Supervision for 29 magistrate judicial ethnographic research methods at the Rutgers officers. Prior to his election to the bench, Judge Graduate School of Education. Lee was an active member of the Bar. He served as Mr. Lee has authored or edited over 30 a past member of the Voting Council of the government publications dealing with probation, Virginia State Bar, as well as chavperson of the court interpreting, minority concerns, and His- General Practice of Law Section and President of panics and criminal justice, most notably Equal the Northern Viginia Black Attorneys Association. Access to the Courts for Linguistic Minorities, In 1990, Judge Lee was appointed by Govemor the final report of the New Jersey Supreme Doug Wilder to serve on the Board of Directon of Court Task Force on Interpreter and Translation the Metropolitan Washmgton mrts Authority Services (1985). He also serves on the following (the managers of the Washmgton National and advisory boards: “Court Interpretation: Chal- Dulles International Airports) and left that position lenges for the 1990s,” National Center for State to become ajudge. Courts, and “Master of Arts Program in Legal Judge Lee qresented the court in a series of Interpreting,” Department of Spanish and Ital- town medings on “The Fairness of the Fairfax ian, College of Charleston. Criminal Justice system” Worlang with community groups and mtyagencies, he assisted YVONNE LEWS, a justice for King’s in preparing a qort and mmmenMons to the County’s (New York) Supreme Court’s Crimi- County Board of Supervisors to improve the nal Team, graduated from State University of criminal justice system to meet the needs of New York, College at Geneseo, with a B.S. in Virginia’s growing diverse population, and he education in secondary social studies. As a re- serves on the Legdative and Law Clerk sult, she taught in Buffalo high schools and did Committees of the court. As an active member of social work for Erie County Welfare Depart- the Judicial Education Committee of the Statewide ment. Returning to school three years after col- Judicial Confmce of Virginia, Judge Lee also lege, she received her J.D. from the University plans continuing legal education seminars for trial of Buffalo, School of Law and Jurisprudence. judges. Justice Lewis was awarded a Reginald He- Judge Lee is also a member of the Legdative ber Fellowship in 1973 and therewith “landed” & Board Relations and Law Clerk Committm. He in New York City. She worked with Legal has been appointed Vice Chair of the Judiciary Services in several offices as a Staff Attorney, Committee of the American Bar Association Unit Director, Director of Litigation, and Man- General Practice Section. He participates in aging Attorney. Additionally, she served with continuing legal and judicial education programs the Legal Services Corporation to assist legal and is the author of numerous legal articles as well services offices both in compliance and technical

90 assistance for the provision of services. Before 1952; and his LL.M. from bardLaw School going on the bench, Justice Lewis also taught as in 1953. a Charles H. Revson fellow at City University of New York, City College and Hofstra Law SEKERIANO LISBOA, a graduate of School. Brooklyn College of the City University of New Justice Lewis was elected to the Civil York and Rutgers University Law School in Court in 1986-the first African-American fe- Newark, New Jersey, has over 13 years of expe- male to sit in that court. Justice Lewis was rience as a judge, with his first appointment to elected to the New York Supreme Court bench the Jersey City Municipal Court Bench in 1981. in 1991. After serving as a judge for four years, he was Justice Lewis is currently on the Franklin elevated to the position of presiding judge for H. Williams Judicial Commission on Minorities, the entire court. Later Judge Lisboa was ap- Advisory Committee of Judicial Ethics, Judges pointed to the State Superior Court Bench in Committee on Automation and Technology, 1989. Prior to his becoming a judge, he worked New York County Lawyers’ Association Drug for Hudson County Legal Services and was an Policy Task Force, Judicial Friends, National Associate in the law firm of Fuentes, Plant, and and State Associations of Women Judges (Board Velazquez in Jersey City. of Directors), a member of Black Bar Associa- Judge Lisboa is a founding member and tion (Board of Directors), Association of Black was past President of the New Jersey State His- Women Attorneys, and the Brooklyn Women’s panic Bar Association. Having served with the Bar Association. Criminal Division and Special Civil Part, he is currently with the Family Division of the Supe- PAUL J. LUCOS took office as Chief rior Court of Hudson County, New Jersey. Judge Justice of the State of Massachusetts in June Lisboa was an initial member of Task Force on 1989, having served on the Supreme Judicial Minority Concerns in New Jersey chaired by Court since 1976. He was partner in the firm of Honorable James H. Coleman, Jr. (1984), and Liacos and Liacos, 1952-1976; Professor of member of the Minority Access Committee Boston University School of Law, 1956-1976; (1989). Appointed to the Executive Committee and a lecturer for the U.S. Military Academy at on Minority Concern by the Chief Justice West Point, 1972. (1991), he served as Vice Chair of the Task Chief Justice Liacos received his J.D. from Force on Minority Concerns (1994) and Chair of Suffolk University School of Law (1978-1979) the Juvenile Justice Committee on Minority and completed continuing legal education pro- Concerns. grams of Association of Trial Lawyers of Judge Lisboa has received numerous America and other bar groups. He is a member awards and distinctions. He was selected for the of the American, Essex County, Massachusetts, 1989 Brooklyn College Distinguished Scholar- Boston and Peabody Bar Associations; the Award as well as various community service American Law Institute; and the Association of awards from several community organizations, Trial Lawyers of America. including Urban League, Aspira Inc. of N.J., Chief Justice Liacos authored the book Boy Scouts of America, PAC0 of Puerto Rican Handbook of Massachusetts Evidence (5th ed., Association for Community Action of Jersey 1981; 1985 supplement; 6th ed., 1993). For- City, NAACP, and Hogar Crea Drug Rehabili- merly a Judge Advocate General with the U.S. tation, Jersey City. Air Force, 1953-1956 (U.S. Air Force Reserve, 1956-1965), Chief Justice Liacos is a Trustee for GEORGE LOGAN 111, an Attorney and Suffolk University, 1993-present. His education currently Project Manager for the Arizona includes LL.D. (honorary), Suffolk University, Supreme Court’s Commission On Minorities, 1984; New England School of Law, 1985; Public Access to Court Records, and Jury Northeastern University Law School, 1991. He Reform Project, began his career as Assistant holds a honorary Doctor of Humane Letters Staff Judge Advocate in the U.S. Air Force. from Salem State College (1988), and he re- There he served as Trial and Defense Counsel, ceived his A.B. (magna cum laude) from Boston Military Judge, Claims Officer, and Base Equal University in 1950; his LL.B. (magna cum Opportunity Officer. laude) from Boston University School of Law in Mer leaving the military, Mr. Logan

91 established a private law practice involving diversity training models, interpreter services, substantial trial work in federal, state, and local and other access issues in the courts. Ms. Mark courts. His cases included personal injury, oversaw the compilation of data and publication workers’ compensation, domestic relations, of the Commission’s final report, Equal Justice: corporate and business organizations, real Eliminating the Barriers, in September 1994. estate, probate, bankruptcy, criminal, and Prior to becoming Director, she served as the administrative matters. Later, he became a Commission’s Community Outreach Director foundmg member of the law firm Logan, and organized statewide public hearings and Marton, Halladay & Hall, P.A., in Phoenix, focus groups. Arizona. A native of Massachusetts, Ms. Mark re- As Chief Hearing Officer of the Arizona ceived a B.A. degree from Hampshire College in Department of Economic Security in Phoenix, Amherst, Massachusetts, where she studied Mr. Logan managed the Appeals Office, photography and modem Chinese studies. In supervising 55 employees and processing more 1990, she received a Master’s in Urban Studies than 12,000 administrative hearings annually. and Planning from the Massachusetts Institute Later promoted to Assistant Director, Mr. Logan of Technology. managed the Division of Management Review, supervising 296 employees and overseeing YOLANDE P. MARLOW joined the New annual budgets exceeding $10 million. His Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts’ staff responsibilities there included administrative in August 1988. She has provided staff support appeals; special investigations; internal affairs; to the New Jersey Supreme Court Task Force on equal opportunity; internal audits; data security; Minority Concerns and presently is staff to the evaluations; rules processing; administration Standing Supreme Court Committee on Minor- and support services for the Attorney General; ity Concerns. The latter committee is responsi- and legislation and presdmedia relations. ble for monitoring the implementation of court- In March 1993, Mr. Logan published for approved recommendations. Additional respon- the Arizona Supreme Court (AOC) the Title XIX sibilities include offering training in diversity Report. His many civic and community awards and providing staff support for various projects include the Arizona Administrators’ Association that are assigned by the Administrative Director Recognition Award; the Appreciation Award and the Assistant Director of Trial Court Sup- and Recognition Award from Phoenix’s Com- port Operations. munity Legal Services; the National Judicial Dr. Marlow is one of the founding mem- College’s Recognition Award; and the Phoenix bers of the National Consortium of Task Forces Aging Services’ Appreciation Certificate. Mr. and Commissions on Racial and Ethnic Bias in Logan received his B.A. from Rutgers College the Courts and served as its first Coordinator. (New Jersey) and his J.D. from Rutgers Law She is the current Consortium Coordinator as School. well. Dr. Marlow, together with three former SHIRLEY MARK has been active in the Project Directors of task forces or commissions Asian-American community for the past 15 on racial and ethnic bias in the courts, wrote a years, providing social services, diversity train- manual, Establishing and Operating a Task ing, and educational programs to students, im- Force or Commission on Racial and Ethnic Bias migrants and refugees, and professionals. She in the Courts (1993). The manual was a joint has promoted cultural awareness in the Asian project of the National Consortium and the Na- and broader communities by consulting in the tional Center for State Courts and was devel- areas of affirmative action, the Asian-American oped under a grant from the State Justice experience, and! Asian cultures. She has also Institute. taught Asian-American Studies to college stu- Dr. Marlow completed her graduate work dents. at the University of Pennsylvania. She holds a Most recently, she directed the Massachu- doctorate in criminology from the Wharton setts Supreme Judicial Court’s Commission to School and master’s degrees in sociology and Study Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts from criminology. Most of her career has been in an 1992 to 1994. In this capacity, she managed academic setting. She has been an Adjunct Pro- research projects as well as pilot projects on fessor at the following universities: University of

92 Pennsylvania, Villanova, St. Josephs, Temple, Attorney for the City of Los Angeles. Her ever- and Morgan State. Dr. Marlow completed a increasing involvement with the practice of law postdoctoral fellowship in Gerontology at the resulted in holding such positions as Supervis- Phladelphia Geriatric Center immediately fol- ing Attorney of the West Los Angeles branch lowing the completion of her doctoral studies. (1979-1981) and Domestic Violence Coordina- She was also the recipient of an NIMH Fellow- tor of Trials (1977-1978). ship in Suicidology at the Johns Hopkins School Judge McBeth’s abiding interest in the law of Public Health. and the preservation of the rights of all citizens has led to her extensive involvement with both JON M. MAYEDA, a judge of the Los community and professional organizations. She Angeles Municipal Court since 1981, has served as is a member of the NAACP; the Los Angeles the court’s presiding judge since 1990. His Chapter of Links; the Coalition of 100 Black assignments have included both criminal and civil Women (as Secretary and Chair); the Advisory trials as well as numerous other assignments Board of the Black Peace Officers Association of throughout the court. During 1995, he is sewing as Los Angeles County; and the Board of Directors the Chair of the Los Angeles Municipal Court’s of Operation Field Trip, Los Angeles City Judges Association, whch is a Ill-time admini- Schools. In 1979, then attorney McBeth was strative, court management position. elected President of the Black Women Lawyers Judge Mayeda sits on the Judicial council, Association of Los Angeles. She was appointed which is the policy- and rule-making body for to the Executive Committee of the UCLA Law California courts. He is a member of the State Trial School Alumni Association in 1982; served as Court Budget Commission, which oversees the President of the National Bar Association Judi- state’s $1.7 billion trial court budget. Pnor to hs cial Council in 1990; chaired the Commission appointment to the bench, Judge May& was a on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts of the Deputy Los Angeles City Attorney in both the civil National Bar Association’s Judicial Council in and criminal law branches. 1992; and worked with the National Consortium A founder and past President of the Japanese of Task Forces and Commission on Racial Bias American Bar Association of Greater Los Angeles, in the Courts in 1993. Judge May& was a former member of the As Chair of this Conference, Judge Minority Bar Associations of Los Angeles and past McBeth has been integral in bringmg together Chau of the California Asian Judges Association. some of the best and brightest educators of bias He has served on the ABA’s Minorities in the reform in the country. Along with the Confer- Profession Committee and the Planning Committee ence’s Planning Committee, she has drafted a for the First National Convention of Minority groundbreaking educational program that will Attorneys held in 1980, and he was a member of give added momentum to the completion of state the California Judges Association Executive Board plans tasked by this conference. (1980-1 992) and Vice-president of the Association Judge McBeth’s awards include the Presi- (1991-1992). dential Award of the National Bar Association; Judge May& has medon the faculty of the the Judge of the Year Award from the California California Judicial College and for various pro- Association of Black Lawyers, and the Thurgood grams presented by the California Center for Judi- Marshall Award of the Watts Chapter of the cial Education and Research (CJER), Continuing NAACP. After receiving her undergraduate de- Judicial Studies Program (CJSP), and Administra- gree from California State University at Los tive office of the Courts (AOC). He earned his J.D. Angeles, Judge McBeth was awarded her J.D. fiom the University of California at Los Angeles degree from CSULA in June of 1975. Law School. ADA PECOS MELTON, a member of the VERONICA SIMMONS McBETH, SU- Pueblo of Jemez, is owner and Executive Direc- pervising Judge of the Central Criminal Divi- tor of American Indan Development Associates sion of the Los Angeles Municipal Court and and also manages two projects dealing with Chairperson of the Planning Committee for the children and youth for the National Indian Jus- First National Conference on Eliminating Racial tice Center. Both these organizations are 100 and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, began her law percent Indian-owned businesses. Her work in- career as an attorney in 1975 as Deputy City volves conducting training sessions in various

93 areas of the Indian justice system for tribes Governor, 1975-1979. Private practice, eight throughout the country; providing technical as- years. Assistant Attorney General, 1964-1966. sistance in research and development of jushce Lecturer: Ohio Judicial College; Ohio Legal and social service systems based on indigenous Center Institute; Court of Appeals Judges Asso- jurisprudence, traditions, and practices; and ciation. President: Columbus Bar Association conducting program evaluations. (1980-1981); Columbus Board of Education She received her M.P.A. and B.A. degree (1973-1974). Member, Board of Trustees, in criminal justice, both from the University of Franklin University. Past member, executive New Mexico. committee and council of delegates of Ohio State Bar Association; Board of Trustees, PATMCIA MCHELSEN is an Inter- Franklin University. Award of Merit, Ohio Le- preter Trainer and Consultant currently living in gal Center Institute. Herber Harley Award, Richmond, Virginia. She is a licensed Oral Ex- American Judicature Society (1989). Ohio Bar aminer and federally certified Interpreter, and Medal, Ohio State Bar Association. Honorary her services are in wide demand. She travels doctor’of laws degrees: Akron University, Defi- extensively throughout the United States, serv- ance- College, Miami University, Ohio State ing as faculty and speaker for such diverse cli- University. B.A. (political science), Ohio State ents as American Express, Berlitz, and the University, 1961. J.D., Ohio State University, Board of Education of New York City. 1964. A native of Columbia, South America, Ms. Michelsen began her court work as a Staff Inter- G. THOMAS MUNSTERMAN is Director preter and Trainer in New York in 1982. Her of the Center for Jury Studies of the National work involved monitoring state interpreters in Center for State Courts and was one of the in- court proceedings, interpreting for psychiatric corporators of the Center for Jury Studies. He is and polygraph tests, training staff attorneys in coauthor of A Guide to Jury System Manage- legal Spanish as well as preparing curriculum ment (1975) and directed the projects that pro- and teaching Spanish in local public schools. In duced A Guide to Juror Usage (1974) and 1989, Ms. Michelsen was appointed Chief Inter- Methodology Manual for Jury Systems (1981). preter for the U.S. District Court for the South- Also, he is coauthor of A Manual for Managing ern District of New York. There she supervised Notorious Cases, December 1991, and a com- Spanishcertified and all other language per missioned paper “Innovations in Jury Trial Pro- diem interpreters; interpreted all court proceed- cedure” for the ABNBrookings Institution ings in simultaneous and consecutive modes; symposium on the future of the Civil Jury Sys- certified translations of written documents and tem in the U.S. He worked with the Jury transcripts of tape recorded conversations; and Committee of the Federal Ninth Circuit in the dealt extensively with the court, the Bar, the preparation of the “Manual of Jury Trial Proce- public, and the interpreter community. dures.” Working with with the ABNJAD Ms. Michelsen is the author of the Circuit Committee on Jury Standards since its inception Executive Bulletin article ‘‘Evexytiung You Al- in 1982 in the development, implementation, ways Wanted to Know about Interpreting and and revision of trial court jury standards, Mr. Were Afraid to Ask,” published in 1992. She Munsterman is currently directing a project to received her undergraduate degree from Boston assist the states in the adoption and implemen- University; her M.Ed. from the University of tation of the ABA Standards. Aberdeen (Scotland)-an equivalent to a U.S. Mr. Munsterman has written many papers, Ph.D.; and completed post-graduate work at directed research, and spoken on many aspects Marymount Manhattan College. of jury systems, ranging in topics from multiple source lists to juror attitudes to the impact of THOihAS J. MOYER,Chief Justice, Ohio variations in jury size. He has testified as the Supreme Court, took office in January 1987, court’s witness in cases concerning jury repre- after being elected in general elections. He was sentativeness and jury management and has reelected for a six-year term beginning January testified before state and local legislative com- 1, 1993. Judge, Tenth District Court of Appeals, mittees. In 1993, he was part of a team sent to 1979-1986 (Presiding Judge, 1986; Administra- Russia to provide technical assistance for the tive Judge, 1985). Executive Assistant to the reintroduction of the right to trial by jury. Mr.

94 Munsterman was formerly a Senior Associate Ms. Nagae has over 20 years of experience and Project Director of Jury Systems Projects at focusing on race, gender, and other diversity Bird Engineering Research Associates and Staff issues and is a nationally respected and much- Engineer at the Applied Physics Laboratory, sought speaker and seminar leader. As a Princi- Johns Hopkins University. He holds a B.S.E.E. pal in Total Diversity Management Consultants, from Northwestern University and an M.S.E. she has developed specific expertise in the fields from George Washington University. of diversity, sexual harassment prevention, communication, conflict management, team JOSEPH A. hfXERS, a member of the building, supervisory and managerial skills, and Pomo Tribe of northern California, is the Ex- other aspects of human resource management ecutive Director of the National Indian Justice and organizational change. Center, an Indian4wned and operated nonprofit Ms. Nabe has served as President of the corporation with principal offices in Petaluma, Asian Bar Association of Washington and California. He helped create the Center in 1983 Treasurer, President-Elect and President of the in order to establish an independent national Asian Pacific American Bar Association. She is resource for tribal courts and other tribal agen- the current Vice Chair of the American Bar As- cies. The Center develops and delivers legal sociation Commission on Opportunities for Mi- education, research, and technical assistance norities in the Profession. In addition to programs aimed at improving tribal court sys- performing these civic duties, Ms. Nagae was tems and the administration of justice in Indian the lead attorney in the case of Yasui v. United Country. States. This case involved a petitioner who vio- From 1976 to 1983, Mr. Myers served as lated the curfew imposed upon Japanese Ameri- Associate Director of the American Indian Law- cans during World War II and is identical to the yer Training Program, in charge of its tribal coram nobis cases of Korematsu v. United States court advocate training project. He is a graduate and Hirabwashi v. United States. of the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law at Baalt Hall. Mr. Myers is an authority ROSE M. OCHI has been appointed by on American Indian affairs and has authored President Clinton to the post of Associate Direc- several important publications on Indian legal tor of the office of National Drug Control Policy issues. He has been well recognized for his ex- and will serve at the national forefront of drug tensive work for Indian communities. In 1993, policy, heading up the Bureau of State and Local Mr. Myers received national recognition from Af€%rs in the Executive office of the President. Attorney General Janet Reno for his work on Before her appointment, Ms. Ochi was Execu- behalf of victims of crime in Indian Country. tive Director of the Los Angeles office of Criminal Justice Planning serving as a Principal PEGGY A. NAWholds an A.B. degree, Advisor to the Mayor. She coordinated justice cum Iaude, in East Asian Studies from Vassar related matters-leaving a legacy of change and College. She earned a J.D. with honors from accomplishments. In this capacity, she repre- Northwestern School of Law at Lewis and Clark sented the City of Los Angeles on numerous College. She holds certificates from the Harvard local, state, and national committees, where she Institute for Educational Management; Com- gained a reputation for her leadership in crimi- municationdDeckiondRaults in Boulder, Colo- nal justice reform. rado; and the Snohomish County Dispute During her professional career, she has Resolution Center in Everett, Washington. served on several advisory groups including the Ms. Nagae is a Lawyer with extensive President’s Select Commission on Immigration management experience. She has served as the and Refugee Policy, Vice Chair of the National Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs at the Uni- Minority Advisory Council to the D.O.J., Na- versity of Oregon School of Law, Aftinnative tional Council on Crime and Delinquency, Gov- Action Director for Northwestern School of ernor’s Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, Law, and Director of Associates at a mid-size and the Los Angeles County Criminal Justice litigation firm in Seattle, Washington. Ms. Na- Coordinating Committee. gae’s litigation background has included the Ms. Ochi has served as a Trainer and areas of criminal defense, civil rights, and Speaker at judges’ fonuns regarding racial bias complex civil litigation. in the courts and has written in this area, e.g.,

