If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov.
.':.""',1 .t:~1_ 1975 REPORT
This microfiche was produced from documents received for Inclusion in the NG1RS data base. Since NCJRS cannot exercise control over the physical condition of the documents submitted. the individu::-I frame quality will vary. The resolution chart On this frame may be use~ to evaluate the document quality.
1~="=Z::::::::::::::==';:rc:~= .. ,.. '. .' 1.0 t ti/ -. <::! ~~~ .1
1.1 IIIII~~~ -- -- IIII!~~~
111111.25 1\1\1 1.4 111111.6
f . "" _J'-••~ .. ,.~- -_. -.ui_~ >. t:l -~";i . - -:;
:l~_~:;:;;;:=:z ... , ~..... -.~.. :::::::=. ~===' ... , ,,~
Microfilming procedures used to create this fiche comply with the standards set forth in 41CFR 101·11.504 -. • '~~.~ Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the author!s) and do not represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ...... , "'-. LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION - .- NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFERENCE SERVICE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20531 • ... - .. 2/10/77 •
) a , !, rilmed
------".~~--,- --- 1975 REPORT
i. fj i t: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE of PENNSYLVANIA COURTS
Room 1414 - Three Penn Center Plaza Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102
NCJRS
OCT 1~ ALEXANDER F. BARBIERI Court Administrator
COVER: Old City Hall, built in 1789-1791, as the first permanent CARLILE E. KING GERALD VV. SPIVACK ROBERT F. KENT home for the city government of Philadelphia was the meeting Deputy Court Administrator Deputy Court Administrator place of the United States Supreme Court from 1791-1800 during Deputy Court Administrator the period that Philadelphia was the seat of the federal for Court Operations for the Minor Judiciary for Fiscal Affairs government. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, a Philadelphia based institution, was established on May 22, 1722, and is the oldest Appellate Court in the United States, antedating the United States Supreme Court by sixty-seven years. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is headquartered with its main courtroom in Philadelphia's City Hall. . ~ "
'j. ,1
." / , SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA '{,
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF PENNSYLVANIA COURTS 1414 THREE PENN CENTER PLAZA PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19102 (215) 567-3071 - 666-3576
ALEXANDER F. BARBIERI DEPUTY COURT ADMINISTRATORS JUDGE CARLILE E. KING, ESQUIRE COURT ADMINISTRATOR OF PENNSYLVANIA GERALD W. SPIVACK, ESQUIRE ROBERT F. KENT, ESQUIRE
TO: The Honorable Chief Justice and JUstices of the Supreme"Court FROM: Judge Alexander F. Barbieri The year 1975, my first year as your Court Administrator, was a year of plann.ing and expansion of activities and programs in all areas in which 'the Administrative Office must function. Important new interests were developed during the year and new responsibili ties were assumed and implemented. While details of all programs and activities are to be found in the report which follows, including the information and data previously distributed in three separate pub lications, I would like to briefly note here some of the new projects and programs initiated in 1975. Recognizing that communications and information are vital keys to effective administration of statewide judiciary systems, a Direc tor of Court Information Systems was appointed to head up a new Infor mation Services Department. The Department is engaged in conducting pilot programs in several counties, and provides advice and assistance to county systems to improve and modernize record keeping, filing and reportin.g, with special assistance in judicial ~istricts having or planning automated management systems. When the Attorney General ruled early in the year in a formal opinion that his Office would discontinue legal services to Penn sylvania's Judiciary, a Legal Services Department was established, basically to provide litigation services and represen~ation to judges and others in the judiciary systems. This new department, in addition, provides legal opinions and advice intermlll:y for the use and guid.ance of all Administrative Office departments. With continuing education for all branches of the Judiciary as the antiCipated goal, the Pennsylvania College of the Judiciary was founded. As in previous years, judicial education continued to be a jOint product of this Office and the Pennsylvania Conference of Trial #1 ! ; ,I I
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF PENNSYLVANIA COURTS Judges, with new vitality provided to benefit all educational pro grams when the Court made orientation and indoctrination seminar~ 1975 REPORT mandatory for a large class of new judges. Legislature relations were made a separate and special area CONTENTS of concern and interest in 1975. Aside from daily attention paid by the Administrative Office to the flow of proposed legislation af fecting the Judiciary, the Office was honored and pleased to serve as secretariat and st'aff for the innovative, nine-member liaison committee, established jOintly by your Court and the Legislature. Part Page Constaple affairs and activities also received attention. Letter from the Court Administrator of Pennsylvania ...... III Educational programs were planned and are being implemented. A Task Force, sponsored by this Office, is now studying proposals I ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION OF THE UNIFIED JUDICIAL to improve and further professionalize these important aides to SYSTEM OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA the Judiciary. The Supreme Court...... 3 In concluding, I wish to acknowledge and extend thanks for The Superior Court...... 4 the help I received during the first year of my service: to the The Comn10nwealth Court ...... ·...... 4 Chief Justice for his patient and daily advice and other assistance, Courts of COlnmon Pleas...... 5 and to the entire Court for total support and encouragement; to my Special Courts ...... 6 dedicated staff and supporting personnel, whose quality, high morale Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts...... 8 and devotion to duty are exceptional in my experience; and to the Supportive Personnel...... 9 hundreds of judiciary officers and clerks at all levels for their Cour.t Rule iVlaking...... 9 cooperation.in the work of this Office, and for providing the infor The Judicial Inquiry and Revie,v Board ...... 9 mation that has made possible the presentation of statistical and The Judicial Council...... 9 other data in this report. II REPORT FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF PENNSYLVANIA COURTS Information Systems ...... 15 Evaluation of Trial Court Administratiol1 ...... : ...... 16 Barbieri I Judicial Education ...... ,...... 16 . AFB:'ek Court of Pennsylvania District Justice of the Peace Courts ...... 17 Constables ...... , ...... , ...... ,. 18 Fiscal Affairs ...... '" ...... 19 Legal Services ...... '1 ...... 21 Conference of S tate Trial Judges ...... 21 Trial Court Administrators ...... ,... . 22 Court Reimbursement Program ...... ,...... 23 Bail Programs ...... ,...... , ...... " .. 24 Federal Grants ...... ,...... ,...... ,...... 24
III REPORTS OF SUPREME COURT COMMITTEES AND RELATED COURT AGENCIES Civil Procedural Rules COlnmittee ...... 29 Criminal Procedural Rules Con1mittee ...... 31 Minor Court Civil Procedural Rules Committee ...... 32 Advisory Committee on Appellate Court Rules ...... 33 Judicial Inquiry and Review Board ...... ,...... ,...... 33 Lawyers' Disciplinary Board ...... , ...... 34 State of Law Examiners ...... 36 Committee for Proposed Standard Jury Instructions ...... 36 Juvenile Court Judges' Commission ...... 37 Members of Supreme Court Committees and Related Court Agencies ...... 39 PART •
. i • ! '1 . Organization and Jurisdiction of the' Unified Judicial System of the Part Page IV APPELL ATE COURT ST ~ TISTICS Commonwealth Justices of the Supren1e Court...... 47 Supreme Court Statistics ...... " ...... "...... 48 of Pennsylvania Judges of the Supreme Court...... 49 Superior Court Statistics ...... 50 Judges of the COlnmon\vealth Court ...... ,...... 51 Common\vealth Court Statistics ...... """""'''''''''''''' 52 V COURTS OF COMMON PLEAS JUDICIAL CASE VOLUME Judicial Case Volume, 1971-1975 ...... ,...... 55 Total Judicial Case Volume, 1975 ...... 56 Criminal Case Vo}ume...... 59 Status of Undisposed Defendants ...... "'"'''''''''' ...... 60 Disposition of Criminal Cases ...... "'"'''''''' ...... " ...... " ... " .. ".". 61 Abolition of Indicting Grand Jury ...... "...... 62 Juvenile Court Cases ...... "'''''''' ...... 63 Civil Court Cases ...... 63 Arbitration Cases...... 64 Divorce Cases ...... ,.... 64 Methodology for Reporting Common Pleas Court Statistics ...... "...... 65 Case Volume by Judicial District, 1975...... 68-77 Judges of the Courts of Common Pleas...... 79-85 Retired Judges-Active ...... 86-87
Map of Judicial Districts ...... ,...... 88-89 f 1 .! VI CASE VOLUME FOR DISTRICT JUSTICES OF THE PEACE -'t i Total Cases Filed, 1975...... 93 Disposition of Cases, 1975 ...... ~...... 94 Comparative Filings Dispositions...... 94 Methodology for Reporting Statistics for District Justice Courts...... 96 Traffic Citations by County ...... 98 Non-Traffic Citations by County ...... 99 Sumlnary Complaints by County ...... 100 Civil COlnplaints by County...... 101 Misdemeanor and Felony Complaints by County...... 102 Case Volume by Magisterial District, 1975 ...... 104-147 Roster of Justices of the Peace and Judges of the Philadelphia Traffic Court...... 149-160 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA UNIFIED JUDICIAL SYSTEM (As O~!J'y 19, 1974) 'j
SUPfE COURT i
I I ~' I (CO~bD Art. V, §2) I I I Judicial Council Procedural Rules Court Administrator State Board of The Disciplinary Board of Pennsylvania JUdicial Inquiry of the Supreme Committees of Pennsylvania Law Examiners (Pa. R.J.A. No. 301) and Review Board Court of Pennsylvania (Const. Art. Y, §10) (Sup. Cl. Rule 7) (Const. Art. Y, *18) (Sup. Ct. Rule 17-5)
I --- SiiPffilEC'oiiiiiEXTAAOm;"IHAR;- --- i APPEllATE JURISDICTION .------.. r '------1-' SUPREME COURT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I ,' (King's Bench Power) I I Type ACJA § I I ____ Note I, Herer.nces to ACJA nrc to Act 1970.223. Note 3. ACJA ,403( 1 )Iii,l. Us llIoditl.d br Act 1915-338. ~427. Note 5. 15 Pn. S, ,1041 bl. Note 7, ACJA !202(4),as modified by 15 Pi!. S. H041b1121. Notc 2, Pn. n.J.A. No. 210L NOle 4: Aot 1970·195. *1501 et seq, Note 6. None in existence, Note 8. Also Pittsburgh Police Magistrates. Source: Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts [Pa. B. Doc. No. 74- ,I PART I ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION OF THE UNIFIED JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA On i\Iay 23, 1968 Pennsylvania voters The sixty-seven counties of the state, in fiftv approved the structure for a modern, revital nine judicial districts, are divided into three ized consitution. While many parts of the 1874 Supreme Court Districts. The Western District Constitution \vere retained, four sections is comprised of 22 counties with its prothono received major revisions. These sections were: tary's (clerk's) office located in the City of Legislative apportionment, taxation and state Pittsburgh; the j\,IIidclle District consists of eight finance, local government, and the judiciary. counties with its prothonotary's office located in Among the proposals adopted for judicial the City of Harrisburg; and the Eastern District reform were a unified court system uneler the consists of all the other counties Of the Com administration of the State Supreme Court, a monwealth with its prothonotary's office major program to upgrade and decrease mem located in the City of Philadelphia. bership in the minor judiciary, merit retention of judges after election to their first terms, Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction of courts has mandatory retirenfent at age 70 of all state remained constitutionally a legislative matter, judges and justices of the peace, a Constitu although the 1968 constitutional amendments tional guarantee of the right of appeal in all conferred broad rule-making power upon the cases, and a judicial board of inquiry and Supreme Court. The legislature acted to imple revie\v. ment the new constitutional provisions with the Article V, Section 1 of the 1968 Constitutional comprehensive "Appellate Court Jurisdiction Amendment provides that "The judicial power Act of 1970", one interesting feature of which is of the Commonwealth shall be vesteel in a a form of veto power in the legislature, exercis unified judicial system consisting of the able on the Supreme Court's power to assign or Supreme Court, the Superior Court, the Com reassign" classes of actions or classes of appeals mOl1\vealth Court, courts of common pleas, among the several courts ... as needs of justice community courts, municipal and traffic courts shall require." in the City of Philadelphia, such other courts as may be provided by law and justices of the 1. Original Jurisdiction The Supreme peace. All courts anel justices of the peace and Court has original, but not exclusive, juris their jurisdiction shall be in this unified judicial diction of cases of habeas corpus, manda system." mus or prohibition to courts of inferior jurisdiction, and quo warranto as to any THE SUPREME COURT officer of statewide jurisdiction. Organization: The Supreme Court, the Commomvealth's highest court and Court of 2. Direct Appeals from Courts of Common last resort, has a membership of seven, six Pleas The Supreme Court has exclusive associate justices and a Chief Justice, who is the jurisdiction of appeals from final orders of justice longest in continuous service. A justice is the courts of common pleas in cases elected to a first term of office (ten years) in a involving felonious homicide, the right to partisan election, with retention election to public office, probate or "orphans' court" subsequent terms until the mandatory retire matters, direct criminal contempt anel ment age of 70. Hetention election is accomp other contempt relating to matters\vhich lished in a nonpartisan election in which the are appealable directly to the Supreme voter simply answers by a "yes or no" vote the . Court; suspension or disbarment from the question whether the justice should be retained. practice of law and disciplinary orders or Justices may be appointed by the Governor to sanctions relating thereto; supersession of fill vacancies, but are required to run for reelec a county district attorney by an Attorney tion in the first judiCial election ten or more General or by a court; matters involving a months after such appointment. direct question as to the right or power of 3 the Commonwealth or any political subdi ments, with filings and arguments similarly in in classes of appeals \vhich are within the judges in each as "provided by law". Each vision to create or issue indebtedness; Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Harrisburg. exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme judicial district has a president judge. This role "matters where the court of common pleas Court. This includes criminal actions or is ex officio in themany one-judge districts, is by has held invalid as repugnant to the Consti Jurisdiction proceedings for the violation of any fule, seniority in districts having seven or fewer tution, treaties or laws of the United States, 1. Original Jurisdiction The Superior regulation or order of any administrative judges, and is elective by the courts which have or to the Constitution of this Common Court has no original jurisdiction, except agency of the Commonwealth; appeals more than seven judges. wealth, any treaty or la"v of the United habeas corpus, and mandamus and prohi involving administrative agencies, when The 1968 amendment abolished the ancient States or any provision of the Constitution bition to lower courts in matters within its determinable initially in the common "courts of oyer and terminer and general jail of, or of any act of Assembly of, this regular appellate jurisdiction. pleas; actions or proceedings arising under delivery", "quarter sessions of the peace", and Commonwealth, or any provision of any 2. Ap.peals from Courts of Common any county, institution district, city, the separate orphans' courts. All types and home rule charter." Pleas The Superior Court has exclusive borough, incorporated town, township, divisions of the courts of common pleas, how ever, continue to exercise the jurisdiction and 3. Appeals from the Commonwealth appellate jurisdiction in all appeals from public school, planning or zoning code, or final orders of courts of common pleas, where a municipality or other political functions of the prior courts. All districts now Court The Supreme Coun has exclusive have a Trial Division within the Court of Com jurisdiction of appeals from all final orders regardless of the nature of the controversy subdivision or authority is involved; or where a question is raised as to the applica mon Pleas. Philadelphia County and Allegheny of the Commomvealth Court entered in or the amount involved, except the speci tion, interpretation or enforcement of (i) County and most of the larger counties have any matter which was originally COltl fieel classes of appeals which are exclu certain regulatory statlites, or (i1) any other appropriate divisions, such as Family, llwl1ced in that court, and which docs not sively within tl1c jurisdiction of the home rule charter or local ordinance or Domestic Helations, Criminal, Juvenile Court, constitute an appeal from another court, Supreme and Commonwealth Courts. resolution. Specifical1y, the Common and Orphans' Court. an administrative agency or a justice of the wealth Court is given exclusive jurisdiction The Common Pleas Courts in "Pennsylvania peace, except that any final order of the THE COMMONWEALTH COURT to hear certain appeals to it directly from are the courts of general trial jurisdiction. State Commonwealth Court entered in any Organization: The Commonwealth Court state and local administrative agencies, wide, t11ey exist in fifty-nine judicial districts, appeal from a decision of the Board of is composed of seven judges, the judge with the without the prior intervention of any com which include the State's sixty-seven counties. Finance and Revenue is appealable to the longest period of continuous service being its l110n pleas or other 10\\ler court. These Eight of the districts contain two counties, with Supreme Court, as of right. President Judge. This was a newly created court appellate areas include such matters as each of the counties constituting a branch of the in 1970, with initial statutory terms of two, four, public utility commission cases, work district. These districts are: the seventeenth, 4. Discretionary Allow,mce of six and eight years. New terms that follow are men's and unemployment compensation which includes Snyder and Union Counties; the Appeals Final orders oft','w Superior for ten years, with subsequent retention terms as cases, licensing cases, including motor twenty-sixth, which includes Columbia and Court and final orders of the Common with other courts until age 70. vehicle and liquor licensing appeals, and Montour Counties; the thirty-seventh, which wealth Court, not appealable as of right, Hegular sessions of the court are generally appeals on certain tax questions. includes Warren and Forest Counties; the thirty may be reviewed hy the Supreme Court h(,ld at the seat of government in the City of ninth, in Franklin and Fulton Counties; the upon allowance of appeal by any two Harrisburg, but meetings are also scheduled in forty-first, which are Perry and Juniata Coun justices of the Supreme Court. Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. COURTS OF COMMON PLEAS ties; the forty-third, which includes Monroe and Jurisdiction: Basically, this innovative Pike Counties; the forty-fourth, which includes 5. Extraordinary Jurisdiction The The Constitutional Amendments of 1968 also court, sometimes called "the government made chang{'s in the character and structure of Sullivan and Wyoming Counties; and the fifty Supn.'Jlle Court is also provided \vith cer court", has jurisdiction in civil proceedings in ninth, which includes Cameron and Elk Coun tain extraordinary jurisdiction, in that it Pennsylvania's courts of common pleas. In each \vhich the state, or an official of that govern- ties . may, on its O\'\'n motion or upon lwtition of -judicial district there must be at least one court . ment, or of any of its subdivisions, or of any of common pleas. In the larger, multi-judge All other judicial districts consist of a single a party, aSSU!1l(' plc.'l1ary jurisdiction and government agency, is involved. districts, there are divisions, with the number of county. Each judicial district has a President decide finally any matter pending before 1. Original Jurisdiction The COIllIllon any court or justice of the peace, if it ,""ealth Court has original jurisdiction in Number of involves an issue of immediate public civil actions or proceedings involving the Authorized Number of Judicil\1 Districts importance. Commonwealth or any of its officers when Judgeships 1975 acting in an official capacity, except such 81 1 THE SUPERIOR COURT h.abeas corpus or post-conviction applica 39 1 Organization: The Superior Court, like all tions as are not within the appellate juris 12 2 Pennsylvania appellate courts, is compos('d of (~iction of the court. This original jurisdic seven judges, the longest in continuous service tIon of the Commonwealth Court is 9 1 'lwing the President Judge. These judgcs are exclusive, except that when the relief is 7 1 elected for terms of ten years, with retention sought by the Commonwealth or by an 6 3 reelection permitted thereafter until tlw age of officer a~ting in his official capacity, the 70, as with Justices of the Supreme Court. courts of· common pleas have concurrent 5 8 Judges appointed to fill vacancies must also jurisdiction. . 4 4 face election at the first election ten months or 2. Appeal.. s frpm Courts of Common 2 13 more after appointment. Pleas The COIllmonwealth Court has 1 25 The counties of the commol1\vealth are exclusive jurisdiction of appeals in the divided by the Superior Court into three dis ~jvil, government areas previousl)' noted, tricts approximating the Supreme Court align- frOlll tht' COllrts of common pleas, except T()TAL 285 TOTAL 59 4 5 I ,;.I Juclge ancl sllch additional judgeships as author Court Division, unlike all other court new judgc's must be lawyers, with remaining JUSTICE OF THE PEACE (DISTRICT jzecl by the legislature. The Table below shows districts, has exclusive jurisdiction in non-law judges being phased out under "grand JUSTICE) COURTS the number of judicial districts with the specific father" provisions. The President Judge of the adoptions and delayed birth certifi Organization: The 1968 HeBdal Article to l1tllllht'l' of statutorily authorized judgeships in Common Pleas Court appoints the president J cates. the Constitution estahlislwd that justices of the each. The nurnber of common pleas judgeships Each division of the court of common pleas is judge of the ~lul1icipal Court, but the ~J unicipal per judicial district ranges from eighty-one in . Court is otherwise administratively managed as p('ace be members of the bar of the SUpl'(\Ule presided over by one of its members who serves Court or complete a course of training and the Philadelphia J uclicial District to one each in as an administrative judge, being elected for a a separate judicial entity within the unified hventy-five of the rural judicial districts. Com court syst('Il1. instruction in the duties of their office anel pass term of five years by a majority vote of the an appropriate examination. There are 562 mon pleas judges are selected, elected, and judges of his division. lIe assists the president retained or rejected by retention election, as are justices of the peace now authorized. The term judge in supervising the judicial business of the of a district justice is for six years, and1ike all Supreme Court jnstices, and all judges in other court. Jurisdiction: ~(unicipal Court judges have courts of record. other judgeships in Pennsylvania except the 2. Allegheny County Court of Common jurisdiction to sit as cOTlnnitting magistrates in Pittsburgh ~lagistrates (discussed below), is 1. The Common Pleas Court of Philadel Pleas In Allegheny County, in which is all criminal matters. The court, in its criminal elective, there being one justice judgeship for phia UncleI' a "Schedule" to the Judicial located the City of Pittsburgh, Pennsylva~ jurisdiction, may adjudicate summary offenses, each "magisterial district." Article of the Constitution, as amended in nia's second largest city, the court of com except those under the motor vehicle laws; all Jurisdiction: District justices in all coun 1968, the Philadelphia common pleas mon pleas has four divisions: the Civil criminal offenses for \vhich no prison term may ties, (except Philadelphia where, as notc>d courts were placed in divisions approxi Division, the Criminal Division, the Fam be imposed or which are punishable by a term above, there are none), have juriscliction over mating prior separate court systems. These ily Division and the Orphans' Court Divi of imprisonment of not more than five years, criminal cases involving nffenses carrying a are three: the trial division, orphans' court sion. These divisions now handle all of the and certain more serious offenses under the maximum potential sentence of" up to 90 clays division, and family court division. Courts jurisdictional areas which were handled motor vehide laws. In these criminal cases, the imprisonment. Civil matters involving up to of cornmon pleas have unlimited original prior to 1968 by the Allegheny Coun ty dcfendan t has no righ t of trial by jury in this $1,000 may also be tried and adjudicated in such jurisdiction in all cases, except those exclu common pleas courts and by the former court, but has an absolute right of appeal to the courts. In addition, district justices, like the sively within Commomvealth Court juris County Court. With few differences, the common pk'as for de no\'o treatment, including Philadelphia Municipal Court, may hold pre diction, and those Philadelphia cases divisions in the Allegheny County com pretrial motions and the right to trial by jury liminary hearings in most criminal cases (misde assigned to the Philadelp hia Municipal mon pleas court are similar to Philadel there. meanors and felonies), to determine whether or Court and Traffic Court. The Philadelphia phia's in jurisdictional scope. One major On the civil siele, the Philadelphia Ivlunicipal not a prima facie case exists on the charges Court of Common Pleas Trial Division, difference, of course, is that one division in Court has jurisdiction in landlord and tenant presented . however, hears and determines appeals, Philadelphia, the Trial Division, handles . matters, and in assumpsit and trespass claims allowed as of right from the ]\;1 unicipal all of the matters included in Allegheny's involving no more than one thousand dollars. In Court and Traffic Court. separate Civil and Criminal Divisions. these cases, the parties have no right of trial by MAGISTRATES OF THE CiTY In other jurisdictional provisions in the 1968 3. Common Pleas Courts Other Than in jury in this court, but, here again, have the right OF PITTSBURGH package, there are the following; Philadelphia and Allegheny County Dis of appeal to the common pleas for a trial de (1) The Orphans Court Division continues novo, including trial by jury if desired. The pur The Pittsburgh police magistrate courts are a tricts As has been seen, Philadelphia 8.nd unique component of the unified judicial sys to handle all probate, trusts and other Allegheny Counties have received special pose here, of course, is to provide an expedi matters traditionally included in the tious small claims procedure whereby employ tem and exist as the only city courts in Pennsyl constitutional and legislative treatment. vania. The judges, six in number, are appointed prior orphans' court jul'isdiction. These counties are in the t\VO major popu ment of cO\ll1sel might be avoided. (2) The family COurt division has broad tvlunicipal Court judges may also serve as by the mayor of Pittsburgh to serve during his lation centers, three hundred miles apart at term. Thus, these judges are the only ones in jurisdiction in domestic relations mat opposite ends of the State, and the special commissioners to preside at arraignments, fix ters, including desertion or nonsupport and accept bail, issue bail, issue \'\'arrants and Pennsylvania who are not elected to office. treatment is traditional as well as in some Although t11e "Sc11edule" to the 1968 Judicial of spouses, children and indigent par respects justifJed. In any event, hov,rever, perform duties of a similar nature. ents; matters involving children born In practice, the remaining non-law judges are Article of the Constitution "grandfathered" in courts of all otl1er districts have the same the then members of the court, the court's out of wedlock; proceedings for cus areas of jurisdiction and responsibility, seldom assigned to sitin the trial of cases, but do tody of children; proceedings for handle other routine matters, such as prelimi continued existence is presently being chal whether or not they have divisional align lenged as to constitutionality in the courts. divorce and annulment and the prop ments. nary arraignments and preliminary hearings in erty matters relating thereto. all cases oth.eJ: than homicide and rape. J~1l'isdiction of this court roughly approxi (3) In Philadelphia, the Family Court Di SPECIAL COURTS mates that of district justices except thatits functions are limited geographically within the vision includes the Juvenile Court, in TRAFFIC COURT OF PHILADELPHIA which are handled matters involving MUNICIPAL COURT OF PHILADELPHIA boundaries of the City of Pittsburgh. The Court is apparently preferred by City law enforce delinquent and deprived children;. Organization: The Philadelphia .Municipal Organization: Pursuant to tl1e "Schedule" problems involving children under Court is the only one of its kind in Pennsylvania, to the 1968 Juclicial Article of the Constitution, ment systems over those district justices who eighteen years of age; those suffering and is a unique prociuct of the 1968 constitu tIle Goyel'nor appointed si.