95 ''Racial Dimhination in Criminal Sentencing" tional Conference on Black Lawyers "People's for the ABA Judges' Journal. She has received Lawyer of the Year Award," the "Man of Vision recognition from numerous organizations for Award" from the Museum of Afro-American her professional achievements and years of dedi- History in Boston, and, more recently, the 1993 cated community service. She holds a B.S. from Albert Sacks-Paul A. Freud Award for Teach- the University of California, Los Angels; an ing Excellence at Harvard Law School. M.S.from CSULA; and a J.D. from Loyola Law Professor Ogletree was formerly a partner School. in the Washington, D.C., firm of Jessamy, Fort & Ogletree and is now "Of Counsel" to Jessamy, CHARLES J. OGLETME, Jr., bard Fort & Botts. Beginning as a Staff Attorney in Law School Professor and prominent legal the District of Columbia Public Defender Serv- theorist, has made a reputation by taking a hard ice, he served as Training Director, Trial Chief, look at complex institutional issues of law and and Deputy Director of the Service before enter- by working to secure the rights guaranteed by ing private practice in 1985. the Constitution for evezyone equally under the In 1991, Professor Ogletree served as Le- law. He has examined these issues not only in gal Counsel to Professor Anita Hill during the the classroom and in the pages of prestigious Senate Confirmation hearings for Justice law journals, but also in the everyday world of Clarence Thomas and was profiled in an article the public defender in the courtroom and in fo- in The American Lawyer (December 1991) enti- rums where these issues can be dramatically tled "Tree Time." revealed. Professor Ogletree factually presents A contributor to the Harvard Law Review, and discusses the challenges that face our justice among other publications, Professor Ogletree system as it tries to deliver equal treatment to all holds a J.D. from Harvard Law School and an our citizens and protect those rights that the law M.A. and B.A. (with distinction) in political guarantees them. science from Stanford University, where he was Professor Ogletree moderated a forum on Phi Beta Kappa. He formerly served as Special the United States Constitution at Manhattan's Projects Editor, Hanard Civil Rights-Civil New School for Social Research that explored Liberties Law Review, and he is a member of the the Fourth and F'iftlt Amendment protections American Bar Association, Criminal Justice c against unreasonable search and seizure and Section, and the National Conference of Black self-incrimination using the fictitious dramatic Lawyers, Criminal Justice Task Force. background of a criminal case. This hypothetical approach to probing such questions of ethics and FREDERICK (FRITa K. OHLRICH has law is one that Professor Ogletree continued served since 1983 as the Assistant Court Admin- using as the moderator of four parts of the ten- istrator of the Los Angels Judicial District. part series "Ethics in America" produced by Previously he sewed as the Court Administrator Fred Friendly and aired on PBS in 1989; the of the Newhall Judicial District and as Assistant PBS productions, Hard Drugs, Hard Choices in Executive Officer of the Ventura County Mu- 1990; America's Schools: Who Gives a Damn? nicipal Court. Fritz began his government sew- in 1991; That Delicate Balance II: Our Bill of ice in the Ventura County Sheriffs Department Rights in 1992; Popular Culture: Rage, Rights in 1965. He achieved the rank of Sergeant be- and Responsibilities in 1992; How Will Our fore leaving the Sheriffs Department in 1974. Cities Survive?, Kids, Color and Crime, and Mr. Ohlrich is a graduate of the Institute Ethical Choices in 1993; and, most recently, of Court Management Executive Development Surviving the Odds: To Be a Young Black Male Program and holds a master's degree in the in America in 1994. Administration of Justice from California Lu- Professor Ogletree has also appeared as a theran University. guest commentator on Nightline, This Week with Mr. Ohlrich recently completed a term as a David Brinkley, McNeil-Lehrer News Hour, member of the Board of Directors of the Na- Crossfire, The Today Show, Good Morning tional Association for Court Management. He America, Lnny King Live, and Meet the Press. remains actively involved in monitoring legisla- A Washington, D.C. public defender for tion for the Los Angeles Municipal Court and seven years, Professor Ogletree received the Na- has testified on numerous occasions before legis-

96 lative committees on court-related legislation. was honored by the Judicial Council in 1987 He served for a number of years as Chair of the with its Raymond Pace Alexander Award for Legislation Committee for the Association of outstanding service. Municipal Court Clerks of California and for the Justice Ortique’s very real interest in stu- Municipal Clerk-Administrative Officers As- dents, education, and international relations was sociation of Los Angeles County. He has also the genesis of his lifetime involvement in many served as President of both of those associations. of the seminars and addresses he has made to academic institutions all over the world. A REUUS 0. ORTIQUE, Jr., retired Asso- highlight was the 1990 visit of Mamdouh ciate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court, Moustafa Hasson, Chief Justice of the Supreme began practicing law in 1956 in Louisiana and Constitutional Court of Egypt, and Associate participated in and was co-counsel for several Justice Awad Mohamed El Mor, Vice President landmark Title VI1 cases and the Lewis v. Ce- of the Court and former delegate to the United lotex Corp. (1957), which upgraded blacks as Nations. well as brought them equal pay prior to Title VI1 Justice Ortique received his bachelor’s of the Civil hghts Act. During 1965-1966, he degree in sociology from Dillard University was elected as President of the National Bar (1947); hs master’s from Indiana University Association and in 1960 was President of the (1949); and his J.D. from Southern University New Orleans’ Community Relations Council, School of Law (1956). Among Justice Ortique’s which worked toward the peaceful elimination many awards and honors are the 1976 Brother- of segregation in Louisiana. Justice Ortique was hood Award from the National Conference of appointed by U.S. Presidents to several impor- Christians and Jews, the 1986 Louisiana State tant posts-in 1965-1967, he was appointed by Bar Association’s Lifetime Achievement Award, President Lyndon B. Johnson to the Federal and the 1993 Lifetime of Leadershp Award Hospital Council, which improved facilities and from the United Negro College Fund. expanded employment opportunities for minorities in the health field, and in 1970, he was ap- DEANNA L. PARKER is Staff Associate pointed by President Richard M. Nixon to the with the Information Service of the National Commission on Campus Unrest, which con- Center for State Courts. Her specialized areas of ducted nationwide hearings on campus student research include numerous court-related topics, unrest. In 1975, President Gerald Ford nomi- such as racial and ethnic bias in the courts, court nated Justice Ortique to the Legal Services Cor- administration, courtcommunity relations, per- poration’s Board of Directors. sonnel administration, nonjudicial court staff In 1973, Justice Ortique was the first black training and education, judicial education, judi- Attorney to be elected to the House of Delegates cial selection, and other issues. for the Louisiana State Bar Association and to In preparation for the First National Con- be appointed to the committee that studied and ference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias promulgated the Rules of Professional Respon- in the Courts, Ms. Parker has compiled and up- sibility for that association. At that Same time, dated the Survey of State Court Activity Related Judge Ortique was also the first black to be to Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts elected and made President of the Defender As- (preconference survey). She is also compiling sociation Executive Committee. the upcoming Women and Minority Judges in Justice Ortique began his service on the State Courts and assists in updating the bian- bench in 1978, when he was appointed to serve nual Judicial Salary Survey. In addition to her for six months as judge of the Civil District staff support to the First National Conference on Court of the Parish of Orleans (Louisiana). In Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, Ms. 1979, he was elected to a five-year term. Upon Parker also serves as support to the National his retirement, Justice Ortique was Associate Consortium of Task Forces and Commissions on Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court. Racial and Ethruc Bias in the Courts. In 1982-1983, Justice Ortique was elected Ms. Parker earned a B.A. in communica- to and became Chairperson of the Judicial tions with in minor in sociology from Howard Council of the National Bar Association and University, and an M.P.A. from Old Dominion lectured extensively throughout the South on University. She was formerly employed as Spe- topics of international law and human rights. He cial Assistant to the Vice President of Student

97 Services at Old Dominion University and DAVID E. WIRE2has many outstand- worked as an Analyst for an Arlington, Vir- ing legal accomplishments, including establish- ginia, consulting firm on projects funded by the ing the first municipal juvenile court in Denver, U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Patent Colorado. Currently a Juvenile District Court and Trademark Of6ce. Judge in Denver, Judge Ramirez has also served as a County Court Judge, an Assistant City At- ELLEN ASH PETERS, Chief Justice of torney, and a Staff Attorney for Denver Legal the Connecticut Supreme Court, was elected Aide Society. President of the Conference of Chief Justices Beyond his community and court work and Chwperson of the Board of Directors of the with teen delinquents, Judge Ramirez is active National Center for State Courts in August in a number of legal associations, serving as a 1994. She is the first woman to hold these psi- Trustee for the National Council of Juvenile and tiOnS. Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ), and Trustees for Having earned her Bachelor of Arts, cum the Denver Bar Association. He is also a mem- faude, Phi Beta Kappa, hmSwarthmore Col- ber of the Kellogg Foundation’s National His- lege in 1951 and an U.B., cum faude, Order of panic Children First Campaign. the Coif, at Yale Law School in 1954, Chief Judge Ramirez is also active in law-related Justice Peters served as a law clerk to Chief education. Currently, he is an Adjunct Professor Judge Charles E. Clark of the U.S. Court of Ap- of law at the University of Colorado and a Visit- peals for the Second Circuit from 1954 until ing Professor of law at the University of Iowa. 1955. From 1956 to 1978, she taught contracts He is a certified Instructor for the National and commercial law at Yale Law School and Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges holds the distinction of being the first woman and for the Of€ice of Juvenile Justice and Delin- tenured Professor at the institution. In 1978, she quency Prevention. He has presented numerous was appointed as the first woman Associate Jus- courses on racial bias and cultural competence tice of the Connecticut Supreme Court, and on in the Juvenile Court System. November 21, 1984, she was sworn in as the first woman Chief Justice of that court. ROBERTA COOPER RAM0 is President- Chief Justice Peters is a member of the Elect of the American Bar Association, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the world’s largest organization of attorneys, and is American Bar Association, the American Bar the first woman to head the organization in its Foundation, the American Law Institute, the 116-year history. A graduate, magna cum laude, American Philosophical society, and the Con- of the University of Colorado, Ms. Ram0 earned necticut Bar Association. She has received the her law degree from the University of Chicago. Connecticut Trial Lawyers Association Judicial Named one of the Best Lawyers in Amer- Award, the Ella Grasso Foundation Distin- ica in corporate law, Ms. Ram0 serves clients in guished Service Medal, the Yale Law School the areas of business law, real estate, health law, Certificate of Merit, the Connecticut Region of and related matters including profmional cor- Hadassah Myrtle Wreath Award, the Hartford porations, probate, estate planning, and com- College of Women Pioneer Woman Award, the mercial real estate leasing. Connecticut Bar Association Henry J. Naruk Ms. Ramo’s diverse legal career has taken Judiciary Award, and the University of Con- her from small-firm and solo practice to partner- necticut Law School Alumni Association Dis- ship with New Mexico’s largest law firm, Mo- tinguished Service Award. drall, Sperling, Roehl, Harris & Si&. The recipient of 15 honorary degrees, A past President of the Albuquerque Bar Chief Justice Peters has published two books and Association and former Chair of the ABA’s Law numerous law review articles, writing recently Practice Management Section, Ms. Ram0 has about emerging developments in state constitu- been active in the national, state, and local bar tional law. On November 21, 1994, she was associations. She is a two-time recipient of the honored by her Connecticut Supreme Court State Bar of New Mexico Outstanding Contri- colleagues on the occasion of the tenth anniver- bution Award. sary of her leadership of that court and the Ju- Ms. Ram0 is also very active in her com- dicial Branch of the state of Connecticut. munity. She is a former member and President

98 of the University of New Mexico Board of Re- County Deputy Public Defender. Mr. Richard gents. Ms. Ram0 served as President of the New received his B.S. and J.D. degrees from Arizona Mexico Symphony Orchestra Board and is on State University. the Executive Committee of the Albuquerque Community Foundation. In 1993, she received JOHN G. RICHARDSON is a Research the Governor’s Distinguished Public Service Analyst with the Research Division of the Na- Award for community service in New Mexico. tional Center for State Courts (NCSC). In addi- Ms. Ram0 hopes to lead the ABA to im- tion to providing his staff support of The First prove public understanding of the law and to National Conference on Eliminating Racial and improve our system of justice. She has, for ex- Ethnic Bias in the Courts and The National ample, appointed a Task Force on Domestic Consortium of Task Forces and Commissions on Violence to recommend legislative and judicial Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, he has reforms to protect partners and children from contributed to numerous other NCSC projects, abuse and to stop the intergenerational cycle of including Court Interpretation: Challenge of the violence. She also hopes to invigorate the ABA 199Os, Community-focused Courts, Denial of to become more responsive to the needs of the Federal Benefits, Habeas Corpus in the State profession, lawyers in small-firm and solo prac- and Federal Courts, and Assessing the Courts’ tice in particular, and to broaden the ABA’s Responses to Drug Cases. He is also an Adjunct service to the public at large. Staff Member of the NCSC Information Service Department, specializing in drug court informa- INDIRA RAMPERTAD currently serves tion and research. His most recent writings in- as the Director of the Ohio Commission on Ra- clude “Model Code of Professional Responsi- cial Fairness. Prior to her present post, Ms. bilities for Interpreters in the Judiciary” and Rampersad served as the Assistant Director to “Visual Modes of Communication: Interpreting the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s for the Deaf Persons,” co-authored chapters in Commission on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the the manuscript “Court Interpretation: Model Courts. Ms. Rampersad has spent several years Guides for Policy and Practice in the State conducting proactive research on the impact of Courts.” race and the judicial system. She is also in- Mr. Richardson holds a bachelor’s degree volved in various community groups that work (summa cum laude) from Saint Leo College of towards fostering racial harmony and in ending Florida. A William and Mary Graduate Dean’s domestic violence. Fellow and Virginia Commonwealth Fellow, he Ms. Rampersad received her J.D. from holds a Master’s degee (with honors) in sociol- Suffolk University Law School and her B.S. ogy from the College of William and Mary in degree from the University of Massachusetts. Williamsburg, Virginia. Presently, Mr. Richard- Upon assuming her current post, Ms. Ramper- son is an Adjunct Professor of sociology at Saint sad deferred her Ph.D. at Northeastern Univer- Leo College of Hampton Roads, Virginia. sity Graduate School of Law, Policy, and Society Mr. hchardson is a former Air Force Lin- until 1996. guist (Korean), Intelligence Analyst, and United States Assistant Delegate to a North Atlantic GERALD P. RICHARD II is an Attorney Treaty Organization (NATO) advisory commit- and the Director of Community Services for the tee. Presently, he is a Commissioned Officer in Phoenix Police Department. A member of the the U.S. Navy (Reserve), serving as an Intelli- Governor’s Drug and Gang Police Council, the gence Officer for the Atlantic Intelligence Arizona Juvenile Justice Council, and the Ari- Command in Norfolk, Virginia. As a military zona Supreme Court Commission on Minorities officer, he has managed numerous multiforce, Chair, he is also Chair of the Arizona State multiservice, and multinational intelligence Gang Advisory Committee. programs for the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, Mr. Richard is a former Deputy County National Security Agency, and NATO command Attorney for the Maricopa County Attorney’s authorities. Office, where he was assigned to the Organized Crime Unit and was responsible for the special LEO M. ROMERO,Dean and Professor of prosecution of street gangs and occult criminal law at the University of New Mexico School of activity. He has also worked as a Maricopa Law, earned his bachelor’s degree at Oberlin

99 College in 1965, his J.D. at Washington Uni- have included Cochair of the California Judicial versity in St. Louis in 1968, and his LL.M. at Council Committee on Gender Bias in the Georgetown University Law Center in 1972. Courts; lecturer on judicial ethics, conduct, and Dean Romero began his academic career at fairness in new trial judge educational programs the Dickinson School of Law in 1970, where he since 1981; and author of the 1990 publication, was Assistant Professor of law in charge of stu- the California Judicial Conduct Handbook, a dent clinical affairs. He joined the faculty at the comprehensive summary of the law concerning University of New Mexico’s School of Law in judicial ethics, accountability, and discipline for 1972 as Assistant Professor; he was promoted to Californiajudges. Associate Professor in 1974, then full Professor Judge Rothman received his B.A. from the in 1978. He served as Associate Dean for aca- University of California in 1959 and his Doctor demic flairs from 1989 to 1991. He has served of Laws in 1962 from the University of Chicago as Dean since 1991. In addition, he has held the Law School. Judge Rothman was also Deputy following visiting positions: Visiting Associate Attorney General of California from 1963 to Professor of law at the University of Oregon 1967 and began his general practice of law in (1976-1977) and visiting Edward F. Howrey 1967. Professor of trial advocacy at the George Wash- ington University National Law Center (1987- CHARLES 2. SMITH was appointed by 1988). Governor Booth Gardner to the Washington Dean Romero has written extensively; his State Supreme Court in July 1988. Justice Smith published work includes books, articles, mono- was reelected unopposed for a short term in graphs, and conference presentations on a wide 1988 and a 111term in 1990. variety of subjects. He also has done a consider- Born in Lakeland, Florida, in 1927, Justice able amount of iecturing and has served on nu- Smith graduated from Temple University in merous committees for various professional 1952 and from the University of Washington associations, including AALS, ABA, LSAC, School of Law in 1955. He served as a law clerk NITA, the New Mexico Bar Association, and for Justice Matthew W. Hill (1955); as a Deputy CLEO. Prosecuting Attorney for King County (1956- 1960) and as a Special Assistant to Attorney DAVID GRAY ROSS has headed the Fed- General Robert F. Kennedy (1960-1964). eral Office of Child Support Enforcement since His career includes service as a judge of January 1994. A former Prosecutor in the Dis- the Seattle Municipal Court (1965-1966) and as trict of Columbia, a former Circuit Court Judge a judge of the Kmg County Superior Court in Maryland, and a former member of the (1966-1973). He was Associate Dean and Pro- Maryland Legislature, he has devoted the ma- fessor of law at the University of Washington jority of his adult life to issues surrounding our and retired in 1983 as Professor Emeritus. He children and our families. Judge Ross brings was a News Commentator for KOMO Radio and experience from all branches and levels of gov- Television (1973-79) and retired as a Lieutenant ernment to his new job. He has experienced and Colonel in the United States Marine Corps Re- seen firsthand the need to improve our system so serve (1 986). He had prior service in the United that chddren can be raised out of poverty and States Army (1945-1946). placed in loving and nurturing environments. Justice Smith has served in local, national, He has, on a dady basis, made the decisions that and international organizations concerned with alter people’s lives in such an important way. He religion, law, health, children and families, hu- has been involved in making laws, prosecuting man rights, and cultural diversity. He chairs the the laws, interpreting the laws, and rendering Supreme Court Mnority and Justice Commis- judgments under those laws. He is now respon- sion. His service awards include the 1988 Law- sible for the administration of our national child yer of the Year Award, Seattle-King County Bar support program. Association; the Public Service Award, United States Department of Justice Community Rela- DAWD M. ROTHMAN, judge of the Los tions Service (1988); the 1989 Volunteer of the Angeles Superior Court, has had a professional Year Award, American Cancer Society, the lifetime of involvement in issues of ethics and 1990 Edwin T. Pratt Award, Seattle Urban gender fairness in the courts. His many duties League; and the 1990 Distinguished Alumnus

100 I Award, University of Washington School of porations for youth of color. He is regularly Law. sought as a national speaker, commentator, and strategist on local, state, and national issues that H. T. SMITH, one of Miami’s distin- have an impact on black people. guished native sons, was born in the Overtown section of Miami and educated in its then- WLLL4M A. THORh!E, Jr., is a Pomo segregated schools. He earned an undergraduate Indian firom northern California Dunng his years degree from Florida A&M University in 1968. as a practicing Attorney, Judge Thorne represented He served in Vietnam, 1969 to 1970, receiving individuals and businesses in both state and federal the Bronze Star for valor, and returned home to courts, served as counsel to tribal government as earn a J.D. degree from the University of Miami well as to corporations and individuals doing busi- School of Law in 1973. ness on Indian reservations. Mr. Smith’s law career began by blazing For seven years, in addition to having a law new paths, as Dade County’s first African- practice, Judge Thorne served as Chief Jwemle American Assistant Public Defender, then as Judge and as an Adult Trial Judge for the Uintah Dade County’s first African-American Assistant and Ouray Tribal Court in eastern Utah and as a County Attorney. In 1977, he and fellow Uni- trial and appellate judge for the Shoshone Bannock versity of Miami schoolmate, Harold Long, Tribes of the Fort Hall Indian Reservation in Idaho. opened the first African-American law firm in By special appointment, Judge Thorne has served downtown Miami. Since 1981, he has been in a as a trial or appellate judge at the Ute Mountain solo law practice in Miami, specializing in civil resenation in Colorado; the Crow, Ft. Belknap, and criminal litigation. He is currently recog- Northern Cheyenne, and Flathead reservations in nized in the 1995-96 edition of Best Lawyers in Montana; and the Ft. Mojave, hbab Paiute, and America. Colorado River Indian Tribes in Arizona, as well as With a keen grasp of Miami’s political and the Jicarilla Apache Tribe in New Mexico. civil rights history, Mr. Smith vigilantly pursues Judge Thorne has previously wed on the his dream of full equal opportunity and justice Board of Directors for the National American for blacks in Florida. From 1990 to 1993, he Indian Court Judges Association; the Native served as a spokesman for the BOYCOTT MI- American Rights Fund in Boulder, Colorado; and AMI campaign, in response to the snubbing of the Salt Lake City United Way. He has been Vice Nelson Mandela by locally elected officials and Chair of the Utah Board of Youth Corrections and the police beating of peaceful Haitian demon- Chair of the Utah Juvenile Justice Task Force. strators. The boycott, which lasted more than Judge Thorne has trained tribal court 1,000 days, caused civic leaders to create a for- personnel for 17 years, with the National Indian mal plan for addressing black economic Qspar- Justice Center and the American Indian Lawyer ity in Dade County. As Cochair of Miami Training Program. He has taught classes at the Partners for Progress, Mr. Smith was also foun- University of Utah as well as conducted presen- der and Chairman of the South Florida Coalition tations for state and tribal judges, officers, and for a Free South Africa, whch forced local and social workers around the countq on a regular state governments to stop purchasing South Af- bS. rican goods and end investments and business Since 1986, Judge Thorne has served as a ties there. In 1983, he founded and chaired the Circuit Court Judge and then as a District Judge for Miami-Dade Trade and Tourism Commission in the Third Judicial District for the State of Utah. He an effort to involve more black businesses in has served on the Board of Circuit Judges, the Greater Miami’s hospitality industry. policy-making board for the Circuit Court in Utah, Mr. Smith also pursues the dream na- as well as on the Judicial Council, the governing tionally. As current President of the National body for Utah’s judiciary. He currently serves on Bar Association, he presides over the oldest and the Utah Stiite Advisory Committee for the US. largest association of lawyers of color and repre- Civil Rights Commission. He has, since its creation sents a network of over 16,000 black lawyers, in 1983, served as President of the National Indian judges, and legal scholars in the U.S., the Car- Justice Center. Judge Thorne continues to serve on ibbcan, and West Africa. MI. Smith also serves a case-bycase basis with several tribal courts when as Secretary to the board of INROADSMami, a needed. He received a B.A. from the University of program that provides internships in major cor- Santa Clara and a J.D. from Stanford Law School.