\': former magistrates have concurrent jurisdiction within the City of from epilepsy, nervous or mental tion's Juclicial Article. This court now has all of to serve as judges of the new traffic court, and Pittsburgh, and it is estimated· that the Court's defects; incorrigible, runaway and dis the regular justice of the peace jurisdiction for appointed its president judge for a term of five volume of crimi"pal matters amounts to more orderly minors eighteen to twenty Philadelphia County, except the area assigned years. than half of the total of criminal initial jurisdic years of age; and all preliminary hear to the Traffic Court. The Philadelphia Munici Jurisdiction: Traffic court has exclusive tion cases for the entire County. These judges ings in criminal cases where the victim pal Court has 22 judges elected for terms of six jurisdiction of all summary offenses under the also serve in the City's traffic and housing is a juvenile. The Philadelphia Family years, sixteen of whom no\v are lawyers. All motor vehicle laws. courts. 6 7 n ! THE COMMUNITY COURTS ment in 1974. Judge Alexander F. Barbieri tary has over-all supervision of the three district Provision for a Community Court was presently serves as statewide Administrator appointed to advise and formulate rules in all offices of ,the State, located in Philadelphia, areas as required by the judicial systems and as included in the 1968 Judicial Article. Whether or under an assignment to this duty by the Supreme Court in December of 1974. Pittsburgh and Harrisburg, each manag<.'d by a recl1.1ested by the Supreme Court. Among the not a county should have such a court \vas made deputy prothonotary. The Superior Court has The Supreme Court promulgated on March sUlnding committees presently functioning are optional, the option to be exercisable by the also retained the Prothonotary office for its general electorate of the county. The purpose 15, 1972, the Pennsylvania Rules of Judicial the Civil Procedural BuIes Committee, Crimi litigation managemcllt, and the Common nal Procedural Hules Committee, Orphans' was to provide for a court which would serve in Administration, which provide that the Court wealth Court likewise has a prothonotary. Each Court BuIes Committee, Minor Court BuIes areas now covered by justices of the peace and Administrator shall serve at the pleasure of the appellate court has other clerical staff. Committee, and Committee on Proposed magistrates. In Philadelphia, such courts would Supreme Court and shall be responsible for the At the common pleas level, prothonotaries Standard Jury Instructions. There is also a have the jurisdiction which is now exercised by prompt and proper disposition of the business manage the civil litigation proceSi>es and Juvenile Court Judges' Commission whose the municipal court and traffic court. In Pitts of all courts and justices of the peace. "Clerks of Courts" manage criminal proceed lllelTJbers are appointed by the Governor upon burgh, such court \vould have the jurisdiction of The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania ings, and Clerks of Orphans' Courts manag(' recommendation of the Chief Justice, which justices of the peace and police magistrates. No Courts (AOPC) now has, under Judge Barbieri's Orphans' Court matters. Each category of court supervision, three Deputy Court Administra proposes rules on juvenile matters to the county has yet voted to have a community support officials is elected in Pennsylvania., Supreme Court. court. tors, two Assistant Court Administrators, some except that in Philadelphia the Prothonotary is 11e\V heads of departments in such areas as appointed by vote of tIll' Common Pleas Court's THE JUDICIAL INQUIRY AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF Electro-data Processing, Law, Retirement and Board of Judges. REVIEW BOARD PENNSYLVANIA COURTS Benefits. Staffing in other departments and areas \vas under consideration at the end of The Pennsylvania Judicial Inquiry and The Judicial Article of the 1968 Constitution 1975. COURT RULE MAKING Heview Board was also first estab1ished in the gave Pennsylvania a unified court system under Within the over-all unified judicial system of As previously noted, the 1968 version of the 1968 Judicial Article of the Pennsylvania Consti the administration of the State Supreme Court, Pennsylvania, the State Court Administrator Pennsylvania constitution, grants to the tution. The Board as spelled out in the Constitu the highest court in the Commonwealth. The serves as the administrative arm of the Supreme Supreme Court broad rule making powers. Sec tion has a membership of nine persons, consist Judicial Article, Section 10(a), provides; "The Court, with responsibility for the management tion 1O( c) of the Judicial Article provides: "I he ing of five judges selected by the Supreme Supreme Court shall exercise general supervi of all of Pennsylvania's court systems. As the Supreme Court shall have the power to pre Court, three of whom are common pleas judges sory and administrative authority over all the State's Court Administrator, he is responsible scribe general rules governing practice, proce from different judicial districts, ancI two judges courts and justices of the peace, including for collecting and interpreting statistical data dure and the conduct of all courts, justices of the of the Superior Court: The four non-judges are authority to temporarily assign judges and justi from courts in all systems; for preparing certain peace and all officers serving process or enforc selected by the Governor, two lawyers \\'ho are ces of the peace from one court or district to court budgets; for assigning judges; while also ing orders, judglllcnts or decrees of any court or not judges and "two non-lawyer electors". another as it deems appropriate." acting as liaison bet\veen the courts, the legisla justicc of the peace, including the power t(~ The Board keeps informed as to matters In addition, the Supreme Court was granted ture, and the public. Under recent separation of provide for assignments and reassignment of rdating to grounds for suspension, removal, broad rule-making powers, \'Vith the authority powers rulings, he must provide legal services classes of actions or classes of appeals alllong discipline or compulsory retirement of the jus to prescribe general rules governing practice, to all components and personnel of Pennsylva tll(' several courts as the needs of justice shall tice or judge. It receives complaints or act~ on its procedure and the conduct of all courts, includ nia's judiciary structures, and he is responsible require, and for admission to the bar and to own initiative. It may investigate, hold hearings ing minor judiciary and officers serving process to provide planning and improvements of court practice law, and the administration of all courts and recommend appropriate action to be taken or enforcing orders, judgments or decrees. The procedures. In practice, the Court Administra and tlw sup('rvision of all officers of the judicial by the Supreme Court including "suspension, area of substantive hi.w remains with the Legis tor works closely with the president judge of branch, if such rules are consistent with this removal, disciplim' or compulsory retirement of lature. The supreme Court was authorized to each judicial district to improve the court sys Constitution and neither abridge, enlarge nor the justice or judge." suspend inconsistent laws by general rule within tems within that district. modify the substantive rights of any litigant, nor the procedure area, except for limitations on affect the right of the General Assembly to THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL actions, but areas of the judiciary's jurisdiction RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION determine the jurisdiction of any court or justice llnder the broad administrative powers remain within legislative authority. of the peacC', nor suspend nor alter any statut<.' of The Pennsylvania Hules of Judicial Adminis granted to the Supreme Coutt by the 1968 limitation or repOSl'. All laws shall be suspended Pennsylvania Constitution, the Court, in its COURT ADMINISTRATOR OF tration, promulgated by the Supreme Court in to tlw extent that they are inconsistent with rules PENNSYLVANIA 1972, contain comprehensive provisions for Pennsylvania Hules of J lldicial Administration, prescribed ullcI('r these provisions." established a Judicial Council. The Council has management of Pennsylvania's judicial systems Prior to this, the Suprem<.' Court had bc.'en Section 10(b) of the 1968 Judicial Article by the Court Administrator, with the aid of a fifteen judicial and lawyer members, with the provides: "The Supreme Court shall appoint a granted extensive rule making powers by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as Chair Judicial Council. These rules are presently legislature. The powers now became constitu court administrator and may appoint such sub being reviewed by the Court. man and the Court Administrator of Pennsylva ordinate administrators and staff as may be { tionally recognized, with the authority to sus nia as Secretary of the CounciL The