101 WCKZ J. TOYOHARA is the Executive Ms. Toyohara was an original member and Director of the Washington State Minority and sub-committee Chairperson of the Washington Justice Commission. As the Executive Director, State Minority and Justice Task Force. Cur- Ms. Toyohara works closely with Commission rently, Ms. Toyohara serves on the Washington Cochairmen, Justice Charles Z. Smith and Jus- Council on Crime and Delinquency board and tice James M. Dolliver, as they work toward provides technical support and expertise to the improving the state justice system. Some of the Diversity Committee of the District and Munici- Commission’s accomplishments under Ms. pal Court Judges’ Association. Toyohara include successful completion of a research study examining racial and ethnic dis- ARLINE S. TYLER is a Senior Sta!T At- parities in exceptional sentencing in Washing- torney with the California Administrative Oflice ton State; presentation of a recruitmentlwork of the Courts/Judicial Council. In addition to force diversity educational program for superior, performing general house counsel duties, she district, and municipal court judges, clerks, and serves as Project Director for the California Ju- court administrators; presentation of two pilot dicial Council Advisory Committee on Racial education programs on cultural diversity for and Ethnic Bias in the State Courts and as Proj- district and municipal court judges and court ect Director for the newly appointed Standing personnel; presentation of a regional education Advisory Committee on Access and Fairness. program on cultural diversity for district and Prior to joining the Administrative Office municipal court ‘judges and court personnel; and of the Courts in 1989, Ms. vler worked for a publication of the Work Force Diversity Re- private firm in San Francisco. By 1983, she was source Directory for Washington State Courts. employed as a labor and Employment Law At- Ms. Toyohara is an Attorney and a mem- torney with the U.S. Postal Service’s Western ber of the Washington State Bar Association. Regional Law Department, where she provided She received her J.D. from the University of advice, counsel, and litigation support to man- Oregon School of Law. In addition, Ms. Toyo- agers in 12 western states. hara obtained her master’s in education from the She is a former Peace Corps volunteer, University of Washington and her B.A. in edu- Assistant Professor of sociology and economics cation from Western Washington University. at Camden County College in New Jersey, and Before joining the Minority and Justice former College Administrator at Wellesley Col- Commission, Ms. Toyohara served as the Con- lege in Massachusetts. tracts Administrator for the Washington State Ms. Tyler earned an M.A. degree from the Department of General Administration. Ms. University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Toyohara was a Criminal Prosecuting Attorney Pennsylvania, and received her J.D. degree in for the King County Prosecutor’s office and an 1980 from Boalt Hall School of Law in Ber- Assistant City Attorney for the Seattle City At- keley, California. torney’s office. Prior to becoming an Attorney, Ms. Toyohara was a high school English ANNICE M. WAGNER, having served as Teacher with the Seattle Public School District. an associate judge of the District of Columbia Ms. Toyohara has served in local organi- Court of Appeals since 1990, took office as zations involved with law, human rights, and Chief Judge on June 14, 1994. She was in pri- Asian-American concerns for over 20 years. She vate practice from 1964 to 1973 and acted as was elected and served as President of the Seat- General Counsel to the national Capital Housing tle Chapter, Japanese American Citizens Authority from 1973 to 1975 and People’s League, in 1990, and she has served on various Counsel for the District of Columbia from 1975 boards and committees, including the State to 1977. Chief Judge Wagner was also the asso- Board of Washington Women Lawyers, Volun- ciate judge of the Superior Court of the District teer Legal SeMces Committee (Kmg County of Columbia from 1977 to 1990. Bar Association), Board of Visitors, University Chief Judge Wagner chairs the Committee of Oregon School of Law, Metrocenter on Arrangements of the District of Columbia Y.M.C.A., and Japan America Society. Ms. Judicial Conference and the District of Colum- Toyohara was a Volunteer Attorney for the Le- bia Court of Appeals Task Force on Gender Bias gal Clinic program, King County Bar Associa- in the Courts. She is a member of the Board of tion, for many years. Trustees of the United Planning Organization,

102 acting as Vice President from 1988 until the Senior StaE Associate with the National Center present. She is also a member of the Charles Fay for State Courts (1976-1977), the Research As- American Inn of Court and the Washington Bar sociate in the Office of the Administrative Assis- Association. tant to the Chief Justice of the United States Among Chief Judge Wagner’s numerous (1974-1976), one of the first tow Judicial Fel- awards is the Award of Judicial Excellence, As- lows (1973-1974), and Assistant Professor of sociation of Plaintiffs’ Trial Attorney, and the political science at Texas Tech University Award for Leadershp and Service, Greater (1970-1973). Washington Chapter of Women Lawyers Divi- Mr. Wheeler has published numerous sion of the National Bar Association. Chief books and articles on judicial administration and Judge Wagner hold a B.A. and LL.B. from organization, judges’ extrajudicial activities, and Wane State University. on the history and evolution of the federal court system in the United States. Most recently he JANICE BRICE WELLINGTON, a na- has coauthored three monographs analyzing key tive of New York City, received her B. A. degree long-term planning issues facing the admini- from Lehman College of the City University of stration of federal justice: the size of the federal New York in 1975 and her J.D. degree from the courts, the “federalization” of civil and criminal National Law Center at George Washington justice, and the current governance structure of University in 1978. the federal judicial branch. On July 1, 1990, Judge Wellington became He served on the Board of Directors of the one of the first two women appointed to the American Judicature Society and chaired the bench in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Society’s editorial committee for its journal, first black appointed to the bench in Prince Wil- Judicature, from 1991 to 1994. He has also liam County. Judge Wellington sits on the 3 l st served on the editorial boards of the Justice Judicial District Juvenile and Domestic Rela- System Journal and Administration and Sociew. tions Court of Virginia. During her years of He has lectured on judicial education and judi- practice in northern Virgmia, Judge Wellington cial administration in Chile (1989) and Brazil earned an impressive reputation as both a (1992) under the auspices of the United States staunch advocate for the rights of her clients and Information Agency. as an individual committed to making a differ- Mr. Wheeler received his Ph.D. in political ence in her community. In an &torial on her science from the University of Chicago in 1970. appointment, The Prince William Journal called Judge Wellington “an accomplished attorney MAURICE E. WHITE is the National with a passion for the law and compassion for Coordinator for Judicial Conference Equal Em- those she will judge.” ployment Opportunity @EO) Programs and Judge Wellington has won numerous Chief of the EEO and Special Projects at the awards and honors and is very active in public Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO). sexvice projects. A member of the faculty of the Prior to his appointment, he directed the Fed- National College of Juvenile and Family Court eral-State Judicial Relations Office in the Article Judges, Judge Wellington lectures at statewide III Judges Division at the A0 and worked and national conferences. She has spoken ex- closely with the Conference of (state) Chief Jus- tensively on domestic violence, disposition al- tices and the Judicial Conference Federal-State ternatives for youth in the juvenile justice Jurisdiction Committee. system, and cultural diversity in the justice sys- Prior to joining the Administrative Office, tem. She also makes many public appearances Mr. White was the Associate Deputy General annually, including speeches, panel appear- Counsel (Legal Counsel) (Acting) and the As- ances, television programs, and workshops. sociate Deputy General Counsel for Legal Coun- sel in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. RUSSELL R WEELER has served While at the Pentagon, he had ongoing respon- since 1991 as Deputy Director of the Federal sibilities for legal, legislative, supervisory, and Judicial Center, the federal court system’s special litigation. During his tenure, he repre- agency for research, education, and planning. sented the Secretary of Defense on the White Prior to joining the Center in 1977, he was a House IradContra Interagency group. Among

103 other honors he received the Civilian Career Exeter University in Exeter, England, and Service Award and the Secretary of Defense graduated with a J.D. degree from the Walter F. Meritorious Services Award and Medal. Mr. George School of Law, Mercer University. White’s personal interests include work with national men’s groups, weightlifting, and travel. ESTHER YAZZIE, born in 1950 to Na- Mr. White began his legal career as an vajo parents and whose first language was Na- Associate with the Wall Street firm LeBoeuf, vajo, learned to speak English at the Navajo Lamb, Leiby & McRae. He was then appointed Methodist Mission School when she was six as a Staff Counsel to the Senate Labor and Pub- years old. She worked as a Navajo Police Radio lic Welfare Committee, Senior Legislative Dispatcher, Navajo Policewoman, Navajo Police Counsel for the Governor of New York, and Clerk, Navajo Deputy Court Clerk, Navajo Pro- directed a program Erom the President’s Advi- bation Officer and Police Family Liaison Coun- sory Commission on Intergovernmental Rela- selor. She has worked as a Navajo Interpreter tions. since 1979 in New Mexico and later in Arizona. Mr. White attended Chapman University She is the coauthor of the English/ilravajo Glos- World Campus Afloat (which visited over 30 sary oJLegal Terms. She is the Principle Formu- countries around the world) and was elected lator and Evaluator as well as the Chief Vice President of the Student Body in 1969. He Examiner of the Federal Navajo Interpreter earned his baccalaureate magna cum laude, Phi Certi-fication Examination. She speaks, reads, Beta Kappa, from Howard University and is a and writes Navajo and has had formal education graduate of the Harvard Law School. In 1971, and course work in the language. he was awarded a Ford Foundation Fellowship Ms. Yazzie’s work as a community organ- to attend session XI1 of the Federal Executive izer began in 1986 with Tonantzin Land Insti- Institute. tute in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and she served as President of the Institute’s Board of TOMMY DA Y WLCOX is a Superior Court Directors for two years. She continues her work Judge of the Macon Judicial Circuit, Macon, as a community organizer in the communities of Georgia, having been elected to that office effective Cactus Valley/Red Willow Springs, Kayenta, Ft. October 15, 1981. The Macon Judicial Circuit Defiance, Window Rock, Arizona, and Ramah, consists of three counties in central Georgia: Bibb New Mexico-all Navajo reservation communi- (pop. 149,967), Peach (pop. 21,189), and Crawford ties. Her strong interest in working with the (pop. 8,991). Navajo youth has led to her development of the Judge Wilcox has served as -dent of the Navajo Spiritual Land Recovery Project, a proj- Council of Superior Court Judges of the State of ect aimed toward Navajo youth leadership and Georgia (1989-1990) and was a charter member of selfdetemination with emphasis on restoring the Chief Justice’s Commission on Professionalism Navajo culture, history, and spirituality. (1990-1992). He is a member of the Georgia Ms. Yazzie has presented advocacy docu- Supreme Court’s Commission on Racial and ments such as written testimony to the Senate Ethnic Bias in the Court System. He orgaruzed and Judiciary Committee and House of Representa- presides over a Special Drug Court for the Superior tives Judiciary Committee in support of reau- Court of Bibb County, Georgia. Along with thorizing the Native American Language Afiican-American colleagues, he has presented assistance in the electoral process. She has made programs on race relations in local schools in the numerous presentations across the country on Central Georgia area. Judge Wilcox is a frequent Native American issues such as Native Ameri- lecturer on the subjects of judicial ethics and racial can Women in the Struggle, Native American and ethnic bias. He is a Trustee of the Georgia Youth, and Interpreting, all of which deal with Institute of Continuing Judicial Education. Navajo culture. She is also working with the Before becommg a trial court judge, Judge Language System Line for AT&T in Monterey, Wilcox practiced law in Macon, Georgia, with the California. Other organizations to which she law firm of James and Wilcox. He received his serves as a resource are Masters Translating A.B. degree from Mercer University, studied law at Services, Miami, Florida; Berlitz International,

104 Inc., Princeton, New Jersey; and Diplomatic publication by the United States District Court Language Services, Arlington, Virginia. for the District of New Mexico. Ms. Yazzie began her education at the Following his elevation to the Navajo Na- Navajo Methodist Mission School, Farmington, tional Supreme Court, he directed several sig- New Mexico, and she later received her B.S.and nificant changes in policy: the Navajo Nation P.A. at the University of New Mexico. has the most comprehensive domestic violence laws in the United States, with court rules to ROBERT YAZZIE was appointed as the implement them, and the Navajo Peacemaker Chief Justice of the Navajo Nation on January Court, a contemporary version of traditional 20, 1992. The appointment followed seven years Navajo justice, has expanded throughout the as the presiding judge of the Window Rock Dis- Navajo Nation and is successful in dealing with trict court. social problems; a new focus is creating avenues Born in 1947, Chief Judge Yazzie grew up for redress for the victims of crime. In 1994, the in a traditional area in the New Mexico portion U.S. Justice Department honored Chief Justice of the Navajo Nation. He attended the Bureau of Yazzie for his initiatives to address victim Indian Affairs Boarding School and Rehoboth rights. Chief Justice Yazzie also promotes the High School at Rehoboth, New Mexico, and experimental “Slay the Monsters,” a program received his B.A. degree in sociology from for court access without lawyers. He currently Oberlin College in Ohio (1973), followed by his serves on the President’s Commission on a J.D. from the University of New Mexico in White House Fellowshp. 1982. The author of an essay, “Law School as a Chief Justice Yazzie has both formal and Journey,” 46 Arkansas Law Review 271 (1993), practical legal experience. Prior to attending law Chef Justice Yazzie relates the difficulties of school, he served as Court Advocate for DNA- Indian law students and how they can enter the People’s Legal Services, Inc. (1974-1979). He field of law successfully. His most recent piece, was a Navajo-English interpreter in U.S. Dis- “‘Life Comes From It’ Navajo Justice Con- trict Court, and with his wife, Esther Yazzie, he cepts,” New Mexico Law Review 175 (1994), coauthored a glossary of Navajo legal terminol- relates the essentials of Navajo justice thinking ogy. The glossary is pending publication by the for a better crosscultural understanding of tra- University of Arizona, following successful ditional Indian law.

105 Alaska: Sentencing in Alaska (March 1975). Statistical analysis of felony sentences imposed in 1973. 1973 Sentences of Five Years or Longer (April 1975). Analysis of factors contributing to lengthy sentences, and the impact of appellate review of sentencing. Alaska Felony Sentencing Patterns: A Multivariate Statistical Analysis--19 74-1976 (April 1977). Study requested by the legislature and used to structure presumptive sentencing provisions of the new criminal code. Also resulted in the creation of the Sentencing Guidelines Committee. Interim Report on the Elimination of Plea Bargaining (May 1977). Summarized effects of the Attorney General’s 1975 ban on plea bargaining as reported by attorneys, judges, and defendants. Interim Report of the Alaska Judicial Council on Findings of Apparent Racial Disparity in Sentencing (October 1978). Summary of data accumulated on felony case dispositions and sentencing patterns fiom Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau (1 974- 1976) giving evidence of racial and other disparities in sentencing for certain types of offenses. Resulted in legislation creating the Advisory Committee on Minority Judicial Sentencing Practices, and fbnding of Judicial Council follow-up studies of felonies and misdemeanors. See text of Tenth Report for other effects. The Effect of the Official Prohibition of Plea Bargaining on the Disposition of Felony Cases in Alaska Criminal Courts (December 1978). [Reprinted by the Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., as AhkaBans Plea Bargaining, 1979.1 Evaluates the effectiveness and consequences of the Attorney General’s 1975 ban on plea bargaining, including the results of over 400 interviews with attorneys, judges, and criminal justice personnel, and two-year felony statistical study. Alaska Misdemeanor Sentences: 1974-76 Plea Bargaining (August 1979). Analysis of misdemeanor sentences to determine effect of plea bargaining ban on sentences imposed after trial or plea. Alasku Misdemeanor Sentences: 1974-76 Racial Disparity (November 1979). Analysis of existence of racial disparity in misdemeanor sentences; shows significant disparity for several categories of offense. Alaska Felony Sentences: 1976-1979 (November 1980). Follow-up study requested by the legislature on felony disparities; shows disappearance of most racial disparities. Additional analysis and findings on sentences in rural areas, effects of attorney type, and possible continuing trends fiom the plea bargaining ban. Alaska Felony Sentences: 1980 (December 1982). Study requested by the legislature as a continued monitoring of sentence disparities and analysis of the effects of the revised criminal code. Shows disappearance of disparities (racial and attorney type), shortened sentence lengths.

107 Alaska Misdemeanor Sentences: 1981 (December 1983). Funded by the legislature to analyze misdemeanor sentences imposed during 1981. Recommended alcohol treatment programs for convicted defendants and increased legislative sanctions for DWI to reduce the incidence of alcohol-related crime. DW7 Sentences: 1981 (March 1984). Additional analysis of DWI (drunken driving) sentences included in the 198 1 misdemeanor study database. Types of sentences imposed for DWI convictions and characteristics of offenders are described. Alaska Felony Sentences: 1984 (March 1987). Describes felony sentencing patterns for 1984 cases. Analyzes the impact of presumptive sentencing and other criminal justice system changes between 1980 and 1986. A Re-evaluation of Alaska’s Ban on Plea Bargaining (January 1991). An analysis of data and interviews concerning Alaska’s ban on plea bargaining and its interactions with presumptive sentencing and other changes into the justice system between 1975 and 1990. A Re-evaluation of Alaska ’s Ban on Plea Bargaining: Executive Summary (January 1991).

Arkansas: Buffalo, “The Women and Minorities Study,” Arkansas Lawyer (January 1992). Buffalo, “The Women and Minorities Study,” Arkansas Lawyer (April 1992). 1 Kearney, “firing Guidelines from the Committee on Opportunities for Women and Minorities in the Legal Profession,” Arkansas Lawyer (April 1994).

California: The 1991-1992 Public Hearings on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the California State Court System. California Judicial Council Advisory Committee on Racial and Ethc Bias in the Courts. Fairness in the California State Courts: A Survey of the Public, Attorneys and Court Personnel. California Judicial Council Advisory Committee on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts. Racial and Ethnic Composition of the California Trial Courts: A Report to the Judicial Council . Advisory Committee on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts.

Delaware: “Delaware: High Court to Study Racial Bias,” News Journal, Wilmington, Delaware, A6. Delaware State Bar Association. Delaware Minority First Year Law Student Summer Program: Louis L. Redding Fellowships. Wilmington, Del., (1 995). Delaware State Bar Association. Letterfrom the Editor: Lydia Swanson Cox (December 1994). Minutes of the Meeting of the Delaware Team attending the First National Conference on Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts. Wilmington, Delaware (January 1995).

108 Letter from Rodman Ward, Jr., Esquire, to Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey (July 1994). Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey. “Resources for Court Are Key Weapons in the Struggle for Justice.” Speech to the Delaware State Bar Association on Law Day U.S.A., Wilmington, Del., (May 1993). Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey. “The Joy of Independent and Critical Thought.” Speech presented on Founder’s Day at The Peddie School (February 1993). Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey. “The Delaware Judiciary.” Outline of speech before the Darmouth Club of Delaware (April 1994). Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey. “State of Judiciary Message to the Second Session of the 137th General Assembly.” Dover, Del. (May 1994). Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey. “Presentation to the Members of the Justice of the Peace Courts.” Speech at Wild Quail (May 1994). Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey. Remarks at the Press Conference on the Louis L. Redding Fellowship Program, Wilmington, Del. (October 1994). Delaware State Bar Association. INRE (March 1994). Article announcing formation of Delaware Bar Association’s Committee on Diversity in the Legal Profession.

District of Columbia: Final Report of the Task Force on Racial and Ethnic Bias and Task Force on Gender Bias in the Courts. District of Columbia Courts (May 1992). The Joint Committee on Judicial Administration. Report on Implementation of the Final Report of the Task Forces on Racial and Ethnic Bias and Gender Bias (June 1993). The Joint Committee on Judicial Administration. Report on Implementation of the Final Report of the Task Forces on Racial and Ethnic Bias and Gender Bias (June 1994).

Florida: ‘Florida Supreme Court Racial and Ethnic Bias Study Commission. Where the Injured Fly for Justice: Reforming Practices Which Impede the Dispensation of Justice to Minorities in Florida (December 1990).

Georgia: Reports Prepared for or by the Georgia Supreme Court Commission on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Court System: Perception Survey of Commission Members Sensitivity Exercise for Commission Members Staff‘ Summaries and Transcripts of Commission Hearing Including Prepared Statements of

109 Racial Bias in the Court System, Statement of Stephen Bright, Director, Southern Center for Human Rights (October 1993) Statement of George H. Kendall, Assistant Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (April 1994) Differential Treatment of Individuals by the Judicial System Which May Be Caused by a Person’s Race or Ethnicity, Eric Knocher, Director (October 1993) Statement of Leonard Leavell, President, NAACP Chapter, Columbus, Georgia (April 1994) Statement of Dr. Joseph E. Lowery, President (April 1994) Statement of Gilda Williams, Southern Center for Human Rights Summaries of Forums and Interviews with: Chairperson, Judicial Qualifications Commission Chairperson, Judicial Nominating Commission Deans of ABA Accredited Law Schools Gate City Bar Association Forums with Hispanic Community: Gainesville, Tifton and Latin American Association, Atlanta Georgia Chapter, National Asian and Pacific Bar Association Inmates, Phillips Correctional Institution Foreign Language Interpreter Survey and Report StafFMemo and Data Concerning Cultural Diversity and Language Slulls Training of Public Safety Officers Contract Courtwatch Project Attitude Surveys of Judges, Clerks and Attorneys (results have been compiled for all but attorneys) Interim Report Employment Survey of Superior and State Courts Monthly Commission News Digest (June, 1993 - January, 1995) Guia a las Cortes de Georgia (Guide to the Georgia Courts) pamphlet, Administrative Office of the Courts (1993) Juvenile Court Studies: Georgia’s Juvenile Justice System: A Retrospective Study of Racial Disparity Prepared for Georgia Children and Youth Coordinating Council (circa 1988) Georgia’s Juvenile Justice System: A Prospective Study of Racial Disparity (circa 1990) Strengthening Juvenile Justice in Fulton County/Altanta, Fulton County/Atlanta Commission on Juvenile Justice (May 1986) Report of Senate Study Committee on Children at Risk (December 1993)

110 Development of a Risk Assessment Instrument for Juvenile Court of Cobb County, Georgia, Robert F. Scherer, Ph.D., Kennesaw State College (September 1989) Ethnic Community Regional Profiles, Atlanta Regional Commission, 1994, Including: Cambodians Haitians Nigerians Mexicans Puerto Ricans South Americans Ethiopians and Eritreans Cubans Somalis Georgia Indigent Defense Council, Report to the Governor, General Assembly and Supreme Court (1994) Gwinnett County Criminal Justice Study, 1988- 1992, by Gwinnett County Human Relations Commission Data from Court Appointed Special Advocate Program Court Conduct Handbook, State Bar of Georgia, Committee on Involvement of Women and Minorities in the Profession (1 994) The Effect of Gender and Race on the Practice of Law In Georgia, State Bar of Georgia (1991)

Hawaii: Report of the Advisory Panel on Minorities and the Justice System. Judiciary’s Policy Statements regarding Equal Employment Opportunity/AfXrmative Action, Sexual Harassment and Racist Conduct. Proposed Rules of Professional Conduct prohibiting memberships in clubs that invidiously discriminate and prohibiting discriminatory behavior in the course of representing a client. News articles and commentary regarding use of a cultural defense in the case of State v. Ganal. State v. Batson and State v. Levinson, Hawaii Supreme Court pronouncements on peremptory challenges, and news commentaries on the case of State v. Fukusaku, in which the judge declared a mistrial based upon prosecution’s misuse of peremptory challenges.

Iowa: Supreme Court of Iowa, Final Report of the Equality in the Courts Task Force: Executive Summary (State of Iowa, February 1993). Supreme Court of Iowa, Final Report of the Equality in the Courts Task Force (State of Iowa, February 1993). Iowa Judicial Department, Sexual Harassment Policy (Supreme Court of Iowa, October 1992). Iowa Judicial Department, Guide for Eliminating Sexual Harassment (Supreme Court of Iowa, October 1992). Supreme Court of Iowa, Final Report of the Supreme Court Task Force on Courts’ and Communities ’ Response to Domestic Abuse (State of Iowa, August 1994).

111 Zimmer, Judge VhD., Memorandum, TO: Chief Justice Arthur A. McGverin, RE: Initial Report of the Criminal Issues Committee (November 1994). “Task Force Recommends Comprehensive Approach to End Domestic Violence,” 13 :3 Iowa ’s Third Branch, p. 1 (July-October 1994). “Equality Not Always Present in Iowa Courts,” The DesMoines Sunday Regzster, p. 3C (February 14, 1993). Santiago, Frank, “Race, Sex Bias Task Force to Hold Public Hearings,” The DesMoines Register, p. 4M (May 14, 1991). Santiago, Frank, “High Court Panel to Investigate Racism, Sexism in Justice System,” The DesMoines Register (December 4, 1990). “Bias in the Courtroom?” The DesMoines Sunday Register (June 1990). Roos, Jonathan, ‘fSupreme Court Urges Judicial System Probe into Race, Sexual Bias,” The DesMoines Register (June 8, 1990).

Maryland: Battaglia, Lynne A., Chairperson, Report of the Select Committee on Gender Equality of the Maryland Judiciary and the Maryland State Bar Association, Annapolis, Md., October 1992.

Massachusetts: “A.B.A. Project to Examine Sex Offender Sentencing Disparities,” 1 15 New Jersey Law Journal (January 1985). Address by Judge Constance Baker Motley, reprinted in 136 F.R.D.233, 305 (2d Cir. Annual Conference)(July 1991). Aguirre, “Is the Criminal Justice System Racist,” and “Empirical Research on Racial Discrimination in the Imposition of the Death Penalty,” Criminal Justice Abstracts (March 1990). hyetoro, “The Criminal Justice System: Racism and Genocide,” N.B.A. Magazine (March 1989). America’s Children at Risk: A National Agenda for Legal Action (ABA, 1993). Appendix 4, “RaceEthc Identification,” Employer Information Report EEO- I (Rev. 4-92), Auerbach, Justice Without Law? Resolving Disputes Without Lawyers (1 983). Barbosa, Carr, & Johnson, “Cultural Factors and Considerations in the Investigation of Care and Protection Petitions,” 373 MCLE (1 993). Bjelde, Visek, Wickham, & Kiene, “Sentencing Probation, and Parole,” 74 Georgetown University Law Journal 84 1 (February 1986). Black, “Chao from Dot. Ave.,” Boston Globe, Magazine Section, p. 18 (September 1993).

112 Black, “The Concept of a Supreme Court: Massachusetts Bay 1630-1 686,” in The History of the Law in Massachusetts: The Supreme Judicial Court 1692-1992 (R. Osgood, ed., 1992). Blumstein, Cohen, & Martin, eds., Research on Sentencing: The Search for Reform, Vol. 2 (1 983). Borthwick & Schau, Note, “Gatekeepers of the Profession: An Empirical Profile of the Nation‘s Law Professors,” 25 University of Michigan Journal of Law Ref 19 1 (1 99 1). Bowman, “Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Commission, Congress Taking Disparate Paths,” 20 M.L.W. 1699 (May 1992). Bridges & Crutchfield, “Law, Social Standing and Racial Disparities in Imprisonment,” 66 Social Forces 699-724 (March 1988). Chused, “The Hiring and Retention of Minorities and Women on American Law School Faculties,” 137 U. Pa. L.R. 537 (1988). Close, “Child Welfare and People of Color: Denial of Equal Access,” 19 Social Work Abstracts 13 (1983). Connor & Wheat, Families with Supported Investigations: Prevalence of Substance Abuse and Domestic Violence (DSS 1991). Corrothers, “Rights in Conflict: Fairness Issues in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.” 1 1 (Symposium), 26 Criminal Law Bulletin 38-49 (January-February 1990). Cross, Fleischner, & Elder, Guardianship and Conservatorship in Massachusetts (1 992). Crystal, “Asian Americans and the Myth of the Model Minority,” 70 Social Casework 405 (1 989). Dawson & Remington, eds., Sentencing: The Decision as to Type, Length, and Condition of Sentence (1 969).

DeBenedictis, “ 1 1 Mandatory Minimum Sentences Hit,” ABA Journal (December 199 1). Decker & Salect, “Selective Incapacitation: A Note on Its Impact on Minorities (Greenwood Scale),” 4 Journal of Criminal Justice 287 (1987). Douglas & Barnes, “What Review Boards Are Doing About Unjust Sentencing,” 19 Judges ’ Journal 16(6) (Fall 1980). Elder, “Children, Families, and the State: State Intervention in Child Custody Cases,” MCLE (1 993). “Evaluating Massachusetts, Criminal Justice System: Final Report, Task Force on Justice,” 17:1 New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement 17-53. Feimer, Pommersheim, & Weiss, “Marking Time: Does Race Make a Difference? A Study of Disparate Sentencing in South Dakota,” 13 Journal of Crihe & Justice 86- 102 (1 990). Final Report of the Michigan Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues in the Courts (1 989). Fischer, Legal Education, Law Practice and the Economy: A New England Study.

113 Forslund, “Age, Occupation, and Conviction Rates of White and Negro Males: A Case Study,” 6 Rocky Mountain Social Science Journal 14 1- 146 (April 1969). Friedman, A History ofAmericanLaw 155-156 (2d ed., 1985). Gender Bias Study of the Supreme Judicial Court, Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1 989), Gibson, “Race as a Determinant of Criminal Sentences: A Methodological Critique and a Case Study,” 12 Law and Society Review 455-478 (1 978). Gilbert, “Racism land Retrenchment in Capital Sentencing: Judicial and Congressional Haste Toward the Ultimate Injustice,” 18 N. Y.U. Review 5 1 (1990/199 1). Goodstein, Determinate Sentencing and Imprisonment: A Failure of Reform (1 985). Gould, “A Minority-Feminist Perspective on Child Welfare Issues,” 64 Child Werfae 29 1 (1985). Guinther, The Jury in America (1 988). Hagan, “Extra-legal Attributes and Criminal Sentencing: An Assessment of a Sociological Viewpoint,” 8 Law & Society Review 3 57-84 (1 974). Hagan, “Review Essay: A Great Truth in the Study of Crime,” 25 Criminology 421-28 (May 1987). Hampden County (Mass.) District Attorney’s Commission on Civil Rights, Report to the District A ttomey of Hampden County (1 992). Hayden, African Americans in Boston: More than 350 Years (1 99 1). Heaney, “The Reality of Guidelines Sentencing: No End to Disparity,” 28 American Criminal Law Review 161-232 (Fall 1991). Heilbrun, Foster, & Golden, “Death Sentence in Georgia, 1974- 1987: Criminal Justice or Racial Justice,” 16:2 Criminal Justice and Behavior 139 (June 1989). Herkowitz, Parkins, & Seck, Need and Availability of Substance Abuse Service for DSS Consumers @SS 1989). Hernandez, “Local Political Ground Sees a Shifting,” Boston Globe, Metro Section, p. 1 (February 4, 1993). Hogan & Siu, “Minority Children and the Child Welfare System: An Historic Perspective,’’ 33 Social Work 493 (1 988). Holmes & Daudistel, “Ethnicity and Justice in the Southwest: The Sentencing of Anglo, Black, and Mexican Origin Defendants,” 65 Social Science Quarterly 26 (June 1984). Horejsi, Craig, & Pablo, “Reactions by Native Americans to Child Protection Agencies: Cultural and Community Factors,” 71 Child Weyare 329 (1992). Hunsaker, “Are Departures fiom the Sentencing Guidelines Undermining the Goals of Congress: United States v. ha,” 8 Cooley Law Review 1 19. Johnson, “Black Innocence and the White Jury,” 83 Michigan Law Review 16 11 (1 985). Kalven & Zeisel, The American Jury System 90-9 1 (1 97 1).

114 Ked& Vito, “Race and the Death Penalty in Kentucky Murder Trials: An Analysis of Post-Greg Outcomes,” 7 Justice Quarterly 189 (March 1990). Keil & Vito, “Race, Homicide Severity, and Application of the Death Penalty: A Consideration of the Barnett Scale,” 27 Criminology 5 1 1 (August 1989). Kelly “Comparison of Defense Strategy and Race as Influences in Differential Sentencing,’’ 14 Criminology 241 (August 1976). Kempf & Austin, “Older and More Recent Evidence on Racial Discrimination in Sentencing,” 2:1 Journal of Quantitative Criminology (1 986). Kleck, “Racial Discrimination in Criminal Sentencing,” 46 American Sociologzcal Review 783- 805 (1 98 1). Klein, Petersilia, & Turner, “Race and Imprisonment Decisions in California” 247 Science 8 12 (February 1990). Klein, Turner, & Petersilia, Racial Equity in Sentencing (Rand Corporation, 1988). Krisberg, Schwartz, Fishman, Eisikovits, Guttman & Joe, “The Incarceration of Minority Youth,” 33 :2Journal of Crime and Delinquency 173 (April 1987). LaBeff, “Race, Sex, and Prison Sentence Disparity,” 9 Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology 35 (1981). Levine, “Minority Hiring in Boston Limited Despite Efforts; City’s Reputation Sends ‘Wrong Message,” Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, p. 2 (June 8, 1992). Lorant, A Statistical Description of Residents of Massachusetts Correctional Institutions on January I, 1991 (Massachusetts Department of Corrections, September 199 1). Lorant, 1991 Court Commitments to the Massachusetts Department of Corrections (Massachusetts Department of Corrections, December 1992). MacMillan, “Equitable Sentencing: Alternatives in Reducing Disparity,” 42 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 184 (Fall 1984). Massachusetts Department of Social Services Annual Demographic Report on Consumer Populations July 1993 (DSS, 1993). Massachusetts Detailed Occupations by Race and Sex, 1990 Census Equal Employment Opportunity @EO) File (Bureau of the Census, 1992) (PRI Associates). Mauer, Young BlackMen and the Criminal Justice System: A Growing National Problem (The Sentencing Project, 1990). Meeker, Jesilow, & Aranda, ‘‘Bias in Sentencing: A Preliminary Analysis of Community Service Sentences,” 10 Behavioral Sciences and the Law 197-206 (1 992). Morris, “Race and Crime: What Evidence Is There that Race Influences Results in the Criminal Justice System?” 72:2 Judicature 1 1 1 (August-September 1988). Murphy, Racial Discrimination in the Criminal Justice System (1 988).

115 Myers, “New LSAC Figures Demonstrate Continuing Slide in Applications,” National Law Journal 4 (September 1993). Myers, “Social Background and the Sentencing Behavior of Judges,” 26:4 Criminology 649 (November 1988). Myers, “Statistics Show Minorities Have Bigger Share of Lower Enrollment,” National Law Journal 4 (March 1993). Myers & Talarico’, The Social Contexts of Criminal Sentencing (Springer-Verlag, 1987). Myers & Talarico, “The Social Contexts of Racial Discrimination in Sentencing,” 33 Social Problems 236 (February 1986). Nagel, “Structuring Sentencing Discretion: The New Federal Sentencing Guidelines,” 80 Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 883 (Winter 1990). Nagel & Levy, “The Average May Be the Optimum in Determinate Sentencing,” 42 University of Pittsburgh Law Review 583 (Spring 1981). National Conference on Sentencing Advocacy, Race, Sentencing, and Criminal Justice, Litigation and Administrative Practice Course Handbook Series: Criminal Law and Urban Problems (1991). Nelson, Americanization of the Common Law: The Impact of Legal Change on Massachusetts Society, 1760-1830 (1 975). Nelson, “The Incarceration of Minority Defendants: An Identification of Disparity in New York State, 1985- 1986, New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (July 199 1). Nelson, “Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Processing Persons Arrested for Misdemeanor Crimes: New York State, 1985-1986,” New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (July 1991). New Jersey Supreme Court Task Force on Minority Concerns Final Report (1 992). Ochi, “Racial Discrimination in Criminal Sentencing,” Judges‘ Journal (Winter 1985). Olsen, “Services for Minority Children in Out-of-Home Care,” 56 Social Services Review 572 (1982). Osborne, “Changing the Notion that Mnorities Need Not Apply,” American Lawyer 32 (October 1989). Paternoster, “Prosecutorial Discretion in Requesting the Death Penalty: A Case of Victim Based Racial Discrimination,” 1 8 Law and Society Review 437 (1 984). Peterson & Hagan, “Changing Conceptions of Race: Towards an Account of Anomalous Findings of Sentencing Research,” 49 American Sociologcal Review 56 (February 1984). Pierce, Miliano, Garcia, and McDevitt, Report to the Commission to Study Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts (on file at Supreme Judicial Court, June 30, 1992). Pommersheim & Wise, “Going to the Penitentiary: A Study of Disparate Sentencing in South Dakota,” 16 Criminal Justice h Behavior 155 (June 1989).

116

k Powers, “Invisible Voters,” Boston Globe, Magazine Section, p. 16 (August 1, 1993). Pruitt & Wilson, “A Longitudinal Study of the Effect of Race on Sentencing,” 17 Law & Society Review 6 13 (1 983). Public Hearings on Racial & EthcBias in the California State Court System [ 1991-921 (The Judicial Council Advisory Committee on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts, 1993). Rabinovitz, “Los Abogados de Massachusetts,” Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, p. 33 (August 16, 1993). “Race and the Criminal Process: IX. Race and Noncapital Sentencing,” 101 HarvardLaw Review 1626 (1 988). RaciaUEthnic Disparities and Exceptional Sentences in Washington State, Final Report (Washington State Mnority and Justice Commission, September 1993). Radelet & Pierce, “Race and Prosecutorial Discretion in Homicide Cases,” 19 Law and Socieq Review 587 (1985). Recorh of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay (3-20). Report of the Chief Justice’s Commission on the Future of the Courts, Reinventing Justice: 2022 (Massachusetts, 1992). Report of the Fairness and Equality Committee of the Supreme Court of Idaho (1 992). Report of the Gender Bias Study of the Supreme Judicial Court (Massachusetts, 1989). Report of the Michigan Supreme Court Task Force on RaciaUEthnic Issues in the Courts (1 989). Report of the New York State Judicial Commission on Minorities ( 199 1). “Report of the New York State Judicial Commission on Minorities,” 19 Fordham Urban Law Journal 171 (1992). Report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on RaciaUEthnic Issues in the Judicial System (1 994). Roberts, “U.S. Panel Says Sentencing Law Applied Unfairly: Racial Bias Found Under Mandatory Minimum Penalties; Disparities Persist. (U. S. Sentencing Commission),” 104 Los Angeles Daily Press 1 (August 23, 1991). Sabol, “Racially Disproportionate Prison Populations in the United States,” 13 Contemporary Crises 403 (December 1989). Sun .lose Mercury News, “Summary of Results California Criminal Justice Survey” (conducted by the San Jose Mercury News, San Jose, California, November 199 1). Scarnecchia, “Gender & Race Bias Against Lawyers: A Classroom Response,” 23 Journal Law Reform 3 19 (Winter 1990). Schmitt, “The Color of Justice,” first of three parts, Sun Jose Mercury News, p. 22A (December 8, 1991). Schmitt, “The Color of Justice,” second of three parts, Sun Jose Mercury News, p. 8A (December 9, 1991).

117 Schmitt, “The Color of Justice,” third of three parts, San Jose Mercury News, p. 1A (December 10, 1991). Schuster, Eyes on the Courts (1 994). Semeta, “Justice for All Should Not Include Involuntary Servitude for Some,” 13 Criminal Justice Journal 13 5 (1 99 1). Sentencing in the Federal Courts: Does Race Matter? The Transition to Sentencing Guidelines, 1986-1990 (U.S. Department of Justice, NCJ 145328). Sidanius, “Race and Sentence Severity: The Case of American Justice,” 18:3 Journal of Black Studies 273 (March 1988). Smith, “Patterns of Discrimination in Assessments of the Death Penalty: The Case of Louisiana,” 15 Journal of Criminal Justice 279 (1 987). Special Commission on Foster Care, Final Report (Massachusetts, February 1993). Spohn, “The Sentencing Decisions of Black and White Judges: Expected and Unexpected Similarities,” 24 Law & Society Review 1 197 (December 1990). Spohn, “The Sentencing Decisions of Black and White Judges: Expected and Unexpected Similarities,” 24 Law & Society Review (1 990). Spohn, Gruhl, & Welch, “The Effect of Race on Sentencing: A Reexamination of an Unsettled Question,” 16 Law & Society Review 71 (1 98 1-82). Sweeney & Haney, “The Influence of Race on Sentencing: A Meta-Analytic Review of Experimental Studies,” 10 Behavioral Sciences and the Law 179 (1 992). “Symposium [on the Florida Supreme Court Racial and Ethnic Bias Study Commission],” 19 Florida State University Law Review 589 (1 992). Takagi, “Racial Discrimination in Criminal Sentencing-An Asian Perspective.” Presented to the Judicial Response to the Disproportionate Incarceration of Minority Youth in America, Advisory Codtte Symposium, NCJFCJ, San Francisco, California (January 17-1 9, 1989). Tenaglia, Court Commitments to Massachusetts County Facilities During 1992 (Massachusetts Department of Correction, December 1993). The Crisis in Corrections and Sentencing in Massachusetts: Report and Recommendations of the Task Force on Justice (Boston Bar Association & Crime and Justice Foundation, February 199 1). Thompson & Zingrd, “Detecting Sentencing Disparity: Some Problems and Evidence,” 86 American Journal of Sociology 869 (1 98 1). Tinker, Quiring, & Pimentel, “Ethnic Bias in California Courts: A Case Study of Chicano and Anglo Felony Defendants,” 55 Sociologcal Inquiry 83 (1985). Uhlman, “The Impact of Defendant Race in Trial-Court Sanctioning Decisions,” in Gardiner (ed.? Public Law and Public Policy (New York, Praeger). United States Census of Massachusetts, Summary of Social, Economic, and Housing Characteristics (1 990).

118 Unnever, Frazier, & Henretta, “Race Differences in Criminal Sentencing,” 2 1 Sociology QuarterZy 197 (Spring 1980). Unnever & Hembroff, “The Prediction of RaciavEthnic Sentencing Disparities: An Expectation States Approach,” 25 Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency 53 (February 1988). Walsh, “Race and Discretionary Sentencing: An Analysis of Obvious, and Nonobvious cases,” 35 International Journal of Offender Therapy & Comparative Criminologv 7 (Spring 199 1). Washington State Minority and Justice Task Force Final Report (1 990). Welch, Combs, & Gruhl, “Do Black Judges Make a Difference?’ 32: 1 American Journal of Political Science 126 (February 1988). Welch, Gruhl, & Spohn, “Sentencing: The Influence of Alternative Measures of Prior Record,” 22 Criminology 2 15-27 (1 984). Weninger, “Unjustified Sentence Disparity-Case Study of the Levelling Effect of Parole,” 3 6:2 Syracuse Law Review 715 (1985). Wolfgang, Figlio, Tracy,- & Singer, “National Survey of Crime Severity,” U. S. Bureau of Justice (June 1985). Wolfgang & Riedel, “Race, Judicial Discretion and the Death Penalty,” 407 The Annuals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 1 19 (1 973). Wright, ed., The Federalist, No. 83 (1972). Zatz, “Pleas, Priors, and Prison: RaciavEthnic Differences in Sentencing,” 14 Social Science Research 169 (1 985). Zatz, “Race, Ethnicity, and Determinate Sentencing: A New Dimension To An Old Controversy,” 22 Criminology 147 (1 984). Zatz, “The Changing Forms of RaciavEthnic Biases in Sentencing,” 24: 1 Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency (1 987). Zatz, “The Changing Forms of Racial/Ethnic Biases in Sentencing,” 24 Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 69 (1 987). Zimring & Hawkins, Book Review of Death and Discrimination: Racial Disparities in Capital Sentencing, by Samuel R. Gross and Robert Mauro, 9 Const. Comm. 135 (1992).

Michigan: “Women and Minorities,” 73:3 Michigan Bar Journal (March 1994).

Minnesota: Minnesota Supreme Court, Order Establishing the Minnesota Task Force on Racial Bias in the Courts (December 20, 1990).

119 Minnesota Supreme Court, Final Report (Minnesota Task Force on Racial Bias in the Courts, May 1993). Minnesota Supreme Court, Order Establishing the Implementation Committee on Multicultural Diversity and Racial Fairness in the Courts (June 9, 1994). Minnesota Supreme Court, Order Establishing the Minnesota Court Interpreter Advisory Committee (September 15, 1994). Mmnesota Supreme Court, Order and Report Promulgation of Amendments to the Rules of Criminal Procedure (February 8, 1994). Minnesota Supreme Court, Summary of Focus Group Meetings on Jury Participation (July 22, 1994). Minnesota Supreme Court, First Year Progress Report (July 1994). Minnesota Supreme Court, Agenda and Course Materials, Employment Conference (October 2 1, 1994). Minnesota Supreme Court, Recommendations on the 1995 Legislative Agenda (December 8, 1994)

Mississippi: Hetherington, Rachel A. and Barbara Childs Wallace, Recent Developments In Sexual Harassment Law (Fall 1992). Staton, Carolyn Ellis, Sex Discrimination in Public Education (Fall 1988). Patterson, Lindsay C., Individual Rights and Group Wrongs: An Alternative Approach to Affirmative Action (December 1986). Wiessner, Siegfhed, Blessed Be the Ties that Bind: The Nexus Between Nationality and Territory (December 1986). Meador, Daniel J., Lamar to Posterity--A Centennial Memoir (Fall 1993). Parker, Myles A., Affirmative Action Minority Set-Asides: Future Justlfication for Implementation at the State andor Local Government Level (Spring 1989). Lott, Cynthia Langston, Recent Amendments to the Mississippi Rules of Evidence--The Rights of the Victim vs. The Rights of the Accused in Child Abuse Prosecutions and Dependency or Neglect Proceedings (Fall 1991). Connell, Mary Ann, The Road to United States v. Fordice: What is the Duty of Public Colleges and Universilies in Former De jure States lo Desegregate? (Winter 1993). Davis, Robert N., The Quest for Equal Education in Mississppi: The Implications of United States v. Fordice (Winter 1993). Relman, John P., Overcoming Obstacles to Federal Fair Housing Enforcement in the South: A Case Study in Jury Nullification (Housing Law Symposium, Winter 1991).

120

I Shaw, Lynn McCreery, “Five to Four Over Spirited Dissent ”: Justrfication to Overrule?, Payen v. Tennessee, 111 S. Ct. 2597 (1991). Spring 1993.

Montana: “Families of Murder Victims Plan Capitol Rally,” 7he Independent Record, Helena, Montana (November 27, 1993). Anez, Bob, “Delays in Execution Protested,” The Independent Record, Helena, Montana (December 8, 1993).

Nebraska: Commission on Indian Affairs, Native Americans in the Nebraska Justice System (September 1993). Siedschlaw, Kurt, and James N. Gilbert, Native Americans in Criminal Justice, Chapter 4. Task Force Report on Indigent Defense, “Interpreters,” Chapter 7. Nebraska Supreme Court Task Force on Gender Fairness in the Courts, Final Report (December 1994).