Council is , i necessary and proper for the prompt and pend acts of the l<,'gislature. authorized to make recommendations on how proper disposition of the business of all courts SUPPORTIVE PERSONNEL AND Hules committees, which prc('xisted the 1968 to insure the prompt, fair, and efficient adminis and justices of the peace". In implementing this SERVICES-PROTHONOTARIES mandate, and others created since then, are tration of justice. constitutional mandate, the Supreme Court AND COURT CLERKS promptly appointed as Court Administrator of Pennsylvania fanner State Senator, A.' Evans All litigation and individual case management procedures remain in the hRnds of the court Kephart, \vho served \vith great distinction in clerks, generally known in Pennsylvania as the difficult ancl innovative years until his retire- prothonotaries. The Supreme Court prothono- 8 9 ,';1 • ------ PART II Report From The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts '------_.".oiI'-___,_-.', r ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF PENNSYLVANIA COURTS (AOPC) SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA ;. ! Court Administrator ~------I ------1 I of Pennsylvania I I I , I Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts I I I I I I I I I J I I Supreme Court 1. ______.: J I ,I Prothonotary " I Deputy Deputy Deputy ,I Court Administrator Court Administrator I Court Administrator I I Dist. Justice I Common Pleas I Deputies of the Peace Court Affairs Fiscal Affairs I I Affairs I Western Middle Eastern I 1 1 i I I District District District I I I I I' r r I I I I I Budget Retirement I ./ Supreme Court I I I Division of I :--- Rules Committees I I I Information Services I I . J Superior Court I I I J J------: I I I I I I I I Judicial Council I I I 1---/ f- I I I I I Prothonotary I I I l J I I I I Ass't Ct. Administrator.j- I I Data Processing Data Collection I I I I Judicial Inquiry I I I Division and Analysis I I I I & Review Board I I IAss't. Ct. Administratorj-- I Deputy I I ~--I I I I I I I I L______I I I I I IAss't. Ct. Administrator.j- I L __ Disciplinary Board I Education and ! .____ 1 I S- I of Supreme Court '-- Commonwealth Tra.ining I Court of Pennsylvania I Legal Services J I I I - I Public Relations S- State Board of I and ,Publications 1---1 Law Examiners I I Prothonotary J I House . I Counsel iI IL'~-Ilation I I J I Planning and , Supreme Court I Surveys l Chief Clerk J ! LI Advisory Committees Assigned J Legal Counsel l-' W .- PART II REPORT FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE , ' , i OFFICE OF PENNSYLVANIA COURTS In its seventh year of operation, the Adminis for the Commonwealth 'which will encompass trative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) all agencies of the criminal justice system. has expanded its direct services to the courts of A policy committee, consisting of all involved the Commonwealth and directly related per agencies was formed by the AOPC to monitor a sonnel and agencies under Judge Alexander F. four county test project that would act as the Barbieri, Court Administrator of Pennsylvania. initial State Judicial Information System (SJ18). Efforts toward improving the quality of The four county test project will include information and statistics were commenced in counties of various sizes, locations, case 1975 with the goal of providing better adminis volumes and record keeping systems. Tests will trative and management services to the courts as include data collection, data integrity, general well as providing more advanced bases for systems design, and output needs. . analyses of court operations. In December, 1975, an application was filed The beginning of the AOPC's Pennsylvania with the national association SEARCH College of the Judiciary were realized with GROUP, Inc., in an efforttoincludePennsylva approval of a grant amounting to $115, 275 from nia in the nationwide State Judicial Information the Governor's Justice Commission. Plans were System (SJIS) project. At that time, there were also under way to provide for Pennsylvania its eleven states under this project, and,Pennsylva first statevvide constable training program. nia sought to become one of the five new states Legal services were provided to personnel of to be added. Since then, the Pennsylvania appli the system on an increased level throughout the cation has been granted. year. The legal staff of AOPC provided legal representation to judges, Justices of the Peace Policy Committee: and other members of the judiciary, in litiga <) Judge Alexander F. Barbieri-Chairman, tion. Court Administrator of Pennsylvania The ensuing divisions of the Annual Report <) Larry P. Polansky-Vice Chairman, Chief will present details of the organizations, activi Deputy Court Administrator, Philadelphia ties, and functions of AOPC during the calendar County year 1975. <) James M. Vaseleck~Director, Court INFORMATION SYSTEMS Information Systems, AOPC <) Carlile E. King-Deputy Court Adminis Early in 1975, the AOPC recognized the need for Pennsylvania to develop a statewide court trator for Trial Courts, AOPC information system in an effort to coordinate <) Gerald W. Spivack-Deputy Court and standardize collection, storage and dissemi Administrator for Courts of Initial J urisdic nation of court information and statistics. tion, AOPC In order to accomplish this, the Court Admin <) Raymond M. Seidel, Esquire-Criminal istrator of Pennsylvania was awarded an LEAA J ustice Coordinator/Attorney, Montgom subgrant to employ a Director of Court Infor ery County mation Systems for the purpose of studying <) Clifford P. Kirsch-Assistant Court existing systems throughout the Common Administrator, AOPC wealth and to design standard procedures that <) Joseph F. Riggione-Executive Director, would satisfy the needs of the entire judicial Governor's Task Force on Criminal Justice Information Systems : i system. , } John M. Kurtz-President Judge, Court . I Also in 1975, the Court Administrator of Pennsylvania was named a member of the of Common Pleas of Chester County Governor's Task Force on the Comprehensive John N. Sawyer-President Judge, Data System, a statewide committee represent Court of Common Pleas of Beaver ing law enforcement, courts, corrections, pro County . bation/parole and the Governor's Justice Com J olm Q. Stranahan-President Juclge, mission, which is the State Planning Agency. Court of Common Pleas of Mercer The purpose of this committee is to design and County develop a Comprehensive Data System (CDS) • \",Iembers of Steering Committee 15 Morris M. Terrizzi-President Judge, in fourteen counties. The survey teams are as judicial ethics, public relations, and personnel The Pennsylvania College of the Judiciary is Court of Common Pleas of Hunting composed of experienced trial court adminis practices. also designed to operate as a clearing house for don County trators who are recognized as leaders in the field The Administrative Office, 1r. conjunction the .judiciary in the dissemination of judicial J. Andrew Smyser, Esquire-Deputy of court administration. Under established with the Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial education material to meet the needs created by Attorney General procedures, evaluators meet with members of Judges, initiated a prison visitation program, it new laws and court decisions. The college will, LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Esquire, District the court and interview all of the court-related being essential that each judge should be fully eventually, provide training programs for court Attorney, Dauphin County personnel, including the district attorney, pub informed as to the kinds of programs and the administrators, district justices of the peace, and Robert A. Weinert, Esquire, Prothono lic, defender, clerks of courts, prothonotaries, prevailing conditions in institutions to which he other court-related personnel. tary and Clerk of Courts' Association, secretaries, probation and parole personnel, is sentencing offenders. An evaluation is made While the faculty will continue as in the past, Lehigh County, Solicitor. county commissioners, and members of the bar. after each visit, highlighting the disadvantages to be drawn primarily from experienced jurists Dante Bertani, Esquire, Public An evaluation report is prepared, presented to as well as the strengths of the institutional in the state, plus administrators, prosecuting . Defender, Westmoreland County the president judge, and distributed by the programs and facilities. During part of the attorneys and educators, the Administrative William Hittinger, Chief, Bureau of Cor Administrative Office to members of the judi visitation the judges are divided into small Office plans to provide a full-time, trained and rections, Management Information ciary and court administrators in judicial dis groups so as to be able to talk separately, on a competent staff to plan and manage arrange Section, Commonwealth of Pennsyl tricts of similar size. one-to-one basis, with both the inmates and ments and the administrative details of operat vania The Administrative Office works closely with staff personnel. ing the college. Frank J. Walter, Systems Analyst, Proba the trial court administrators in the research and In 1974, the Judicial Council of Pennsylvania It is contemplated that a board of tnJstees will tion and Parole, Commonwealth of development of programs to shift the major approved the establishment of a judicial train be appointed, consisting of'the Chief Justice, P ennsy Ivania administrative burdens from the judges to pro ing center, and in 1975 the Administrative the Court Administrator of Pennsylvania, and Gloria P. Thomas, Esquire, Chief Proba fessional managers. The basic purpose of the Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) estab members of the appellate and trial benches to tion Officer, Luzerne County evaluation is to achieve more effective court lished the Pennsylvania College of the J udi assist in