New Hampshire: “Report on the New Hampshire Bar Association Task Force on Women in the Bar,” New Hampshire Bar Journal (Summer 1988). Court Conduct Handbook (New Hampshire Bar Association Committee on Women in the Profession).

New Jersey: ARTICLES, REPORTS, v7DEO AND SOWD RECORDINGS Administrative Office of the Courts, Management System, Hispanics and Probation Services: Some Preliminary Explorations, New Jersey (May 1982). Proceedings: National Consortium of Task Forces and Commissions on Race and Ethnic Bias in the Courts (Draft). Cherry Hill, New Jersey (February 10, 1990). Survey of Municipal Court Personnel (November 6, 1991). Using Gender-Neutral Language: A Guide for Speakers and Writers in the Judiciary (December 1989). Baldus, D. C. Death Penalty Proportionality Review Project: Final Report for the New Jersey Court (September 24, 1991).

121 Bey, Ingrid and Robert J. Lee, eds. Evaluation of Proposed Research on Differential Court Usage by Ten Persons with Extensive Experience Working with Racial, Ethc and Linguistic Minorities in New Jersey’s Courts (February 2, 1988). Chambliss. W. C. and H. F. Taylor. Survey of Perception of Bias in the New Jersey Courts (May 4, 1989). Chused, R. H. “The Juvenile Court Process: A Study of Three New Jersey Counties,” 26 Rutgers Law Review 488 (1973). Committee on Mnority Concerns (Coleman Committee). Report of the Committee on Minority Concerns (Summer 1984). Department of Corrections. Offenders in New Jersey Correctional Institutions on December 3 1, 1990 by Selected Characteristics (September 1, 1990). State of New Jersey. Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Plan: The Judiciary (May 1988). Feyerhem, W. H. and C. E. Pope. Juvenile Case Processing in New Jersey (1 99 1). Governor’s Council on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse. Comprehensive Statewide Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Master Plan (April 199 1). The Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. New Jersey Statewide Survey on the New Jersey Legal System. Conducted by the Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University (August- September 1992). Juvenile Delinquency Commission. The Impact of the New Jersey Code of Juvenile Justice (September 1986). Juvenile Justice-Toward Completing the Unfinished Agenda (August 1988). Klein, S. P. and R. Bolus. A Statistical Analysis of the New Jersey Bar Examination (April 3, 1990). Addendum to April 1990 Report on the New Jersey Bar Examination (September 5, 1991). New Jersey Office of the Public Defender. Lamberth, John. Report on Camden County Jury Selection System (March 10, 1986). New Jersey Supreme Court. Advisory Committee on Bar Admissions. Report of the New Jersey Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Bar Admissions on Review of Bar Examination Questions by Attorneys fiom Minority and Majority Ethnic Groups (October 1, 1991). Committee on Courthouse Facilities. Courthouse Facility Guidelines (1 990). Committee on Criminal Practice. Report of the Supreme Court Committee on Criminal Practice (April 27, 1988). State of New Jersey. Judicial Conference on Sanctioning and Probation Discussion Paper (March 1992). Judicial Conference on Sanctioning and Probation. Report of the Committee on Community Supervision (March 1992).

122 Judicial Conference on Sanctioning and Probation. Report of the Committee on Sanctioning (March 1992). Task Force on Drugs and The Courts: Final Report (April 199 1). New Jersey Supreme Court. Task Force on Interpreter and Translation Services. Equal Access to the Court for Linguistic Minorities (May 22, 1985). Background Report #16: Survey of Bilingual Court Support Services (April 22, 1985). Task Force on Minority Concerns: Interim Report (August 1985). Task Force on Minority Concerns: Final Report (June 1992). Public Hearings, Vol. I - IV (June 1992). Confidential Hearings, Vol. V (June 1992). Written Testimony, Part A: Confidential; Part B: Public. “Statement on the Final Report of the Supreme Court Task Force on Minority Concerns” (August 16, 1993), pp. 1-4. “Supreme Court of New Jersey Action Plan on Minority Concerns,” pp. 5-38. Para Publicacion: El 16 De Agosta De 1993. Corte Suprema De Neuva Jersey, Declaracion Sobre El Informe Final: Del Grupo De Trabajo De La Corte Suprema Sobre Inquietudes De Las Mmorias, pp. 1-4. La Corte Suprema De Neuva Jersey: Plan De Accion Sobre Inquietudes De Las Minorias, pp. 5- 17. Task Force on Minority Concerns: Subcommittee on EEO/AA. Quality of Life Survey Report (February 10, 1992). Silbey, Susan. Differential Use of Courts by Minority and Non-Minority Populations in New Jersey (November 1993). Task Force on Women in the Courts. Report of the First Year (June 1984). Pathfinders Committee Report (Supreme Court Committee Report, 1989). Wikler, Norma and Lynn Hecht Schafian, Esq. Learning from the New Jersey Supreme Court Task Force on Women in the Courts: Evaluation Recommendations and Implications for Other States (1988). Wood, R. Judicial System: Minorities and Juvenile Justice (July 1989).

V7DEO AND SOUND RECORDINGS New Jersey Supreme Court Task Force on Minority Concerns, Atlantic City Public Hearings (December 16, 1989), Tape 1-3. Camden Public Hearings (December 12, 1989), Tapes 1-4. East Orange Public Hearings (November 29, 1989), Tapes 1-2.

123 Jersey City Public Hearings (December 1, 1989), Tapes 1-2. Neptune Public Hearings (February 27, 1990), Tapes 1-3. Newark Public Hearings (November 30, 1989), Tapes 1-3. Paterson Public Hearings (November 29, 1989), Tapes 1-2. Perth Amboy Public Hearings (December 7, 1989), Tapes 1-3. Sussex County Public Hearing (October 29, 1990), Tapes 1-3. Trenton Public Hearings (December 8, 1989), Tapes 1-3. Union City Public Hearings (November 30, 1989), Tapes 1-2. Union County Public Hearings (December 1, 1989), Tape 1. Vineland Public Hearings (December 13, 1989), Tapes 1-2. Note: The Neptune and Sussex County Public Hearings were not videotaped.

NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS AND EDITORIALS (1992-1994) Ardine, Marie, “Mixed Reviews for Minority Report,” 10 New Jersey Lawyer, p. 1 (August 1992). “Let’sTalk About It,” Asbuly Park Press, p. A-1 6 (August 13, 1992). “Justice for All,” Atlantic City Press, p. A- 10 (August 22, 1992). Baird, Lisa G., “A Long Time to Report What’s Obvious to Some,” Bergen Record, p. B-1 (August 13, 1992). “Racism in the Courts Must be Eliminated,” Bergen Record, p. A- 10 (August 10, 1992). “Finally a Plan to Cut Racial Bias in the Courts,” Bergen Record, p. B-6 (August 19, 1993). Booth, Mchael, “Panel: N.J. Courts Life with Racism,” Trenton Times, p. A-1 (August 7, 1992). Brown, Leanna, Letter to the Editor Commenting on Herb Jaf€e’sArticle, Trenton Times, p. 23 (September 24, 1992). Carter, Kathy, “Task Force Finds Minorities Hurt by Bias in the Courts,” The Star Ledger, p. 1 (August 7, 1992). “Coleman Ends Long Journey to Seat on State’sTop Court,” The Star Ledger, p. 1 (December 17, 1994). “Panel: Bias Pervades New Jersey Courts,” Courier News, p. A-2 (August 7, 1992). “Fairness is Justice for All,” Courier Post, p. A-8 (August 13, 1992). “Study Finds Bias in Court System,” The Daily Journal, p. A-4 (August 7, 1992). D’Ambrosio and Linsk, “Study Finds Racial Bias Throughout New Jersey Courts,” Asbury Park Press, p. A-1 (August 7, 1992).

124 “Task Force Finds Bias in Court System,” Gloucester County Times, p. A-4 (August 7, 1992). Graham, Maureen & Peter Finn. “Bias Hurts Judicial System, Study Says,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, p. B-1 (August 6, 1992). “New Jersey Study Finds Bias All Over Legal System,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, p. B-5 (August 6,1992). Haines, Deane, “Task Force Calling for Sensitivity,” The Herald and News, p. A-3 (August 7,1992). “Free the Courts of Any Biases,” The Herald and News, p. A-8 (August 1 1, 1992). Jaffe, Herb, “Bar Association Panel Finds Widespread Bias in Nation’sJustice System: Task Force Agrees with Conclusions by Jersey Courts,” The Star-Ledger, p. 28 (August 13, 1992). “Justice System Guilty of Blatant Racial, Ethnic Bias,” The Star Ledger, p. 13 (September 1, 1992). “Task Force Finds Bias in the Courts,” The Jersey Journal (August 7, 1992) Kilbourne, Christopher, “Justice Not Blind to Race,” The NewsTribune, p. A-1 (August 7, 1992). “Racial Bias Found in New Jersey Courts Judges Insensitive, Report Says,” The Record, p. A-1 (August 7, 1992). Linsk, Rick and Paul D’Ambrosio, “Is Bias Real or Imagined,” Asbury Park Press, p. A- 1 (August 9, 1992). Lucas, Walter, “N.J. Knew of Racism in Its Courts Before L.A.,” 1 1 New Jersey Law Journal (May 1992). “Wilentz Embroiled, Again, In Court-Bias Crossfire,” 10 New Jersey Law Journal (August 1992). Martello, Thomas, “Coleman seated as first black justice in N.J.,” 18 Burlington Times, p. A-3 (December 1994). McLarin, Kimberly, “Justice Named By Whitman To Top Court,” New York Times, p. B-6 (October 4, 1994). Sanderson, Bill, “Welcome to the Court: Coleman’sDay Makes History,” Tribune, p. A-1 (December 17, 1994). Sharif, Dara N. “State Court Task Force Finds Bias on All Levels,” Courier Post, p. B-1 (August 7, 1992). “Bias in the Courts,” The Star Ledger, p. 26 (August 27, 1992). Sullivan, Joseph H., “Bias Found Widespread in the Courts,” The New York Times, p. B-5 (August 7, 1992). Van Ness, Stanley, “Attack Crime by Going to Its Source,” Trenton Times, p. A-13 (February 15, 1992). “Bias Against Minorities,” Wall Street Journal, p. B-3 (August 10, 1992).

125 Wider, Renee, “Judge: Racial Bias Starts in Society, Not Court,” The Courier Post, p. B-27 (August 1992).

New Mexico: Jaramillo, Arturo L., Chairperson, Final Report Task Force on Minority Involvement in the Profession (State Bar ofNew Mexico, Supreme Court of New Mexico, Albuquerque, N. Mex., January, 1990).

New York: New York State Unified Court System Woryorce Diversity Program (December 1989). Report of the New York State Judicial Commission on Minorities Executive Summary (April 1991). Franklin H. Williams Judicial Commission on Minorities, 1993 Annual Report. Report on the Unified Court System’s Implementation of the Recommendations of the New York State Judicial Commission on Minorities (January 1995).

Oregon: Baker, “Criminal kids: Who goes to jail?” The Oregonian, p. B1 (December 18, 1994). Bricker, “President’s Column-WANTED: Older White Male For Leadership Role in Bar Association. Large Firm (20 members plus). Experience Preferred,” 40 Multnomah Lawyer 1 (June 1994). Christ, “Speakers Criticize Corrections Plan-Many Who Spoke at a Portland Hearing Say They Fear a Proposed Bill on Juvenile Justice Feeds into a Racist System,” The Oregonian, p. B4 (February 28, 1995). Grudger & Lent, “Oregon Supreme Court Task Force Finds Racism,” Oregon Civil Rights Newsletter, p. 1 (Fall 1994). Hill, “Representative Avel Gordly: A Different Voice,” The Oregonian, p. C5 (February 2, 1995). Oregon Supreme Court Task Force On RaciaUEthnic Issues In The Judicial System, Appendices to the Final Report (May 1994). Oregon Supreme Court Task Force On RacialEthnic Issues in the Judicial System, Final Report (May 1994). Peterson, “Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethnic Issues Makes Recommendations,” Trial Lawyer, p. 4 (Summer 1994). Weeks, Memo to agency directors concerning the final report of the Oregon Supreme Court Task Force on Racial/Ethc Issues in the Judicial System, Hot Topics-A Publication Of The Department Of Administrative Services (June 14, 1994).

126 Wilson, Gordly Prepares Judicial Equity Bill, p. 1 (June 22, 1994).

Pennsylvania: Petition and Brief of the Philadelphia Bar Association, Seeking the Appointment of a Commission to Investigate the Presence and Effect of Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Philadelphia Justice System, filed with the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (November 23, 1993). Order of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissing the Philadelphia Bar Association’s Petition as moot and referring to a press release by the Honorable Robert N. C. Nix, Jr., Chief Justice of Pennsylvania which stated in part that: “The [Pennsylvania Supreme] Court will impanel a commission to conduct a detailed study of questions concerning racial, ethnic and gender equity throughout the Commonwealth’s Judiciary” (December 29, 1993). “Blacks Are Short-Changed in City Court Positions, Pay,” The Philadelphia Tribune (March 23, 1993). “U.S. Judges to Study Race, Sex Bias in Court,” The Philadelphia Inquirer (November 30, 1994). Cultural Barriers to Justice in Greater Philadelphia: Background, Bias and the Law (Working Paper No. 9, Philadelphia Folk Lore Project, June 1994). “Update: Minorities and Women in the Law,” The Pennsylvania Lawyer (March 1990).

Rhode Island: Rau, Elizabeth, “Price, Countdown to Freedom,” Providence Sunday Journal, p. A-0 1 (October 10, 1993). “NAACP Says Price Race Victim,” The Providence Journal, p. (2-04 (January 5, 1995). “NAACP Says Race Figured in Price Sentence; May Back Appeal,” The Providence Journal, p. B-05 (December 30, 1994). “Craig Price’s Problem,” The Providence Journal, p. A- 10 (December 14, 1994). Lord, Peter, “Minority Leader Says Craig Price is Victim of Racism,” The Providence Journal- Bulletin, p. A-03 (December 3, 1994). Hulick, Doane, and Laura Meade Kirk, “New Trial Set in Providence Slaying,” The Providence Journal, p. A-03 (December 3, 1994). Breton, Tracy, “RI High Court Upholds Murder Conviction in 1990 Providence Slaying,” The Providence Journal, p. B-10 (April 15, 1994).

Utah: Molando and Willis, Study on Minorities in the Juvenile Justice System. Salt Lake County Jail-Metro Monthly Statistical Report.

127 Valuing Diversity Educational Program, an interactive curriculum designed to heighten awareness of diversity of the various ethnic groups within the court system. Numerous newspaper articles focusing on the difficulties and problems of including Native Americans in the jury pool in southern Utah. Numerous newspaper articles focusing on minorities in the judiciary and in the criminal justice system.

Washington: REPORTS AND PUBLICATIONS Washington State Minority and Justice Commission Annual Report (1 994). Racial/Ethnic Disparities and Exceptional Sentences in Washington State Final Report (September 1993). Work Force Diversity Resource Directoryfor Washington State Courts (June 1993). An Exploration of the Effect of Race and Ethnicity on the Processing of Felony Cases Between Initial Chargrng and Conviction (June 1993). Minority and Justice Task Force Final Report (1 990). Minority and Justice Task Force Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations (1 990).

EDUCATION PROGRAMMA TERIALS Curriculum for Regional Education Program on Cultural Diversity, Ephrata, Washington (October 27, 1994). Curriculum for Regional Education Program on Cultural Diversity, Ephrata, Washington (October 26, 1994). Curriculum for Cultural Diversity Education Program, Yakima Pilot Session, Toppenish, Washington (September 22, 1994). Curriculum for Cultural Diversity Education Program, Seattle Pilot Session, Seattle, Washington (June 2, 1994). Curriculum for RecruitmedWork Force Diversity Education Program, 1994 Spring Conference, Pasco, Washington (May 1.8,1994). Curriculum for Recruitment/Work Force Diversity Education Program, 1994 Spring Conference, Blaine, Washington (April 19, 1994). RFQQ-94032,Recruitment/Work Force Diversity Education Program, (November 19, 1993). RFQQ-93048,Work Force Diversity Resource Manual Project (January 15, 1993). RFP-93016,Cultural Diversity Education Training Program (October 13, 1992).

128 RESEARCH PROJECT REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICA TIONS AND QUOTA TIONS RFQQ-95002, A Study on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Prosecution of Criminal Cases in King County (July 28, 1994). RFQQ-93086, Research Study Number Two, Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Imposition of the Exceptional Sentencing Provision of the Washington State Sentencing Reform Act (May 13, 1993). RFQQ-93049, Research Study Number One, The Effects of Race and Ethnicity of Criminal Defendants on the Prosecution of Criminal Cases in Washington State (February 5, 1993).

POSTERS Poster 0ne”The Jury,” by Catherine Conoley (1985). Poster Two”Equal Justice,” by Sekio Matsumoto (1 994).

PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL AND LEGAL PUBLICATION ARTICLES “Perkins Coie Holds Art Presentation,” WashingtonJournal (February 13, 1995). R. E. Dalrymple, “The Dream Is Still a Dream 30 Years Later,” Washington Journal (January 30, 1995). Nicholas F. Corning, “Lawyers of Color and WSTLA Need Each Other,” Trial News (November 1 994). Arthur L. Burnett, Sr., “National Origin and Ethcity in Sentencing,” 9:3 Criminal Justice (Fall 1994). “Minority Lawyers,” Washington.Journal Special Focus (August 8, 1994). R. E. Dalrymple, “A Position of Respect,” WashingtonJournal (August 8, 1994). Paul L. Stritmatter, “Unity and Diversity Are Our Strengths,” 48:s Washington State Bar News (August 1994). Dennis P. Harwick, “Diversity? What’s the WSBA Got to Do With It?” 48:s Washington State Bar News (August 1994). Charles Oliver Russell, “Education and Work: Cultural Diversity and Emerging Labor Needs,” 48:s Washington State Bar News (August 1994). Vance Knapp and Bonnie Kae Grover, “Can the Corporate Law Firm Achieve Diversity?” 48:s Washington State Bar News (August 1994). Charles 2. Smith, “The Imperative for Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Legal Profession,” 48:s Washington State Bar News (August 1994). Vicki J. Toyohara, “Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Work Force of Washington State Courts,” 48:s Washington State Bar News (August 1994).

129 Colleen Ann Deal, “First-Ever Diversity Workshop Conducted for Washington Courts,” Judicial News (May 1994). “Justice Charles 2.Smith to Speak at Kitsap Pavilion,” Kitsap County Chronicle (October 27, 1993). “Race Fairness arid Cultural Awareness Workshops to Be Taught at NJC,” NJC Alumni Magazine (Spring 1994). “Study Finds Racial Bias in U. S. Death Cases,” neNational Law Journal (March 28, 1994). Mary Megliola Franzen, “Seattle Attorney Seeks Seat on Court of Appeals,” Washington ,Journal (March 28, 1994). Mary Megliola Franzen, “The Social Worker,” Washington Journal (February 2 1 , 1994). Brad Chatfield, “Race and Exceptional Sentences-A New Study Tries to Separate Fact From Fiction,” Judicial News (October 1993). “State Courts Work to Eliminate Bias,” 20:7 National Center for State Courts Report (July 1993). Melanie J. Mavrides, “Justice Takes Unusual Path,” Washington Journal (July 26, 1993). Thomas E. Tyner, “Profile: Washington Supreme Court Justice Charles W. Johnson,” 6:3 De Novo (June 1993). “Mary Alice Theiler to Serve as 1993-94 King County Bar Association President,” 6:3 De Novo (June 1993). “National Consortium of Task Forces and Commissions on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts Is Making Progress,” 7:3 NASJE News (Fall 1992). Victoria Slind-Flor, “Jury Commissions Hope for More Prominence,” The National Law Journal (May 18, 1992). “Racism in Legal System Addressed by Minority and Justice Task Force,” Bar Bulletin (December 1990). “Racial, Ethnic, Gender Differences Reported in Attorney Income,” Bar Bulletin (April 1990). “False Responses Delay State Bias Survey,” Washington Law (March 15, 1990). “Minority Task Force Schedules Awareness Plan,” OAC Reports (July 3 1, 1989).

NEWSPAPER AR77CLES Wallace D. Loh, “On a Path Toward Cultural Diversity,” The Seattle Times (March 12, 1995). Jennifer James, “An Angry Look at Issues of Affirmative Action,” The Seattle Times (March 12, 1995). Andrea Schoelkopf, “State, U.S. Examine Court Bias,” Albuquerque Journal (March 6, 1995). Aly Colon, “News Outside the Mainstream, Ethnic Papers in the Area Find a Loyal and Growing Audience,” The Seattle Times (February 26, 1995).

130 t

Robert Lee Hotz, “Race Is Irrelevant, Researchers Say,” The Seattle Times (February 20, 1995). “Visual Arts,” International Examiner (February 15, 1995). “Commission Offers Diversity Posters,” The Seattle Times (February 15, 1995). Rachel L. Jones, “Homicide Rate for Children Is Near Record, Study Says,” The Seattle Times (February 2, 1995). L. A. Johnson, “Newscaster Loses Job Over Racial Comment,” The Seattle Times (February 1, 1995). “A Shamehl Display of Racial Stereotyping,” The Seattle Times (January 3 1, 1995).

Kery Murakami, “ ‘Political Reality’ or Cultural Naivete?” The Seattle Times (January 29, 1995). Kery Murakami, “Racial Controversy the Talk of Capitol,” The Seattle Times (January 27, 1995). John C. Walter, “Justice for All,” The Seattle Times (January 15, 1995). Aly Colon, “Study Suggests Steps to Ensure Equal Justice for Youths of Color,” The Seattle Times (January 15, 1995). Jeanette Marantos, “History of Hard Work Behind New Judge,” The Wenatchee World (January 3, 1995). Matthew Erlich, “Court Considers Communication Changes,” Columbia Basin Herald (December 30, 1994). Royce Rensberger, “More Alike Than Different,” The Daily News (December 28, 1994). Kate Lyons-Holestine, “Judges Talk Cultural Diversity,” The Wenatchee World (October 28, 1994). Debby Abe, “First Hispanic to Be Named to Pierce Court Bench,” The News Tribune (October 1, 1994). Lavonne Luquis, “State’s Hupanics Face Stereotypes,” The Olympian (September 15, 1994). Jerry Large, “Shaping the Crime Debate,” The Seattle Times, (August 3 1, 1994). Catherine Kenny, “Hispanics Make Up 40% of Jail Count,” The Omak-Okunogan County Chronicle (July 13, 1994). “Justice James Dolliver: A Man for All Seasons,” Stately Piper (July 1994). Jeff Andrews, “Judges Learn How to Diversifjl Courtroom,” Tri-City Herald (May 19, 1994). Frieda Bush, “Diversity Training Starts Early,” The Olympian (May 10, 1994). Aly Colon, “Serious Talk About Diversity in Courts,” The Seattle Times, (April 2 1 and April 22, 1994). Sam Kitchell, “Justice Reaches Out, Court Leaders Urge the Hiring of More Minorities,” The BeIIingham Herald (April 20, 1994). Debby Abe, “State Justice Stresses Minority Recruitment,” The News Tribune (April 19, 1994).

131 Howard Goldberg, “Poll Reveals Prejudices Among All Races,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (March 3, 1994). Craig Troianello, “Judiciary Gap for Minorities Needs Closing, Judge Says,” Yakima Herald- Republic (February 13, 1994). “When a Hispanic Offender Is Sentenced,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (October 25, 1993). Brad Shannon, “State Hispanics Get Fewer Breaks,” The Olympian (October 23, 1993). “Sentences Vary Along Racial Lines,” The Spokesman Review (October 23, 1993). Ed Penhale, “Crime and the Penalty,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (October 22, 1993). Ed Penhale, “Who Gets What Sentence,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer (October 22, 1993). “Research Study on RaciaVEthnic Disparities and Exceptional Sentences in Washington State,” (Fact Sheet, October 22, 1993). Juli Sandoz, “Rehab Helps Justice Dolliver Walk the Road to Recovery,” 12:2 Vitalsigns (Fall 1993). Greg B. Smith, “Census Places State Third in Foreign-Tongue Speakers,” Seattle Post- Intelligencer (April 28, 1993). “Lessons for Minorities on Rising to the Bench,” New York Times (March 5, 1993). “Drug Laws Punish Black Men the Most, Crime Stats Show,” Valley Daily News (January 18, 1993). Devin Smith, “Thurston H~spanicPopulation Doubled in Decade,” The Olympian. Don Williamson, “A Long, Lonely Day in Quest of Newspaper Diversity,” The Seattle Times (December 6, 1992). Rich Roesler, “Below the Surface, Changing Demographic, Crime Lead to Racial Tension in the Yakima Valley,” Yahma-Herald-Republic (November 8, 1992). “Defender’s Office Lacks Mnority Recruitment Effort,” Spokesman Review (April 6, 1992). “Panel Spots Bias in State Courts,” Tri-City Herald (June 26, 1989). “Language Tips Scale of Justice for Minorities,” Tacoma News Tribune (May 4, 1989). “Courts, Police Weigh Racial Bias,” Bellingham Herald (November 1988). “Supreme Court Door Opens for a Minority,” Seattle Times (July 14, 1988). “Ex-Judge to Head Bias Probe,” Post Intelligencer (May 2, 1988). “Judges Thompson, Murphy Named to State Task Force on Minority Bias,” Spokesman Review (April 27, 1988).

Wisconsin: Supreme Court Gender Equality Committee, Interim Report (July 1994, Revised August 1994).

132 ALABAMA Jay A. Rabinowitz t George Logan 111 t f Justice, Alaska Supreme Court Project Director, Arizona John B. Bush Box 114100 Commission on Minorities Presiding Circuit Judge, Juneau, AK 9981 1 1501 W. Washington St. 19th Judicial Circuit Phone - 907-463-4772 Phoenix, AZ 85007-3327 P.O. Box 185 Phone - 602-542-9358 Wetumpka, AL 36092 Arthur H. Snowden, I1 t Phone - 334-567-1 148 Administrative Director, Alaska Gerald P. Richard I1 t f Court System Chair, Arizona Supreme Court Oliver Gilmore t 303 K St. Committee on Mmorities Administrative Director of Courts Anchorage, AK 99501-2083 1501 W. Washington St. 300 Dexter Ave. Phone - 907-264-0548 Phoenix, AZ 85007-93 11 Montgomery, AL 36104 Phone - 602-262-6747 Phone - 205-242-0825 ARIZONA Bemardo P. Velasco 7 Demetrius C. Newton t Margarita Solano Bernal t Judge, Pima County State Representative Municipal Judge, Superior Court 5 12 10th Terrace West Tucson City Court 110 W. Congress Birmingham, AL 35204 103 E. Alameda, 3rd F1. Tucson, AZ 85701 Phone - 205-254-2369 Tucson, AZ 85721 Phone - 602-740-8441 Phone - 602-791-3260 Sharon G. Yates t Robert Yazzie f Judge, Court of Civil Appeals Robert L. Castillo t Chief Justice, Navajo Nation, 300 Dexter Ave. Magistrate Judge, Judicial Branch Montgomery, AL 36104 Tucson City Court P.O. Box 2596 Phone - 205-242-4096 P.O. Box 27210 Window Rock, AZ 865 15 Tucson, AZ 85726-7210 Phone - 602-87 1-7669 ALASKA herC. Collins t ARKANSAS Teresa White Cams Superior Court Judge, Sr. Staff Associate, Pima County Lisa C. Fenell? Alaska Judicial Council 110 W. Congress State Representative 1029 W. Third Ave., Ste. 201 Tucson, AZ 85701 550 Lafayette Bldg. Anchorage, AK 99501-1981 Phone - 602-740-3 130 Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone - 907-279-2526 Phone - 501-375-9131 Judy Holgate Stephanie J. Cole t Assistant Director, Morton Gitelman Deputy Director, Pima County Juvenile Court Professor of Law Alaska Court System 222 E. Ajo Way University of Arkansas 303 K St. Tucson, AZ 89713 Fayetteville, AR 7270 1 Anchorage, AK 99501 Phone - 602-240-2004 Phone - 501-575-2708 Phone - 907-264-8230 James C. Kitt Wendell L. Men Intercultural Relations, t Karen L. Hunt t f Chairman, Opportunities for Pima County Juvenile Court Superior Court Judge MinoritiesWomen in the 2225 E. Ajo Way 303 K St., #421 Legal Profession Tucson, 89713 Anchorage, AK 99501 AZ 200 W. Capitol Ave., Ste. 2200 Phone - 602-740-2063 Phone - 907-264-0772 Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone - 50 1-371-0808

133 Jack Holt, Jr. f' Marilyn Callaway O William C. Harrison Chief Justice, Director Juvenile Court Services, Judge, Solano County Supreme Court of Arkansas San Diego Superior Court Superior Court 625 Marshall St. 285 1 Meadowlark Dr. 600 Union Ave. Little Rock, AR 72201 San Diego, CA 93123 Fairfield, CA 94533 Phone - 501-682-6861 Phone - 619-694-4212 Phone - 707-553-5493

CALIFORNIA John A. Clarke Mary Hernandez Executive Officer, President, National Hispanic Los Angeles Superior Court Bar Association Benjamin Aranda I11 O f 111 N. Hill St., Room 105-E 1 Montgomery St., 25th Floor Judge, South Bay Municipal Ct. Los Angeles, CA 90012 San Francisco, CA 94104 825 Maple Ave. Phone - 213-974-5401 Phone - 415-393-8293 Torrance, CA 90503 Phone - 3 10-222-6534 candace Cooper f Janis R. Hirohama Judge, California Superior Court Staff Attorney, Los Angeles JO~A. Arguellos t Los Angeles County, Dept. C County Municipal Courts Retired Judge 1725 Main St. Planning & Research Unit Gibson Dm& Crutcher Santa Monica, CA 90401. - 110 N. Grande Ave., Rm. 620 4 Park Plaza Phone - 3 10-260-3729 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Irvine, CA 92714-8557 Phone - 213-974-6181 Phone - 714-451-3976 Rudolph A. Diaz t f David Horowitz President, Calif. Judges' Assoc Judge, Angeles Keith 0. Boyum f Judge, Hondo Municipal Ct. Los Rio Superior Court Professor, Political Science 11234 Valley Blvd. 111 N. Hill St., Dept. 30 UCS at Fullerton El Monte, CA 9173 1 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Fullerton, CA 92634-9480 Phone - 818-459-8848 Phone - 714-773-3468 Phone - 213-974-5635 Jural J. Garrett Edward J. Bronson Deputy Court Administrator, Ken Kawaichi f Professor, Political Science Los Angeles Municipal Court Judge, Alameda Superior Court California State ,University 110 N. Grand Ave., Rm. 530 1221 oak st. 1326 Bidwell Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90012 Oakland, CA 94612 Chico, CA 95926 Phone - 213-974-6107 Phone - 510-272-6121 Phone - 916-343-6653 Gay Klausner Dolly M. O Gee f Judge, Los Angeles Allen E. Broussard 7 AttomeylParIner, Superior Court Retired Justice, Coblentz, Schwartz, Steinsapir, et al. 111 N. Hill St., Rm. 204 Wen, MaCabe & Breyer 3580 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 1820 Angeles, CA 90012 222 Kearney St.: 7th Floor Angeles, CA 90010 Los Los Phone 213-974-5562 San Francisco, CA 94108 Phone - 213-487-5700 - Phone - 415-391-4800 Edward M. Kritzman Sheila Gonzalez Court Administrator, Irma J. Brown Exec. Officerffresident NACM Angeles Municipal Court Judge, Municipal Court Ventura Co. SuperiorMuni Cts. Los 110 N. Grand Ave., #428-G 200 West Compton Blvd. 800 S. Victoria Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90012 Compton, CA 90220 Ventura, CA 93009 Phone 213-974-6171 Phone - 310-603-7216 Phone - 805-654-3 160 -

134 Jan M. Lecklikner John P. Montgomery Judith Resnik Attorney, San Francisco Administrative Officer, Omn B. Evans Professor of Law Public Defender Marin County Municipal Court University of Southern California 555 7th St. 3501 Civic Center Dr., Rm. 188 The Law Center, University Park San Francisco, CA 94103 San Rafael, CA 94903 Los Angeles, CA 90089-0071 Phone - 415-553-9640 Phone - 415-499-6244 Phone - 2 13-740-4789 Elizabeth A. Riggs Nancy P. Lee Joseph A. Myers O f President., National Asian Executive Director, Judge, El Cajon Municipal Court Pacific Bar Association National Indian Justice Center 250 East Main St. McDonogh, Holland & Allen #7 4th St., Ste. 46 El Cajon, CA 92020 555 Capitol Mall, 9th F1. Petaluma, CA 94952 Phone - 6 19-44 1-4475 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone - 707-762-768 1 Phone - 916-444-3900 David M. Rothman f LaBrenda Nemorin Judge, Los Angeles David F. Levi * Chair, People of Color Caucus, Superior Court Judge, U.S. District Court GayLesbian Bar Association 1725 Main St., Dept. A Califomia Eastern District Lawyers for Human Rights Santa Monica, CA 90401 650 Capitol Mall, Rm. 2504 14670 Roscoe Blvd., #6 Phone - 3 10-260-3605 Sacramento, CA 95814 Panorama City, CA 91402 Phone - 916-498-5725 Phone - 818-895-6145 Kathleen F. Sikora Assistant Director, California Jon M. Mayeda O f Alban I. Niles Center for Judicial Judge, Los Angeles Judge, Los Angeles EducatiodResearch Municipal Court Municipal Court 2000 Powell St., Ste. 850 110 N. Grand Ave., 7th F1. 110 North Grand Ave. Emeryville, CA 94608 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Phone - 510-450-3642 Phone - 213-974-6237 Phone - 213-974-6204 Marcia Skolnik Mari Mayeda * Fredrick K. Ohlrich t f Director Public Affairs, Attorney, Saperstein, Mayeda, Assistant Court Administrator, Los Angeles Municipal Court Larkin & Goldstein Los Angeles Municipal Court 110 N. Grand Ave., Rm. 428K 1300 Clay St. 110 N. Grand Ave., Rm. 420G Los Angeles, CA 90012 Oakland, CA 94612 Los Angeles, CA 90012-3014 Phone - 213-974-6358 Phone - 213-974-8757 Veronica S. McBeth O f John H. Stanfield, I1 O Judge, Los Angeles Robert W. Parkin Director, African-American Municipal Court Assistant Judge, Los Angeles Studies Program 1 10 North Grand Ave. Superior Court University of California at Davis Los Angeles, CA 900 12 111 N. Hill St., Rm. 204 280 Kerr Hall Phone - 213-974-6061 Los Angeles, CA 900 12 Davis, CA 95616 Phone - 213-974-5550 Phone - 916-752-1548 Steven Montan0 Administrative Assistant, Me1 Red Recana Franklin R. Taft California Judicial Council Assistant Judge, Los Angeles Judge, Solano County 303 Second St., South Tower Municipal Court Municipal Court San Francisco, CA 94107 110 N. Grand Ave. 321 Tuolumne St. Phone - 415-904-5594 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Vallejo, CA 94590 Phone - 213-974-6217 Phone - 707-553-5064

135 Sandra Ann Thompson Larry J. Naves t Eddie Rodriguez, Jr. t Municipal Court (Judge, Judge, Denver District Court Judge, Conn. Superior Court South Bay Judicial District 1437 Bannock St., Courtroom 1 1061 Main St. 825 Maple Ave. Denver, CO 80202 Bridgeport, CT 06604 Torrance, CA 90503 Phone - 303-640-2309 Phone - 203-579-6540 Phone - 310-222-6541 David Ramirez f John J. Ronan Arline S. Tyler o f Judge, 2nd Judicial District Judge, Conn. Superior Court AttorneyProgram Manager, Juvenile Court 1061 Main St. Judicial Council of California Denver CityKounty Bldg. Bridgeport, CT 06604 303 Second St., South Tower 1437 Bannock St., Rm. 159 Phone - 203-579-6540 San Francisco, CA 94 107 Denver, CO 80202 Phone - 415-396-9128 Phone - 303-640-3410 Eugene Spear t Judge, Appellate Court of Conn. william C. vickrey t Luis D. Rovira t 95 Washington St. State Court Administrator Chief Justice, Hartford, CT 06106 303 Second St., South Tower Colorado Supreme Court Phone - 203-566-7340 San Francisco, CA 94107 State Judicial Bldg. Phone - 415-396-9115 2 East Fourteenth Ave. DELAWARE Denver, CO 80203 Fumiko Hachya Wasserman t Phone - 303-837-3750 Margaret Rose Henry t Judge, Los Angeles State Senator Superior Court Gary H. Wente * 17 W. 41st St. 12720 Norwalk Blvd. Deputy Circuit Executive, Wilmington, DE 19802-2207 Nowalk, CA 90650-3188 U.S. Courts, 10th Circuit Phone - 302-764-5286 Phone - 3 10-807-7276 1823 Stout St. Denver, CO 80257 Franny M. Maguire Phone 303-844-0124 t Bobbie Welling - Training Administrator, Senior Staf€ Attorney, Delaware Administrative Office Judicial Council of California Dorothy S. Wham of the Courts 303 Second St., South Tower State Senator 820 N.French St., 1lth F1. San Francisco, CA 94107 2790 South High St. Wilmington, DE 19801 Denver, CO 80217 Phone - 302-577-2501 Diane C. Yu f Phone - 303-866-4875 General Counsel, State Bar Vincent J. Poppiti CONNECTICUT t of California Chief Judge, Family Court 555 Franklin St. 900 King St. San Francisco, CA 94102 Francis X. Hennessy 'f P.O. Box 2359 Phone - 415-561-8261 Judge, Appellate Court Wilmington, DE 19801 Judicial Branch Phone - 302-577-2205 COLORADO 95 Washington St. Hartford, CT 06106 Gregory M. Sleet t Virginia ~eavittt Phone - 203-566-7340 U.S. Attorney, United States Staff Development Administrator, Attorney's Office Colorado Administrative Office Ellen Ash Peters f 1201 Market St., Ste. 1100 of the Courts Chief Justice, Conn. Supreme Court Wilmington, DE 19801 1301 Pennsylvea St., #300 Drawer N, Station A23 1 Phone - 302-573-6277 Denver, CO 80203 Capitol Ave. Phone - 303-837-3654 Hartford, CT 06106 Phone - 203-566-3054

136 Alex J. Smalls t Ulysses B. Hammond Eleanor M.Thayer * Associate Judge, Delaware Chief Executive Office Senior Staff Attorney, Federal Court of Common Pleas District of Columbia Courts Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals 1000 N. King St. 500 Indiana Ave. NW, Rm. 1500 717 Madison P1. NW Wilmington, DE 19802 Washington, DC 20001 Washington, DC 20439 Phone - 302-577-2412 Phone - 202-879-1700 Phone - 202-633-6087

E. t or man Veasey t Molly Treadway Johnson f Annice M. Wagner t f Chef Justice, Del. Supreme Court Attorneyhlesearcher, Chief Judge, DC 820 N. French St., 1 lth F1. Federal Judicial Center Court of Appeals Wilmington, DE 19801 One Columbus Circle NE 500 Indiana Ave. NW Phone - 302-577-3700 Washington, DC 20002 Washington, DC 20001 Phone - 202-273-4086 Phone - 202-879-2726 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Rende M. Landers f Russell R. Wheeler f Eleanor D. Acheson 9 Deputy Assistant Attorney Deputy Director, Assistant Attorney General General, U.S. Dept. of Justice Federal Judicial Center Policy Development Office Main Bldg., Constitution Ave. One Columbus Circle NE U.S. Department of Justice Washington, DC 20530 Washington, DC 20002-8003 10th & Constitution Ave. NW Phone - 202-616-0046 Phone - 202-273-4164 Washington, DC 20530 Phone 202-514-4601 FLORlDA - Rose M. Ochi O f Associate Director, Cheryl R. Bailey National Drug Control Jacqueline R. Griffin ? Assistant to Executive Officer Policy Office Judge, 5th District Ct. of Appeal District of Columbia Courts 750 17th St. NW, 8th Fl. 300 S. Beach St. 500 Indiana Ave. NW, Rm. 1500 Washington, DC 20500 Daytona Beach, FL 321 14 Washington, DC 20001 Phone - 202-395-6632 Phone - 904-253-7909 Phone - 202-879-1434 John Garrett Penn * f Gerald Kogan t f Denise M. Glover f Chief Judge, U.S. District Court Justice, Supreme Court of Fla. Educatioflraining Specialist 6600 U.S. Courthouse 500 South Duval St. Federal Judicial Center Washington, DC 20002 Tallahassee, FL 32399-1925 1 Columbus Circle NE Phone - 202-273-0480 Phone - 904-488-0007 Washington, DC 20002 Phone - 202-273-4054 Randall R. Rader * Debra Roberts t Judge, Federal Circuit Senior Attorney, Office of State Joyce Hens Green * Court of Appeals Court Administrator District Judge, U.S. District Court 7 17 Madison Place NW Supreme Court Bldg. U.S. Courthouse Washington, DC 20439 500 South Duval St. 333 Constirution Ave. NW Phone - 202-633-5861 Tallahassee, FL 32399-1900 Washington, DC 20001 Phone - 904-922-5 109 David Gray Ross Deputy Director, Child Support Eugene N. Hamilton t H. T. Smith O f Chief Judge, DC Superior Court Enforcement Office President, National Bar Assoc. 500 Indiana Ave. NW, Rm. 3500 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW 1017 NW 9th Ct. Washington, DC 20001 Washington, DC 20447 Miami, FL 33136 Phone - 202-879-1600 Phone - 202-401-9370 Phone - 305-324-1845

137

A JO~D. Wessel tr Holly K. Sparrow t Paul A. Sudo t Judge, 15th Judicial Circuit Assistant Executive Director, Human Resources Administrator, South County Courthouse Admin. office of the Courts Superior Court of Guam 200 W. Atlantic Ave. 244 Washington St. SW, 120 W. O'Brien St. Delray Beach, FL 33444 Ste. 550 Agana,GU 96910 Phone - 407-274'1435 Atlanta, GA 30334-5900 Phone - 671-475-3329 Phone - 404-656-5171 GEORGIA HAWAII Chilton Davis Varner * Alford J. Dempsey, Jr. t Chair, 1 lth Circ. Gender Issues Leslie A. Hayashi 7 Magistrate Judge, Fulton County 191 Peachtreet St., Ste. 4300 District Court Judge, Atlanta, GA 30303-1763 185 Central Ave., Ste. 2755 Hawaii State Judiciary Phone 404-572-4600 Atlanta, GA 30303-3462 - 1111 Alakea st., 1lthFl. Phone - 404-730-6949 Honolulu, HI 96813-2897 Tommy Day Wilcox, Jr. f Phone - 808-538-5003 Orinda D. Evans * Judge, Superior Court 3 10 Bibb County Courthouse U.S. District Judge Dew Kaneshiro ?' Macon, GA 3 120 1 75 Spring St., SW Project Director, Gender/Other Phone 912-749-6545 Atlanta. GA 30303-3361 - Fairness Project Hawaii State Judiciary Norman E. Zoller Natzu S. Jenga f * 417 S. King St., Rm. 215 Circuit Executive, U.S. RaciaYEthnic Bias Commission court of Honolulu, HI 96813-2912 Appeals, 1 lth Circuit of the Georgia Supreme Court Phone - 808-539-4860 224 Denydown Way 56 Forsyth St. NW Altanta,GA 30303 Dmtur,GA 30030 Mario R. Rami1 t Phone 404-373-1565 Phone - 404-3 3 1-5724 - Associate Justice, GUAM Supreme Court of Hawaii Charles M. Johnson t 417 S. King St. Development Director, Latin Honolulu, HI 96813-2912 American Associates, lnc. Dorothea P. Cnu. t Phone - 808-539-4716 2665 Buford Highway special Assistant Atlanta, GA 30324 Superior Court of Guam DW M. Yamashiro t Phone - 404-638:1820 120 W. O'Brien Dr. Agana,GU 96910 Chief Deputy Public Defender, Phone - 671-475-3450 Officeof the Public Defender Paul Kilpatrick, Jr. t 1130 N. Nimitz Hwy., Ste. A-135 Raical/Ethnic Bias Commission Honolulu, HI 96817 of the Georgia Supreme Court Raymond B. Ilagan t Phone - 808-586-2200 318 11th St., Ste. 200 Court Staff Attorney, Columbus, GA 3 1902 Superior Court of Guam IDAHO Phone - 706-324-0050 120 W. OBrien Dr. Agana, GU 96910 Phone - 671-475-3526 Sergio Gutierrez John H. Ruffin, Jr. t Judge, 3rd Judicial District Judge, Ga. Court of Appeals 1115 Albany St. Lmrdes T. Pangelinan 408 State Judicial Bldg. Caldwell, ID 83605 Communications Director, Atlanta, GA 30334 Phone - 208-454-7370 Phone - 404-656-3458 Superior Court of Guam Judicial Center 120 W. O'Brien Dr. Eishe Kayar-MacGregor t Agana, GU 96910 Chief Judge, Nez Perce Tribal Ct Phone - 671-475-3386 P.O. Box 305 Lapwai, ID 83540 Phone - 208-843-7338