planning future education and training William F. Butler, Board of Probation administration through the coordination of the ciary. Judge Ernst John Watts, dean of the programs. and Parole, Commonwealth of Penn various divisions of the court and the offices National College of the State Judiciary, The Supreme Court, the Administrative sylvania affecting the judicial system. addressed members of the Supreme Court, Office, and the Conference of State Trial Donald S. Guthrie, Esquire, Delaware encouraging the Court and the Administrative Judges, all recognize the need to develop and County JUDICIAL EDUCATION Office with the Pennsylvania Conference of maintain comprehensive programs of continu Honorable Patrick P. T amili a, Judge, State Trial Judges, to combine their efforts in ing education for members of the judicial sys Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny In 1968, under the auspices of the Pennsylva developing the new judicial college into an tems. Through their combined efforts, it seems County nia Conference of State Trial Judges and the educational institution, not only responsible for assured that training and education will be State Police representative Pennsylvania Bar Association, the first orienta indoctrlinating new judges, but available to made available to maintain at satisfactory levels Local Police representative tion course was conducted for newly elected provide continuing educational courses for all the professional competence of Pennsylvania's Governor's Justice Commission repre and appointed trial judges in Pennsylvania. state trial judges. judiciary and of its court-related personnel. sentative, ex officio Two years later, the Administrative Office obtained federal funds through the Governor's The Administrative Office, in January, 1976, LEAA representative, ex officio obtained. financial support for the new Pennsyl DISTRICT JUSTICE OF THE PEACE Justice Commission to offset the expenses of COURTS such educational programs. The Pennsylvania vania College of the Judiciary when the Gover EVALUATION OF TRIAL COURT Supreme Court endorsed the concept of judicial nor's Jw;tice Commission approved federal The District Justice of the Peace Courts are ADMINISTRATION education, and Chief Justice Benjamin R. Jones funding in excess of $100,000 for the first year of under the supervision of the Administrative The Pennsylvania Rules of Judicial Adminis has recently directed that attendance at such the college. The Administrative Office will, Office of the Courts (AOPC). District Justices tration charge the Administrative Office with orientation courses shall be mandatory for new over the next several years, gradually absorb the of the Peace jurisdiction is handled in Philadel the responsibility and duty of reviewing the judges. These conferences are held in April of costs of this educational program into its fiscal phia County by Philadelphia Municipal and operating efficiency of the judicial systems and each even-numbered year, approximately three budget. In 1976 it is planned to conduct four Traffic Courts, with Police Magistrates having of all offices relating thereto, and to formulate months after the commencement of the new two-day conferences in the following areas: (1) some concurrent jurisdiction in the City of Pitts and submit to the Supreme Court recommenda judges' elective term of office. Attendance Juvenile Court Problems and Procedures, and burgh. tions for the improvement of the system. includes approximately eighty new judges, and Orphans' Court Problems and Procedures, to be OnDecember 31, 1973, there were 576 magis The Administrative Office, in 1973, under a fifteen to twenty veteran judges who partici conducted separately but concurrently at Penn terial districts in existence. As a result of consoli federal subgrant from the Governor's Justice pate in the conference as group leaders during sylvania State University; (2) Criminal Court dation, mergers, and realignments, 568 existed Commission, conducted in-depth analyses of their unstructured discussion periods. The Techniques, at Carlisle; (3) Civil Court Tech at the end of 1975. The processing of all requests administrative practices in seven judicial dis faculty primarily consists of experienced jurists niques, at Pennsylvania State University; and for changes in magisterial district boundaries is tricts. This program was considered most help who have acquired expertise in their assigned (4) Sentencing Practices and Procedures, also at initially handled by the Administrative Office ful, and the counties surveyed have now imple areas, but includes some practicing attorneys, Penn State. of Pennsylvania Courts. mented most, if not all, of the recommendations educators, and others who are nationally promi n is also planned that trial judges will be The salary of a District Judge is established made by the evaluation team. nent in the judicial field. The comprehensive permitted to go outside of Pennsylvania to at by the Legislature and is computed " ... by A similar study was undertaken in 1975, again curriculum covers such subject matters as trial tend, on a selective basis, regular, graduate and adding to six thousand dollars ($6,000.) the funded through the Governor's Justice Com techniques, charging juries, sentencing proce special courses conducted by the Natkll1arCol product of the population of his magisterial mission. Surveys are conducted at the specific dures, substantive criminal law, evidence, lege of the State Judiciary, at Reno, Nevada, district times forty cents (40¢), but in no event request of the president judge of the judicial search and seizure, and post-conviction prob hopefully to broaden the scope of their learning shall the salary exceed sixteen thousand five district. The present program includes surveys lems. Included are indoctrination matters, such achievements. hundred dollars ($16,500.) or be less than seven 16 17 ~ -. thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500.)". The the offices of the District Justices and are sub supervision and control over constables within prepares budgets for the Courts of Common population of each magisterial district is com~ mitted monthly to the Administrative Office of his judicial district. _ Pleas, Philadelphia Municipal and Traffic puted on a certification submitted by the Presi Pennsylvania Courts. They are summarized in In order to properly evaluate the needs of Courts, the District Justices of the Peace, and dent Judge of each judicial district to the State another section of this report. constables, and the need for these officials in the the Offices of the Court Administrator. Legisla Treasurer. If the salary of a magisterial district is Prior to 1974, no program existed for the judicial systems of Pennsylvania, it is necessary tive appropriations for reimbursement to the to be changed due to population increases or systematic collection of data regarding defend that a thorough stuely be made to determine at counties for county court expenses, and for decreases, the President Judge can recertify the ants processed through this District Justice the outset just what functions constables are county offices of resident appellate justices and populations on a subsequent Federal census Court. The Administrative Office of Pennsylva no\'\' performing, with consideration given to judges, are allocated and disbursed by the without prior approval from the Supreme nia Courts recognized that there was a need for the determination of what functions they should Court Administrator. Budgets prepared by the Court. However, if the basis for the recertifica data on all defendants including those proc~ be performing. Obviousiy, the functions of Supreme, Superior, and Commonwealth tion is other than a Federal census, prior essed by these courts; and that this information constables should be standardized and made Courts are forwarded through the Fiscal Office Supreme Court approval must first be obtained. represents a vital link in the comprehensive data more uniform. In order to effectuate this objec to the Budget Secretary of the Commonwealth. The processing of all such requests for recertifi system, as well as a valuable tool for overall tive, this Office has filed an application for a Upon approval by the Chief Justice and the cation is handled by the Administrative Office. court management. grant with the Governor's Justice Commission Court Administrator, the unified budget for the Since the large majority of the members of Initial reporting forms have now been revised to help fund this project. Judicial Department is also transmitted to the these Courts are not lawyers, it is important for and simplified to more accurately reflect activ Also, in an effort to identi~y constables and Secretary of the Budget for submission to the all such individuals to be well informed in those ity in the offices of district justices of the peace. deputy constables, the AOPC is working to General Assembly as a part,of the Governor's areas of the law which affect their functions and Although the reports are not intended to meas obtain a complete list containing the names and Budget. If there is a disagreement as to the jurisdiction. As a regular procedure, the Ad ure all of the work that is performed by these addresses of all constables and deputy consta~ amounts requested for the various segments of ministrative Office sends to such judges copies judges, the information thus gathered plays a bles. Furthermore, a pending application filed the Judicial Department, then the Court Admin of statutes and rules of law of current interest. major role in the analysis of the performance with the Governor's rustice Commission, if istrator is compelled to take the requests During the past two years, the office has con and needs of the unified Pennsylvania judicial approved, would provide funding for a sorely directly to the General Assembly. ducted many conferences in an effort to system.r;. needed education program for constables. The Fiscal Office prepares and administers upgrade the knowledge and skills of the district An additional new device in the State's COlU Finally, AOPC is working on the preparation of the judicial and judiciary personnel payroll for justices. Beyond this recent period, and for the prehensive judicial data system is a uniform a manual of instructions and legal guidelines approximately 1100 personso, processing all .past several years, programs have been con- docket transcript form. This form, which is now which will aid constables in the performance of vouchers, and maintaining complete account ducted by AOPC at Pennsylvania State Univer used by all dish'ict justices throughout Pennsyl their duties. In the past, constables have had ing records for all components of the Judicial sity, University Park, Pennsylvania. These pro vania, will help identify and locate de.fendants little or no input in matters that define their Department. grams are presented in one~week seminars, in who are, or have been, processed through the duties and functions. In order to improve com The new Retirement Code, approved March which are included such subjects as Rules of State's judicial systems. In addition, the form munications and seek to eliminate possible 1, 1974, provides that each department within Evidence and Search and Seizure. Extensive use reduces the aI'nount of paper work formerly problems affecting the relationships betwee~ the Commonwealth governmental complex is made of videotaped simulated trials, during required to be completed by district justices constables and other units of the judicial sys provide retirement counseling to those within which each participant is given an opportunity and Clerks of Courts. The new docket tran ! , , ., tems, a new committe~ is being sponsored by the department. As a result, the Fiscal Office of to rule on evidentiary matters. Approximately script form contains a preprinted number which AOPC, including in its membership representa~ the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania 104 district judges attended the 1974 sessions, is assigned to a defendant when he enters the tives of the .constables, district justices, court Courts was required to school and train selected and 226 the 1975 sessions. Ia addition, this criminal justice system and remains yyith him administrators, and others who are associated in staff personnel in the many varied and compli Office annually conducts a seminar for the until his case is disposed. In addition, an effort the administration of justice. It is hoped that this cated laws and formulae pertainiI).g to retire Administrators of our District Justices of the will be made to fingerprint and assign a classifi committee will aid in achieving more efficient ment of judges, district judges and other judi Peace. These programs are also held at Univer cation number to each set of fingerprints. It is management of, and performance by, District ciary employees in the judicial systems in order sity Park, and are designed to promote com contemplated that in the near future computer Justices in Pennsylvania. to provide retirement services and counseling as munication among Court Administrators and to ized criminal history records of all defendants to entitlement and benefits. These very time provide an opportunity to discuss common will be available for all components of the FISCAL AFFAIRS consuming services have been provided with~ problems and solutions for those problems. criminal justice system, including the State's The Court Administrator of Pennsylvania is out serious interference with the normal opera~ In addition to the educational programs con~ district justice courts. required by statute to prepare, supervise, or tions of the Fiscal Office. The situation has been ducted at Penn State, regional programs are delegate preparation of budgetary and funding improved by employment of a full time, trained and experienced Retirement Counselor to fill presented on such important subjects as the CONSTABLES requisitions for the Judicial Department. By Crimes Code and Substantive Law pertaining order of the Supreme Court dated July 27, 1973, the role now mandated by the legislature. to Bail, Sentencing, and Security. Each District An important auxiliary to our District J llstice the Office of Deputy Court Administrator of In ruly, 1975, the Fiscal Office was moved to Justice is directed to attend a regional seminar Courts is the constable system in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania for Fiscal Affairs was authorized, new quarters in City Towers, 301 Chestnut on the subjects previously mentioned. These This ancient system has received very little and, effective September 4, 1973, the Office Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to better seminars are held in strategic locations through attention, until recently. It is deemed necessary was opened in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with accommodate the ever increasing work load of out Pennsylvania. by this Office that the constable system be implementation of the requisition process the office, to provide more adequate filing In April, 1974, this Office, in cooperation with materially upgraded, and that the laws and rules entrusted to the Deputy Court Administrator the Department of Justice and the Office of pertaining to constables be clarified, to the end for Fiscal Affairs. °Justices and judges of the Supreme, Superior, Commonwealth Criminal Justice Statistics, initiated a judicial that constables may· more ably carry out their U! , The Court Administrator of Pennsylvania Courts and related staffs; judges of the Courts of Common Pleas, statistics program to collect aggregate data functions. Under Supreme Court rules, the t Municipal and Traffic Courts of Philadelphia, justices of t1~e Hi prepares the fiscal year budget request for the peace, employees of the Administrative Office of Pennsyl~nl1la from each distl'ict justice of the peace The President Judge of the Common Pleas Court of l ~ lmified judicial systems. Under the supervision Courts, and staffs of certain Supreme Court Rules CommIttees t 1 reports reqUired in this program are prepared in each judicial district is charged with the general 1 ( of the Court Administrator, the Fiscal Office and Boards. 18 il 19 ~ , t il 11 _~ ___~ ___~------~ __~ ---IIW...I _____ ~ ___ ~ _____', space for records, and to furnish the space been in mandamus or prohibition, challenging COMMONWEALTH APPROPRIATIONS requirements for the more comp!ete use of the the procedures by which an individual judge or for computer facility maintained on tile Fiscal justice of the peace conducted a proceeding Office premises. before him. Many of these actions have been STATE JUDICIAL SYSTEM patently frivolous, brought by disgruntled lit LEGAL SERVICES igants, but several have brought to light ques GENERAL AND SPECIAL FUNDS r; In February, 1975, the Attorney General of tions as to procedures laid down in the various FISCAL YEAR 1975-76 Pennsylvania, in a formal opinion, ruled that the rules of court. Generally, the more substantial Department of Justice could not continue to cases are brought in federal district courts, most 15 MONTHS, TOTAL STATE BUDGET $6.7 BILLION J" provide legal representation for members of the frequently as civil rights actions. These often challenge and question traditional and funda (Dollar Amounts in Thousands) Pennsylvania judicial systems when they might be sued in their official capacities. The Attorney mental operations of our systems of jurispru Social Economic Development General reasoned that our Constitution pro dence in Pennsylvania, threatening the delicate Development and Income Maintenance vides for a clear and definite separation of balance between state and federal court sys $485,485 14.5% $977,679 tems. 7.2'J,~ powers among the three coordinate branches of government in Pennsylvania-executive, legis The dynamic relationships which now exist lative and judicial-and that, as an appointed among the three branches of go;vernment official of the executive branch answerable to require constant attention, and the AOPC Law Transportation Department has been charged with keeping a and the Governor, he should not provide legal servi IIealth-Physical . ,.-- Communication ces to a separate and independent judicial close and alert watch on these relationships. and Mental K $755,308 Fortunately, this department's staff includes a Well-being ~ 11.2% branch in whose courts he must also appear. To $863,745 fill the need, a Law Department was created lawyer who has had previous service in the 12.9% within the Officf' of the Court Administrator of Legislature. Recently, a legislative liaison com Recreation and mittee has been formed, with membership that Cultural Enrichment Pennsylvania. The Law Department of AOPC has been includes three members from each body of the 1.5% $103,8.'54 General Assembly with bipartisan representa State State Judicial ' assigned several functions. First, it provides Judicial System System ' ; legal representation for trial judges, appellate tion and three members of the Supreme Court. $46,9.'30 .7% The aim of this committee is to insure regular .7% .7'1, $45,266 judges, and justices of the peace when they are General Salary sued in their official capacities in either the state and official discussions of areas of impact 6.5'1, and Hetirement between legislative and judicial functions, with Increases or federal court systems. Second, the Depart Protection to ment is required to monitor legislation as it is the hope that confontations between the two Persons and branches may be avoided. The AOPC and its Property introduced in the General Assembly, both in $434,858 terms of its effect on the judicial branch and its Law Department'serve as staff, to provide relationship to the present statutory law. In this planning, legal support and a secretariat for the Committee. 