138 Ida Rudolph Leggett t John L. Nickels Thomas N. Frederick t Judge, Second Judicial District Justice, Illinois Supreme Court Director, Court Services, 1230 Main St., 2nd Fl. 1500 Lincoln Hwy, Ste. 201 St. Joseph County Probate Ct. Lewiston, ID 83501 St. Charles, IL 60174 1921 Northside Blvd. Phone - 208-799-3057 Phone - 708-513-3005 South Bend, IN 46615-1626 Phone - 219-235-9588 Ernest0 G. Sanchez t Rachel Patrick Executive Director, Idaho Council Staff, ABA, George R. Glass t Legal Aid Services Inc. Council on RaciaUEthnic Bias Executive Director, 310 N. 5th St., P.O. Box 913 750 N. Lakeshore Drive Indiana Judicial Center. Boise, ID 83701 Chicago, IL 606 11 115 W. Washington Street Phone - 208-336-8980 Phone - 312-988-5638 Ste. 1075 Indianapolis, IN 46204-3417 ILLINOIS Roberta Cooper Ram0 Phone - 317-232-1313 Presidentelect, ABA 750 N. Lake Shore Dr. William Cousins, Jr. t William C. Lee * Chcago, IL 6061 1 District Judge, U.S. District Court Justice, Illinois Appellate Court Phone - 3 12-988-5109 Chairelect, NBA Commission on 2 145 Federal Bldg. Racial and Gender Bias Fort Wayne, IN 46802 160 N. LaSalle St., Rm. S1905 William G. Schwartz t Phone - 2 19-424-7360 Chicago, IL 60601 Judge, Jackson County Phone - 3 12-793-5424 Circuit Court Sheila M. Moss t P.O. Box 388 Judge, Lake Superior Court Richard D. Cudahy * Murphysboro, IL 62901 2393 N. Main St. Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Phone - 618-687-7330 Crown Point, IN 46307-1854 Appeals, 7th District Phone - 219-755-3076 219 S. Dearborn St., Ste. 2648 Stephen E. Walter Chicago, IL 60604 Chief Judge, 19th Judicial Circuit IOWA Phone - 312-435-5825 18 North County St. Waukegan, IL 60085 Phone - 708-360-6480 ~ouisA. Lavorato t Collins T. Fitzpatrick * Justice, Iowa Supreme Court Circuit Executive, 7th Fed. Circ. State Capitol 219 S. Dearborn St., Rm. 2780 Robert A. Zastany Court Administrator, Des Moines, IA 503 19 Chicago, IL 60604 Phone - 515-281-3952 Phone - 3 12-435-5803 19th Judicial Circuit 18 North County St. Waukegan, IL 60085 Elizabeth L. Seiser t Robert C. Henderson f 5 Phone - 708-360-6480 Director, Human Resources Secrew-General, State Ct. Administrator's Office National Baha'is of U.S. INDIANA State Capitol 536 Sheridan Rd. Des Moines, IA 503 19 Wilmette, IL 60091 Phone - 5 15-28 1-7608 Phone - 708-869-9039 Webster L. Brewer t Judge, Superior Court 200 E. Washington St., W241 Rose A. Vasquez 7 Theodis P. Lewis - t Criminal Room Assistant Attorney General Judge, Seventh Judicial Circuit I1 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Hoover State Office Bldg., 201 S. Ninth St. Phone - 3 17-327-5002 2nd Floor Springfield, IL 62701 Des Moines, IA 503 19 Phone - 217-753-6392 Phone - 5 15-281-6706

139 van D. Zimmer t* Boyce F. Martin, Jr. Max N. Tobias, Jr. t District Judge, 6th Judicial Dist. Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Judge, Civil District Court 1003 1stAve. 6th Circuit 421 Loyola Ave. Vinton, IA 52349 209 U.S. Courthouse New Orleans, LA 701 12 Phone - 3 19-472-4660 60 1 W. Broadway Phone - 504-592-9236 Louisville, KY 40202 Phone 502-582-5082 KANSAS - Felicia T. Williams 7 Judge, 2nd Judicial Ct of Appeal Timothy E. Brazil t Gerald A. Neal t 430 Fannin St. District Court Judge, Division 3 State Senator Shreveport, LA 71 101 102 S. Lincoln 1718 W. Jefferson St. Phone - 3 18-227-3744 Chanute, KS 66720 Louisville, KY 40203 Phone - 316-431-5730 Phone - 502-584-8500

Hemy W. Green, Jr. t Robert F. Stephens t Morton A. Brody * Judge, Kansas Court of Appeals Chief Justice, Ky. Supreme Court U.S. District Judge 301 West 10th St. State Capitol, Rm. 23 1 202 Hollow St., Rm. 350 Topeka, KS 66612 Frankfort, KY 40601 Bangor, ME 04402 Phone - 913-296-5409 Phone - 502-564-6753 Phone - 207-945-0549 LOUISIANA Sheila Hochhauser t Jill C. Duson t State Representative Senior Human Resources 1636 Levenworth Robert L. Clayton t Administrator Manhattan, KS 66502-6 110 Associate Dean Central Maine Power Co. Phone - 913-539-6177 Tulane Law School 83 Edison Dr. 6325 Freret St. Augusta, ME 04336 New Orleans, LA 70 118-5670 Phone 207-623-3521 Denise M. Kilwein - t Phone 504-865-5941 Education OBcer, - Office of Judicial Administration Patrick F. Ende t 301 W. 10th St., Rm. 337 Anthony J. Gagliano t Attorney, Pine Tree Legal Topeka, KS 66612 Deputy Judicial Administrator Associates, Inc. Phone - 913-296-2556 Louisiana Supreme Court 39 Green St. 301 Loyola Ave., Rm. 109 Augusta, ME 04330 KENTUCKY New Orleans, LA 701 12 Phone - 207-622-7896 Phone - 504-568-7324 usa an Stokley clary t Peter James Goranites t Court Administrator/Counsel Revius 0. Ortique, Jr. 8 Judge, Maine District Court Kentucky Supreme Court Associate Justice (Retired), 205 Newbury St. Capitol Bldg., Rm. 235 Louisiana Supreme Court Portland, ME 04101 Frankfort, KY 40601 10 Park Island Dr. Phone - 207-822-4269 Phone - 502-564-4176 New Orleans, LA 70122 Phone - 504-288-1221 Joyce A. Wheeler Edward J. Holmes t Director, Family Court Project Secretary, PublicProtection & Ulysses G. Thibodeaw t 205 Newbury St. Regulations Cabinet Judge, La. Court of Appeal Portland, ME 04 112 Ste. 1, Capitol City 1000 Main St. Phone - 207-822-4235 Louisville Rd. Lake Charles, LA 70615 Frankfort, KY 40601 Phone - 318-433-9403 Phone - 502-564-7760

140 MARIANA ISLANDS Theresa A. Nolan t Charles M. Grabau f Judge, Maryland District Court Justice, Mass. Superior Court Edward Manibusan 131 15 14th St. 36 Swallow Dr. Associate Judge, Bowie, MD 20715 Newton, MA 02162 NMI Superior Court Phone - 301-952-401 1 Phone - 508-74 1-0200 P.O. Box 307 Saipan,MP 96950 Sandra A. O'Connor t Kay H. Hodge Phone - 670-234-6401 States Attorney, Attorney, Mass. Bar Association Baltimore County Courts 99 High St. Pete P. Reyes t Bldg. 401, Bosley Ave. Boston, MA 021 10 Chairman, NMl Legislature Towson, MD 21204 Phone - 6 17-542-6789 Ways and Means Committee Phone - 410-887-6600 P.O. Box 586 John J. Invin, Jr. t Saipan,MP 96950 Lawrence F. Rodowsky t Chief Justice, Mass. Trial Court Phone - 670-664-3278 Judge, Maryland Court of Appeals 2 Center Plaza, Rm. 540 620 C.M. Mtchell Jr. Courthouse Boston, MA 02108-1905 Herbert D. Sol1 t Baltimore, MD 2 1202 Phone - 617-742-8575 Chief Deputy Attorney General, Phone - 410-333-4374 Government of the NMI Susan J. Krueger * Mariana Islands Admin. Bldg. MASSACHUSETTS Executive Director, Capitol Hill First Circuit Court of Appeals 1403 John W. McCormack Saipan,MP 96950 Christine P. Burak t Phone - 670-322-43 11 Post OfficeKourthouse Bldg. Staff Attorney, Massachusetts Boston, MA 02109 Supreme Judicial Court Phone - 617-223-9049 Ramon G. Villagomez t 1300 New Courthouse Justice, CNMI Supreme Court Boston, MA 02108 Nauru Building, Box 2165 Phone - 617-557-1161 Paul J. Liacos o t f Saipan,MP 96950 Chief Justice, Supreme Court Phone - 670-234-5 175 1300 New Courthouse Richard J. Chin Pemberton Square Associate Justice, Superior Ct Boston, MA 02108 New Courthouse Phone - 617-557-1 136 MARYLAND 1 100 Pemberton Square Boston, MA 02108 Ivan Matthew Campbell, Jr. Phone - 612-725-8130 Neil L. Lynch t Deputy State's Attorney Assoc. Justice, Supreme Court Pemberton Square 50 Courthouse Square Paul T. Edgar Rockville, MD 20850 Boston, MA 02108 Director, Human Resources, Phone - 617-557-1130 Phone - 301-217-7577 Massachusetts Trial Court 2 Center Plaza, Ste. 540 Kenneth Lavon Johnson t Boston, MA 02 108 Shirley Mark f Judge, Baltimore City Circuit Ct. Phone - 617-742-8575 ConsultantRormer Director, 111 N. Calvert St. Massachusetts Commission to Baltimore, MD 21202 Vincent Flanagan * Study Bias in the Courts Phone - 410-396-5066 Circuit Exec., U.S. Ct of Appeals 3 Hollis Park 1403 JW McCormack Post Cambridge, MA 02140 Diana Gribbon Motz * Ofice and Courthouse Phone - 617-864-3229 Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals Boston, MA 02 109 920 U.S. Courthouse Phone - 617-223-9049 101 W. Lombard, 9th F1. Baltimore, MD 21201 Phone - 410-962-3606

141 Maria Z. Mossaides t Harold Hood 7 f June H. Cicero t f Admin. Asst. to Justices, Judge, Mich. Court of Appeals Judge & Court Administrator Mass. Supreme Judicial Court 900 First Federal Bldg. Mnnesota Supreme Court, 1400 New Courthouse Detroit, MI 48226 Continuing Education Dept. Boston, MA 02108 Phone - 313-256-9223 25 Constitution Ave., Ste. 140 Phone - 617-557-1 194 St. Paul, MN 55155-6100 Denise Langford-Morris t Phone - 612-297-7592 Charles J. Ogletree, Jr. f 8 Judge, Oakland Co. Circuit Ct. Director, Criminal Justice Institute, 1200 N. Telegraph Rd. Margaret F. Corneille Hamud Law School Pontiac, MI 48341-0404 Director, Board of Continuing 320 Holmes Field Bldg. Phone - 810-858-0363 Legal Education Cambridge, MA 02 138 25 Constitution Ave., #110 Phone - 617-495-5097 Benjamin H. Logan I1 St. Paul, MN 55155 Judge, 6 1st District Court Phone - 612-297-1800 Gregory L. Phillips t Hall of Justice, Rm. 261-5 First Justice, Roxbury Division 333 Monroe Ave. NW Margaret Dostal* District Court Grand Rapids, MI 49503-22 11 Assistant Circuit Executive 85 Warren St. Phone - 616-456-3278 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ROXbUry, MA 021 19-3294 3 16 N. Robert St., Rm. 574 St. Paul, MN 55101 Phone - 6 17-427-7000 Helen P. Mickens t Phone 612-290-3289 Associate Dean, - Yvonne R. Sullivan t Thomas Cooley Law School Affirmative Action Officer, 217 S. Capitol Ave. ~lanC. Page t Massachusetts Trial Court Lansing, MI 48901 Associate Justice, Supreme Ct. 2 Center Plaza, Ste. 540 Phone - 517-371-5140 427 Minnesota Judicial Center Boston, MA 02108 25 Constitution Ave. St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone - 617-742-8575 William B. Murphy t Phone 612-296-6615 Judge, Mich. Court of Appeals - Robert V. Ward, Jr. 350 Ottawa MW, Ste. J Professor, New England Grand Rapids, MI 49505 John M. Stuart t School of Law Phone - 616-456-7553 Minn. State Public Defender 154 Stuart St. Rm. 95, University of Boston, MA 02 186 MTNNESOTA Mlnnesota, Law School Phone - 617-422-7271 Mlnneapolis, MN 55455 Jo Ann Bennett Phone - 612-625-5008 MICHIGAN Chief Deputy Court Administrator 325 East Main St. MISSISSIPPI Dennis W. Catlin Anoh, MN 55303-2265 Executive Director, Michigan Phone - 612-422-7359 David C. Bramlette, I11 * Judicial Institute Judge, Southern District of Miss. P.O. Box 30205 Tanya M. Bransford ? 725 Washington Loop, Ste. 216 Biloxi, MS 39530 Lansing, MI 48909 District Ct. Judge, Hennepin Co. Phone - 5 17-334-7805 300 S. Sixth St., C-1251 Phone - 601 -436-43 17 Minneapolis, MN 55487 Pamela J. Creighton Phone - 612-348-3771 Michael P. Mills t Coordinator, Access to Justice Chairman, Judiciary Committee, Program Miss. House of Representatives P.O. Box 30048 205 Riverwalk Lansing, MI 48909 P.O. Box 38 Phone - 517-373-5596 Fulton, MS 38843 Phone - 601-862-5855

142

I I

Denise S. Owens t Carol Ann Robinson * Robin W. Hadfield t Judge, 5th Chancery Court Dist. Clerk of Court, Chair, Human Rights Commission P.O. Box 686 U.S. Bankruptcy Court Nebraska State Bar Association Jackson, MS 39205 21 1 N. Broadway, 7th F1. 7210 S. Wedgewood Dr. Phone - 601-968-6549 St. Louis, MO 63 102-2734 Lincoln, NE 68510 Phone - 3 14-425-4222 Phone - 402-486-3022 James W. Smith, Jr. t Justice, Miss. Supreme Court william T. Session t Donald E. Rowlands t P.O. Box 117 President, Kansas City District Judge, 1lth Judicial Dist. Jackson, MS 39205 Metro Bar Association Lincoln County Courthouse Phone - 601-359-2093 4700 Belleview, Ste. 205 North Plane, NE 69101 Kansas City, MO 64 1 12 Phone - 308-534-4350 Phone - 816-931-5900 Michael W. Wright t Program Mgr., Judicial College Lyle E. Strom * MONTANA P.O. Box 8850 Judge, U.S. District Court University, MS 38677 P.O. Box 607 Phone - 601-232-5955 Karla M. Gray t Omaha, NE 68101 Justice, Montana Supreme Court MISSOURI Justice Bldg. John F. Wright t 215 N. Sanders Justice, Supreme Court Helena, MT 59620 Justine E. Del Muro Rm. 2222, State Capitol t Phone 406-444-5573 Judge, Jackson Co. Circuit Court - P.O.Box 98910 415 E. 12th St. Lincoln, NE 68509 Phone 402-471-3735 Kansas City, MO 64106 Dorothy B. McCarter - Phone - 816-881-3604 Judge, First Judicial District State of Montana Judy A. Zangari t 228 Broadway Iris G. Ferguson Associate Administrator, t Helena, MT 59601 Judge, 22nd Judicial Circuit Administrative Office of the Phone 406-447-8205 Court Adrmnistrator's Office - courts #10 N. Tucker State Capitol, Rm. 1220 St. Louis, MO 63101 Ed P. Mcht Lincoln, NE 68509-8910 Phone - 314-622-4619 Judge, Montana 4th Judicial Dist. Phone - 402-471-2921 200 W. Broadway Leslie Freeman Missoula, MT 59802 NEVADA Attorney, 8th Circuit Court Phone - 406-523-4771 10 Orchard Way David J. Gamble f Kirkwood, MO 63 122 Sanford Selvey I1 t Project Director, National Council Phone - 3 14-984-9509 Chief Public Defender, of Juvenile and Family Court Yellowstone County Judges Carol E. Jackson * 2708 1st Ave. N. Ste. 8970 Judge, U.S. District Court Billings, MT 59101 Reno,NV 89507 Eastern District Missouri Phone - 406-256-686 1 Phone - 702-784-6012 1114 Market St. St. Louis, MO 63101 NEBRASKA Danny Gonzales t Phone - 3 14-539-2368 Research Analyst, UCCSN

Janice L. Gradwohl O j Ofice of the Chancellor william byPrice t Professor, Univ. of Nebraska 2601 Enterprise Rd. Judge, Missouri Supreme Court Ross McCollum Hall Reno, NV 89512 P.O. Box 150 Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 Phone - 702-784-4022 Jefferson City, MO 65102 Phone - 402-472-1251

143 Patricia J. Gray * Elizabeth L. Hodges t Maria T. Feliciano Clerk of Court, Legal Counsel Case Supervisor U.S. Bankruptcy Court New Hampshire Supreme Court Passaic County Courthouse 300 Las Vegas Blvd. S., #260 Supreme Court Building 77 Hamilton St. Las Vegas, NV 89 10 1 Noble Dr. Paterson, NJ 07505 Phone - 702-388-6639 Concord, NH 03301 Phone - 201-881-7791 Phone - 603-271-2521 Kevin M. Kelly t Carmen Flores f Chair, Nevada Supreme Court Philip S. Hollman t EEO/AA Officer Bias Task Force Associate Justice, N.H. Superior Ct. New Jersey Administrative 302 E. Carson Ave., Ste. 600 99 N. State St. Office of the Court Las Vegas, NV 89 10 1 Concord, NH 03301 RJH Justice Complex, CN-966 Phone - 702-385-7270 Phone - 603-271-2030 Trenton, NJ 08103-4001 Phone - 609-633-6537 susan Lent2 t Linda S. Saunders t Member, Nevada Supreme Court AttorneyKhair, Bar Comm. on Harold W. Fullilove t Bias Task Force Women in the Profession Judge, N.J. Superior Court 302 E. Carson Ave., Ste. 600 FP Law Ctr. Essex County Courts Bldg. Las Vegas, NV 89 10 1 2 White st. Newark, NJ 07102 Phone - 702-385-7270 Concord, NH 03301 Phone - 201-621-5246 Phone - 603-228-1541 Tonia Means Lennox Hinds j Member, Nevada Supreme Court NEW ERSEY Chair, Administration of Justice Bias Task Force Program 302 E. Carson Ave., Ste. 600 Paulette Brown f Rutgers University Las Vegas, NV 89101 43 Mme St. Phone - 702-385-7270 Attorneynice Chair, ABA Brown, Childress, & Wolf New Brunswick, NJ 08903 Phone - 908-932-7155 Kathleen M. OLeary 280 S. Harrison Program Attorney, East Orange, NJ 07018 National Judicial College Phone - 201-678-5038 Robert Joe Lee f UNC Judicial College Bldg. Court Interpreter/Supervisor, Reno,NV 89557 Samuel D. Conti t Administrative Office of the Ct. Phone - 702-784-1014 Assistant Director, Trial Court RJH Justice Complex, CN 988 Support Operations Trenton, NJ 08625 Robert Payant Hughes Justice Complex, Phone - 609-984-5024 Pres., National Judicial College CN-988 University of Nevada at Reno Trenton, NJ 08625 Severiano Lisboa t f Judicial College Bldg. #358 Phone - 609-292-0856 Judge, N. J. Superior Court Reno,NV 89557 595 Newark Ave. Phone - 702-784-6747 Theodore Z. Davis / Jersey City, NJ 07306 ChanceIy Judge, Phone - 201-795-6490 NEWHAMPSHIRE Superior Court of New Jersey Camden County Hall of Justice Yolande P. Marlow O f David A. Brock'? 101 S. 5th St., Ste. 640 Admin. Office of the Courts Chef Justice, N.H. Supreme Court Camden, NJ 08103-4001 RJH Complex, CN 988 Supreme Court Building Phone - 609-225-7012 Trenton, NJ 08625 Noble Drive Phone - 609-633-8108 Concord, NH 03301 Phone - 603-271-2646

144 Dianne E. Robinson t Karl R. Gillson Leo M. Romero f Manager, Volunteer Programs Magistrate Judge Dean, University of New Mexico Admin. Office of the Courts McKinley County Court School of Law Hughes Justice Complex, 451 State Rd., #564 11 17 Stanford NE CN-983 Gallop, NM 87301 Albququerque, NM 87 13 1 Trenton, NJ 08625 Phone - 505-722-6636 Phone - 505-277-4700 Phone - 609-984-9689 Harris L. Hartz Martha Vazquez * Randolph M. Subxyan Judge, N. Mex. Court of Appeals District Judge, U.S. District Court Superior Court Judge 11 17 Stanford NE P.O. Box 2710 77 Hamilton St. Albuquerque, NM 87 13 1 Santa Fe, NM 87504 Paterson, NJ 07505 Phone - 505-84 1-4626 Phone - 505-988-6330 Phone - 20 1-88 1-4 179 Arturo L. Jaramillo t Esther Yazzie f Anne E. Thompson * Chair, Task Force on Mmorities Federal Court Interpreter Judge, U.S. District Court in the Legal Profession P.O. Box 689 402 E. State St. State Bar of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87103 Trenton, NJ 08608 2 15 Lincoln Avc. Phone - 505-766-6503 Phone - 609-989-2 123 Santa Fe, NM 87501 Phone - 505-982-001 1 NEW YORK Shirley A. Tolentino Judge, N.J. Superior Court Tammy L. Bomann 595 Newark Ave. Tommy E. Jewel1 t Vice President, Jersey City, NJ 07306 Judge, 2nd Judicial District Ct. 5 100 Second NW The National Conference Phone - 201-795-6630 Albuquerque, NM 87 107 71 Flfth Ave., Ste. 1100 New York, NY 10003. Renee Jones Weeks Phone - 505-841-7392 Phone 2 12-206-0006 Judge, N.J. Superior Court - Hall of Records Deborah Kanter 7 465 MLK Dr., Rm. 3 16 Director, Administrative Office of Alice M. Chapman Newark, NJ 07102 New Mexico Courts Deputy Director Phone - 201-621-5130 237 Don Gaspar, Rm. 25 Human ResourcesEEO Division Santa Fe, NM 87501 N.Y. State Unified Court System NEW MEXICO Phone - 505-827-4800 270 Broadway, Rm. 1012 New York, NY 10007 Phone - 212-417-5847 Joseph F. Baca t f John J. Kelly f Chief Justice, U.S. Attorney New Mexico Supreme Court 625 Silver SW BWIYA. Cozier t 237 Don Gaspar, Rm. 229 Albuquerque, NM 87 102 Judge, Unified Court System Santa Fe, NM 87502 Phone - 505-766-3341 80 Centre St. Phone - 505-827-4892 New York, NY 10013 Ada Pecos Melton f Phone - 212-417-5590 Paula Cooper OwnerExecutive Director, Senior Clerk American Indian Development Lewis L. Douglass O f U.S. Probation Office Associates Judge, Kmg County Supreme Ct. P.O. Box 1848 1400 Central Ave. SE, Ste. 2000 360 Adams St. Albuquerque, NM Albuquerque, NM 87 106 Brooklyn, NY 1 120 1 Phone - 505-766-3503 Phone - 505-842-1 122 Phone - 718-643-8762

145 Edna wells ~andyf NORTH CAROLINA Dorreen T. Yellow Bird t Professor, Hofstra Law School Development Director, Ctr. for CJ Clinic J. B. Allen, Jr. t American Indian Legal Prog. Hampstead, NY 11550-1090 Senior Resident Judge Univ. of North Dakota Phone - 516-463-5934 North Carolina Superior Court School of Law 1242 Kdby St. Box 9003 Joyce Y. Hartsfield Burlington, NC 272 15 Grand Forks, ND 58202-9003 Executive Director, NYC Judicial Phone - 9 10-570-6870 Phone - 701-777-2238 Comm. on Minorities 270 Broadway, Rm. 421 Steven E. Hairston OHIO New York, NY 10007 Senior Research Associate Phone 212-471-2246 - N.C. Futures Commission Ronald B. Adrine t 127 W. Hargett St., Ste. 704 Judge Steve Hawkins Raleigh, NC 27602 Cleveland Municipal Court Assistant Counsel, NAACP Phone - 919-715-4791 1200 Ontario Legal Defense Fund Cleveland, OH 44 113 99 Hudson St., #1600 Lawrence C. McSwain t Phone 216-664-4975 New York, NY ‘10013 - District Court Judge Phone 212-219-1900 - North Carolina Judiciary Carl J. Character O f 4223 Baylor St. Judge, Court of Common Pleas Sterling Johnson, Jr. * Greensboro, NC 27455 1200 Ontario Judge, U.S. District Court Phone - 910-574-4301 Cleveland, OH 441 13 U.S. Courthouse Phone - 216-443-8686 225 Cadman Plaza NORTH DAKOTA East Brooklyn, NY 1 120 1 Deborah L. DeHaan t Beryl R. Jones * Bruce E. Bohlman Director, State Bar Services Professor, Brooklyn Law School District Judge 1700 Lakeshore Dr. 250 Joralemon St. 124 Fourth St. P.O. Box 16562 Brooklyn, NY 11201 South Grand Forks, ND 58206 Columbus, OH 43216-6562 Phone - 718-780-7957 Phone - 70 1-795-3824 Phone - 6 14-487-2050 James A. Higgins Yvonne bwis Carla J. Kolling t * f Executive, 6th Circuit Court of Justice, Kings Co. Supreme Ct. Director, Judicial Education 360 Adams St. 600 East Blvd. Appeals 100 E. 5th St. Brooklyn, NY 11201 Bismarck, ND 58505 Potter Stewart Courthouse Phone 718-643-3191 Phone - 701-328-4216 - Cincinnati, OH 45202 Phone 513-684-3161 Juanita Diaz Norman Beryl J. Levine t - Assistant DirectorEEO, Justice, N. Dak. Supreme Court N.Y. State Unified Court System Judicial Wing, 1st Fl. Nathaniel R. Jones f 270 Broadway, Rm. 1012 Capitol Bldg. Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals New York, NY 10007 Bismarck, ND 58505 432 Potter Stewart Courthouse Phone - 212-417-5847 Phone - 701-224-2221 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Phone - 5 13-684-292 1 Charles L. Willis t Janice M. Morley 7 Kenneth Miller ~ustice,N.Y. state Supreme court Special Counsel, Chppewa Research Director, Hall of Justice Indians Turtle Mtn. Band Ohio Exchange Bldg. P.O. Box 900 Commission on Racial Fairness 1200 W. 5th Ave., #lo1 Rochester, NY 146 14 Belcourt, ND 58316 Phone - 716-428-5271 Phone - 70 1-477-6 194 Columbus, OH 43 12 1 Phone - 614-488-3 130

146 Q

Thomas J. Moyer t f Raymond L. Vaughn, Jr. t PENNSYLVANIA Chief Justice, Ohio Supreme Court State Representative 30 E. Broad St. 506 State Capitol Bldg., Rm. 247 Roy L. Austin Columbus, OH 43266-0419 Oklahoma City, OK 73 105 Director Phone - 614-466-3627 Phone - 405-521-271 1 Administration of Justice Penn State University Solomon Oliver, Jr. * Alma Wilson t 902 Oswald Tower U.S. District Judge Chief Justice, Okla. Supreme Court University Park, PA 16801 201 Superior Ave. State Capitol Bldg., Rm. 245 Phone - 814-865-441 1 Cleveland, OH 44 114 Oklahoma City, OK 73 105 Phone - 216-522-7955 Phone - 405-521-3843 Bunny Baum Cantor t Director, Dept. of Judicial Svcs. Indira Rampersad t f OREGON Penn. Admin. Office of the Courts Attorneyhlirector, Ohio 1515 Market St., Ste. 1428 Phladelphia, PA 19102 Commission on Racial Fairness Paul J. De Muniz Phone 215-560-6325 1200 W. Fifth Ave., Ste. 101 Judge, Oregon Court of Appeals - Columbus, OH 43212 300 Justice Building Phone - 614-488-3130 Salem, OR 973 10 Ronald Castille Phone - 503-986-5072 Justice, Penn. Supreme Court OKLAHOMA 1818 Market St., Ste. 3700 Philadelphia, PA 19 103 CMS G. Lundberg t Phone - 2 15-560-5663 Janice P. Dreiling Coordinator, Oregon RaciaVEthnic Associate District Judge, Bias in Legal System Washington County Courthouse Implementation Committee Andre L. Dennis t 5 &Johnstone St. Supreme Court Building Immediate Past Chancellor, Bartlesville, OK 74003 1163 State St. Pennsylvania Bar Association Phone - 918-337-2880 Salem, OR 97310 Stradley, Ronon, Stevens, Phone - 503-986-5641 Young Jimmy K. Goodman 2600 One Commerce Square Attorney, Crowe & Dunlevy P.C. Philadelphia, PA 19 103-7098 Peggy Nagae 20 N. Broadway, Ste. 1800 f Phone 215-564-8034 Attorney, Diversity Consultant - Oklahoma City, OK 73102 1472 Wilson St. Phone - 405-235-7717 Eugene, OR 97402 Lydia Y. Kirkland t Phone - 503-484-4595 Judge, Penn. Municipal Court Jesse S. Harris 1002 One East Penn Square Judge, District Court Philadelphia, PA 19107 JO~G. Seitz t Tulsa County Courthouse Phone - 215-686-7358 Rm. 509 Judge, Douglas County Court 1036 SE Douglas 500 S. Denver Ave. Theodore A. McKee * Roseburg, OR 97470 Tulsa, OK 74103 Judge, 3rd Circuit of Appeals Phone 503-440-4433 Ct. Phone - 918-596-5320 - 601 Market St. Philadelphia, PA 19106 Robert H. Henry Bruce A. Thomas t Phone - 215-597-9601 Judge, 10th Circuit Ct of Appeals Committee Member, Oregon 200 Nw 4th St. Supreme Court Task Force Betty Ann Soiefer * Oklahoma City, OK 73 102 P.O. Box 39 Project Director, Equal Phone - 405-231-5618 Grand Ronde, OR 97347 Treatment Courts Task Force Phone - 503-879-2353 601 Market St. Philadelphia, PA 19106 Phone - 215-597-2728

147 PUERTO RICO Alton W. Wiley Patrick McKeever t Associate Justice (Retired), Judge, 6th Circuit Court Jeannette Ramos t Rhode Island Superior Court P.O. Box 758 Appellate Judge 90 Glades Blvd. Ft. Pierre, SD 57532-0758 San Juan Judicial Center Naples, FL 33962 Phone - 605-773-3994 P.O. Box 887 Phone - 813-775-4024 San Juan, PR 00919-887 Connie M. Nelsen SOUTH CAROLINA t Phone - 809-767-8954 Court Services Officer 21 1 W. Main Yamil Suarez t William R. Byars, Jr. Vermillion, SD 57069-2097 Judge, Superior Court Judge, 5th Circuit Family Court Phone - 605-677-6485 P.O. Box 1010 Kershaw County Courthouse Aguadilla, PR 00605 Broad St. TENNESSEE Phone - 809-891-4280 Camden, SC 29020 Phone - 803-425-1518 Arthur T. Bennett t Rebehka Yehia Judge, Criminal Ct., Division VI1 Cameron McGowan Currie * Executive Officer, 201 Poplar Ave., Rm. 519 U.S. District Judge Puerto Rico Superior Court Memphis, TN 38103 John L. McMillan Federal Bldg. P.O. Box 1010 Phone 615-576-5858 Florence, SC 29503 - Aguadilla, PR 00605 Phone - 803-664-8376 Phone - 809-891-4283 Adolpho A. Birch, Jr. t Justice, TeM. Supreme Couit Rosalyn W. Frierson t RHODE ISLAND 304 Supreme Court Bldg. Law Clerk, S.C. Supreme Court Nashville, TN 37219 P.O. Box 11330 Phone 6 15-74 1-6750 Joseph A. DeLorenzo, Jr. t Columbia, SC 2921 1 - State Representative Phone - 803-734-1385 112 Zinnia Dr. Alan Calhoun Cranston, RI 02920 Assistant Public Defender Phone - 401-277-2466 MW E. Spencer t 1202 Stahlman Bldg. Deputy Director, Administrative Nashville, TN 37201 Judicial Department Phone - 615-862-5730 Holly Hitchcock 1015 Sumter St. Judicial Education Officer, Columbia, SC 29201 Bernice B. Donald Rhode Island Supreme Court Phone - 803-734-1800 250 Benefit St. Judge, U.S. Bankruptcy Court 200 Jefferson St., Ste. 625 Providence, RI 02903 SOUTH DAKOTA Phone - 40 1-277-4942 Memphis, TN 38103 Phone - 901-544-4176 Angie M. Goetz t Florence K. Murray t Associate Justice, Administrator, 5th Judicial Circuit Renard Hirsch t 101 SE 1st Ave. Rhode Island Supreme Court Attorney, Smith & Hirsch Aberdeen, SD 57401 2 Kay St. 6 19 Woodland St. Phone 605-626-2450 Newport,RI 02840 - Nashville, TN 37206 Phone - 40 1-277-3280 Phone - 615-242-5003 Pete Gregory Magistrate Judge Donald F. Shea Cynthia Morin t 415 N. Dakota Ave. Associate Justice, Consultant Sioux Falls, SD 57102-0136 Rhode Island Supreme Court 707 Summerly Dr. Phone 605-339-6665 250 Benefit St. - Nashville, TN 37209 Providence, RI 02903 Phone - 615-352-0322 Phone - 40 1-277-3285

148 TEXAS UTAH Denise R. Johnson t Justice, Vermont Supreme Coun Richard Barajas t Robert T. Braithwaite 109 State St. Chief Justice, 8th District Judge, Fifth District Court Montpelier, VT 05609-0801 Court of Appeals 40 North 100 East Phone - 802-828-3278 500 E. San Antonio Ave., Cedar City, UT 84720 Rm. 1203 Phone - 801-586-7440 Thomas J. Lehner El Paso, TX 79901 State Court Administrator Phone - 915-546-2064 Brent M. Johnson 109 State St. Associate General Counsel Montpelier, VT 05609-0701 Man Kay Bickett t Utah Admin. Office of the Courts Phone - 802-828-3278 Executive Director, 230 South, 500 East, Ste. 300 Texas Center for the Judiciary Salt Lake City, UT 84102 Mama Murray 1414 Colorado, Ste. 502 Phone - 801-578-3800 Staff Attorney/Judicial Educator Austin, TX 78701 Vermont Supreme Court Phone - 512-463-1530 Kay A. Lindsay t 109 State St. Judge, 4th District Juvenile Court Montpelier, VT 05609-0801 Hannah Chow t 2121 South State St. Phone - 802-828-3278 Judge, County Criminal Court #5 Provo, UT 84604 301 San Jacinto Phone - 801-373-3613 JO~P. Wesley t Houston, TX 77002 Judge, Vermont Family Court Phone - 713-755-6199 Tyrone E. Medley t 1 Putney Road Judge, Third District Court Brattleboro, VT 05301 Nancy Hall Doherty * 240 East 400 South Phone - 802-257-2830 Clerk, U.S. District Court Salt Lake City, UT 841 11 1 100 Commerce Phone - 801-535-5351 VIRGINIA Dallas, TX 75242 Phone - 214-767-951 1 William A. Thorne 7 f James W. Benton, Jr. t Judge, 3rd Judicial District Court Judge, Virginia Court of Appeals Rodney G. Ellis t P.O. Box 510102 109 N. Eighth St. State Senator Salt Lake City, UT 84 15 1 Richmond, VA 23219 1331 Lamar St., Ste. 1550 Phone - 80 1-967-707 1 Phone - 804-786-6176 Houston, TX 77010 Phone - 713-652-4000 W. Brent West 7 Charles R. Cloud O f Judge, Norfolk General Dist. Ct. John H. Hannah, Jr. * Judge, Second Circuit Court 2549 Washington Blvd., 8th F1. 81 1 E. City Hall Ave., #165 U.S. District Judge Norfolk, VA 23510 104 N. Third Ogden, UT 84401 Phone 801-629-8088 Phone - 804-44 1-2272 Lufkin, TX 75901 - Phone - 409-632-2732 VERMONT Jean W. Cunningham t Mchael Lindsey Member, Va. House of Delegates Nestor Consultants Kathryn L. Fahnestock P.O. Box 542 7 149 Midcrest Dr. Co-Director, Rural Justice Center Richmond, VA 23204 Dallas, TX 75240 P.O. Box 675 Phone - 804-28 1-46 15 Phone - 214-416-6656 Montpelier, VT 05601 Phone - 802-223-0166 William D. DOI~111 Attorney Venable, Baetjer & Howard 2010 Coporation hdge, Ste. 400 McLean, VA 22102 Phone - 703-730-1684

149 Mark L. Earley t Myrna Contreras-Trejo O P. Diane Schneider State Senator Contreras-Trejo & Trejo Conciliation Specialist P.O. Box 13715 3 12 N. 5th Ave. U.S.Justice Department Chesapeake, VA 23325 P.O. Box 2743 Community Relations Service Phone - 804-482-8640 Yakima, WA 98907 915 Second St., #1898 Phone - 509-575-8416 Seattle, WA 98174 Peggy L. Habern Phone - 206-220-6700 Personnel Representative Elbridge Coochise Chief Justice Fairfax County Circuit Court Charles Z. Smith f NW Intertribal Court System 41 10 Chain Bridge Rd., 5th F1. Justice, Wash. Supreme Court 121 5th Ave. N, Ste. 305 Fairfax, VA 22030 Temple of Justice Edmonds, WA 98020 Phone - 703-246-2690 P.O. Box 40929 Phone 206-774-5808 - Olympia, WA 98504-0929 Gerald Bruce Lee f Phone 360-357-2053 t Sheila Guy-Snowden - Judge, 19th Judicial Circuit Personnel Manager 4 110 Chain Bridge Rd. King County Superior Court Je&ey C. Sullivan VA 22030 Fairfax, 5 16 3rd Ave. Prosecuting Attorney Phone 703-246-2221 - Seattle, WA 98104 Yakima County Courthouse Phone - 206-296-9355 128 North 2nd St. Patricia Michelsen f Yakima, WA 98901 Interpreter/Consultant Phone 509-575-4141 Elaine Houghton - 3023 Kensington Ave. Judge, Washington State Court Richmond, VA 23221 of Appeals Vicki J. Toyohara f Phone 804-359-3447 - Division 2945 Executive Director, Washington South Market St. Minority/Justice Commission Janice B. Wellington f Tacoma, WA 98402 Eastside Plaza Judge, 3 1st District JDRC P.O. Box 41 170 931 1 Lee Ave. Olympia, WA 98504-1 170 Michael S. Hurtado t Manassas, VA 221 10 Phone 206-705-5327 Judge, Seattle Municipal Court - Phone 703-792-6179 - Public Safety Building, Rm. 1100 WEST VIRGINIA Seattle, WA 98104 WASHINGTON Phone - 206-684-8709 Theresa R. Chisolm t William W. Baker t f Barbara A. Madsen t Assistant Public Defender Judge, Washington State Court Acting Chief Justice 723 Kanawha Blvd., 9th Floor of Appeals Washington State Supreme Court Charleston, WV 25301 One Union Square Temple of Justice Phone - 304-558-2323 600 University St. P.O.Box 40929 Seattle, WA 98101 Olympia, WA 98504-0929 Fred P. McDonald 'f Phone - 206-464-7423 Phone - 206-357-2038 Assistant Director, W. Va. Supreme Court of Appeals Monica J. Benton Sharon A. Sakamoto t Bldg. 1, Rm. E-400 King County Prosecutor's Office 1900 Kanawha Blvd. 3 105 E. Jefferson St. Attorney, Kawakami & Sakamoto 671 S. Jackson St., Ste. 201 East Charleston, WV 25305 Seattle, WA 98122 Phone - 304-558-0145 Phone - 206-296-9543 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone - 206-682-9932 David H. Sanders t Judge, 23rd Judicial District Berkeley County Courthouse 100 W. King St. Martinsburg, WV 25401 Phone - 304-264-1947

150 Phyllis D. Stewart t Maxine A. White t Linda Caviness Probation Officer, Circuit Court Judge, Executive Director 17th Judicial Circuit Milwaukee County Circuit Court International Programs 243 High St. 821 W. State St., Rm. 618SB National Center for State Courts Morgantown, WV 26505 Milwaukee, WI 53233 300 Newport Ave. Phone - 304-291-7217 Phone - 4 14-278-4482 Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 Phone - 804-253-2000 WISCONSIN WYOMING Carol Davanay Program Specialist Mary Kay Baum t Deborah A. Cornia t National Center for State Courts Gender Equality Staff Appellate Counsel, 300 Newport Ave. Wisconsin Supreme Court State Public Defender Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 3 15 Tenney Bldg. 2020 Carey Ave. Phone - 804-253-2000 110 East Main St. Cheyenne, WY 82002 Madison, WI 53703 Phone - 307-777-7138 Victor E. Flango Phone - 608-266-1557 Vice President, Research Elizabeth Kail t National Center for State Courts Vivi L. Dilweg Judge, District Court 300 Newport Ave. Judge, Brown County Circuit Ct. 450 N. 2nd St. Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 P.O. Box 23600 Lander, WY 82520 Phone - 804-253-2000 Green Bay, Wl 54305 Phone - 307-332-4592 Phone - 4 14-448-413 1 Margaret Fonner Cynthia A. Silva t Adrmnistrative Secretary, Research Janine P. Geske t SMAttorney, &gal Services for National Center for State Courts Justice, Wisconsin Supreme Court SE Wyoming Inc. 300 Newport Ave. P.O. Box 1688 4409 Rio Verde St. Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 Madison, WI 53701-1688 Cheyenne, WY 82001 Phone - 804-259-1883 Phone - 608-266-1882 Phone - 307-634-1566 Clifton Grandy Project Director Patricia McMahon t JO~R. st. Clair t National Center for State Courts Circuit Court Judge, Chief Judge, Shoshone & 300 Newport Ave. 1st Judicial District Arapahoe Tribal Court Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 901 North 9th St., Rm. 578SB P.O. Box 608 Phone - 804-253-2000 Milwaukee, WI 53233 Ft. Washakie, WY 82514 Phone - 414-278-4525 Phone - 307-332-7094 William E. Hewitt f James B. Mohr NATIONAL CENTER FOR Senior Staff Associate, Research Circuit Court Judge, Vilas County STATE COURTS National Center for State Courts 330 North Main St. 300 Newport Ave. Eagle River, WI 5452 1-0369 David Beaty Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 Phone - 715-479-3638 Conference Consultant Phone - 804-253-2000 C & W Associates Inc. V. K. Wetzel t 825 Diligence Drive, Ste. 116 Thomas Munsterman f Director, Judicial Education, Newport News, VA 23606 Director, Center for Jury Studies Supreme Court Phone - 804-873-4735 National Center for State Courts 110 E. Main St., Ste. 200 1700 N. Moore St., Ste. 1710 Madison, WI 53703 Arlington, VA 22209 Phone - 608-266-7807 Phone - 703-841-0200

151 Deanna Parker Janice T. Munsterman INTERNATIONAL Staff Associate Program Manager National Center for State Courts State Justice Institute David P. Cole 300 Newport Ave. 1650 King St. Judge, Ontario Court of Justice Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 Alexandna, VA 223 14 445 Glengrove Ave. West Phone - 804-253-2000 Phone - 703-684-6100 Toronto, Ontario M5NlX4 Phone - 416-327-6800 John G. Richardson Cheryl Reynolds Research Analyst Program Manager D. Terry Vyse National Center for State Courts State Judicial Institute Judge, Ontario Court of Justice 300 Newport Ave. 1650 King St., Ste. 600 Provincial Court Criminal Div. Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 Alexandna, VA 223 14 125 Main St. Phone - 804-253-2000 Phone - 703-684-6100 Hamilton, Ontario NP6 6P1 Phone - 519-741-3366 Larry L. Sipes David I. Tevelin f President Executive Director Sharon Burke Waddell National Center for State Courts State Justice Institute Deputy Dir., Judicial Admin. 300 Newport Ave. 1650 S. Kmg St., Ste. 600 Provincial Court BC Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 Alexandria, VA 22314 501 700 W. Georgia St. Phone - 804-253-2000 Phone - 703-684-6100 Vancouver, BC V7Y 1E8 Phone - 604-660-2864 James D. Thomas Sandra Thurston Vice President, Ct. Services Div., Program Manager National Center for State Courts State Justice Institute 1331 Seventeenth St., Ste. 402 1650 King St., Ste. 600 LEGEND Denver, CO 80202-1554 Alexandria, VA 223 14 Phone - 303-293-3063 Phone - 703-684-6100 Guest Speakers 9 Faculty / Arl B. Williams Richard Van Duizend Planning Committee 0 Director, Human Resources Deputy Director State Team Members t National Center for State Courts State Justice Institute Federal Team Members * 300 Newport Ave. 1650 King St., Ste. 600 Williamsburg, VA 23 187-8798 Alexandria, VA 223 14 Phone - 804-253-2000 Phone - 703-684-6100

STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE Pamela E. Bulloch Program Manager Marilyn M. Nejelski State Justice Institute Program Manager 1650 King St., Ste. Bureau of Justice Assistance Alexandria, VA 223 14 Department of Justice Phone - 703-684-6100 633 Indiana Ave. NW, #528E Washington, DC 2053 1 John F. Da&on, Jr. Phone - 202-307-2924 President, Board of Directors State Justice Institute Byron F. Wong P.O.Box 57 Deputy Director Chesterfield, VA 23832 Bureau of Justice Assistance Phone - 804-748-1333 633 Indiana Ave. NW Washington, DC 2053 1 Phone - 202-5 14-6278

152 National Center Publication Number R- 180 ISBN 0-89656- 160-7