4.0% latter mission, the Law Department provides Direction and day-to-day liaison with committees of the Gen The AOPC Law Department looks forward Supportive Services eral Assembly as well as with agencies and to continuing to provide efficient and capable $266,118 Intellectual legal services to all members of the judicial Development departments of the executive branch. Such and Education liaison fosters a close working relationship to branch, and to ever improving communications 40.8% $2,740,244 exist between the judiciary and the two other with other branches of government. branches of government to the end that unnec PENNSYI.VANIA CONFERENCE OF STATE essary conflicts among the branches may be TRIAL JUDGES avoided. In appropriate instances, the views of Total State Budget $6.7 Billion the judicial branch are positively expressed to The Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial (Dollar Amounts in Thousands) the Legislature under.the authori.ty Qf the Court Judges was formed in 1964 as a non-profit Administrator, with 'the approval of the State Judicial association, its purpose being to promote the Budget Change Budget Change Supreme Court. Third, the Law Department interests of justice throughout the Common Fiscal 1971-72 $3,902,353 acts as in-house ccunsel to the Court Adminis wealth by gathering, studying and disseminat Fiscal 1972-73 $20,494 $4,291,264 10.0% trator and to individuals within the judicial ing to its members information of interest to the Fiscal 1973-74 $68,364° 233.6 $4,737,106 lOA branch to provide legal advice and research judiciary; by presenting and conducting pro Fiscal 1974-75 $70,637 3.3 $5,206,738 9.9 support. grams at meetings attended by persons inter Fiscal 1975-76 $61,245 -13.3 Since April I, 1975, when the Law Depart ested in the law and its procedure; by fostering $6,719,487 29.1 $46,930 - 23.4 Ayerage Change 14.9% ment came into being, the staff of one chief and promoting the passage of desirable legisla 50.1% attorney, one staff attorney and several part tion; by cooperating with bar associations, law time law students has provided legal represen schools and other groups in worthwhile projects tation in over one hundred and fifty individmiI designed to improve the administration of the 'Included $47 million for county reimbursement which was not authorized. cases. The state court cases have most often law; by cooperating with the Chief Justice of 20 21 ". 1'1II /l 6. Dissemination of information concerning, procedures, to formulate and, .most s~andards, or of interest to, his court or courts. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in any as well as the chairpersons of the 26 special II importantly, to furnish a forum for the I~t~r judicial conference, and in general to do such committees appointed annually by the presi tIr \ change of information relating to court admmls- 7. Procurement of supplies and services for his dent. The names of the present officers are set other things as may be necessary to implement I!1 i tration. court or courts. forth in the appendix hereto. It The Council has conducted numerous state- and accomplish its general objectives. 1\ 8. Custody and disbursement of funds for his Initially the Pennsylvania Bar Association The Conference supports the annual meeting "f '\ wide conferences and seminars, and arranged r j court or courts. served as the secretariat for the Conference; of president judges and trial court administra their fifth annual meeting to take place in March handled its business matters, and arranged peri tors, which is conducted by the Administrative of 1976. The Council's programs cover the 9. Preparation of reports concerning his court odic meetings. Judges attending Conference Office each September. In addition, the Judicial gamut in all areas of current interest and con or courts. cern to the members. The Council .h~s b~en meetings were required to pay their own Education Committee of the Conference has 10. Jury management. expenses for travel, room and meals. Active been instrumental in AOPC planning of orienta instrumental in assisting the AdmmIstr~tlve participation was limited. In 1970, at the direc tion seminars conducted biennially for the Office in an annual conference of preSIdent 11. Study and improvement of caseflow, time tion of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the newly elected and appointed judges. This com judges and trial court administrators. standards, and calendaring. Many members of the Coun?il Administrative Office of -Pennsylvania Courts mittee has advocated a policy of continuing Pennsyl~a~ia Research and development of effective also belong to the National ASSOCIatIOn of Tnal 12. became the Conference secretariat; and also at education and training for all personnel in the methods of court functioning, including in Court Administrators (NATCA). Rita E. Pres that time, with financial assistance from the judicial system. Its members have served as districts where feasible the mechanization cott former court administrator in Delaware Governor's Justice Commission, judges became faculty advisers and lecturers at various educa and computerization of court operations. able to obtain reimbursement of their expenses tional seminars. The Judicial Reference Manual COl:nty, served in 1974 as NATCA's president, incurred in attending seminars and Conference used at each orientation seminar is authored by and has recently been elected to the bench of 13. Preparation and administration of trial meetings. In 1973 these costs were included in trial judges possessing knowledge and expe the court of com!1lon pleas of Delaware County calendars for all civil and criminal cases, the budget prepared by the Administrative rience in special areas and has provided valu for a ten-year term. including daily trial lists. The Pennsylvania Council of Trial Court Ad Office for the courts of common pleas. At the able source material for all members of the 14. Responsibility for the assignment, listing present time, with the exception of less than half bench. The Conference also has cooperated in ministrators appointed a committee to define and disposition of all arbitration matters. a dozen, all of the 285 common pleas court the publication of abstracts of recent decisions the functions and responsibilities of trial court judges, all of the active senior judges, and all of of importance rendered by both trial and appel administrators in Pennsylvania. Their findings 15. General supervision of the minor judiciary the law-trained Philadelphia Municipal Court late judges, especially those which reflect signif were submitted to the Court Administrator of system of the Judicial District. judges, are dues-paying members of the Con icant changes in the law. Also, with the support Pennsylvania, and, based upon his recommen ference and enthusiastic supporters of its pro of AOPC, visitations by trial judges to state and dation Chief Justice Benjamin R. Jones, on COURT REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM grams. The 21 justices and judges of the appel federal correctional institutions, for the pur Dece~ber 9, 1975, promulgated the following late courts are honorary members, who pose of evaluating their facilities and programs, order: Since 1971, the Court Administrator of Penn participate in the Conference business and have been sponsored by the Pennsylvania Con (U)pon the recommendation of the Court sylvania has been designated by Acts of the attend many of the seminars. ference of State Trial Judges. Administrator of Pennsylvania ... the duties and General Assembly as the administrator of the The Conference conducts annually a four responsibilities of a District Court Administra court reimbursement program under Which counties are reimbursed by the State for direct day summer meeting to discuss the many and TRIAL COURT ADMINISTRATORS tor should be, but not be limited to, those set varied changes in current law and procedures. forth below: costs incurred in the administration and opera tion of all courts as reported in the counties' Prominent speakers address the Conference on The Constitution of Pennsylvania, as 1. Implementation of policies set by the State matters of national scope and interest, but amended in 1968, provided for the appointment annual financial reports. Court Administrator. basically the programs are presented by trial by the Supreme Court of a state court adminis The Court Administrator of Pennsylvania is judges, and occasionally lawyers, having partic trator and such subordinate administrators and 2. Assistance to the Administrative Office dof responsible f9r making the allocations and pay ular expertise in special fields. The Conference staff as "necessary and proper for the prompt Pennsylvania Courts in setting statewi e ments to the counties and to exclude all costs also meets during the late winter for a day and a and proper disposition of the business of all policies. which are not properly reported. half for discussions on specific major issues of a courts and justices of the peace." At that time Since 1971, the amount of appropriations has 3. Preparation, submission and management significantly increased for reimbursement pur timely nature affecting the judicial system. It is only six trial court administrators served the of the budget for his court or courts. at this meeting that the Pennsylvania Confer courts of common pleas in Pennsylvania. Today poses, although the total gran.ted has neyer been ence of State Trial Judges hosts the members of there are 39 persons who have been appointed, 4. Recruiting, hiring, training, evaluating and sufficient to cover all of the dIrect costs ll1curred the federal bench at the traditional dinner for in 42 judicial districts, to act in an administrative monitoring personnel of his court or courts. by counties for court costs. . both federal and state judiciary. Probably the capacity. The Administrative Office ofPennsyl The Administrative Office of Pennsylvama 5. Management of space, equipment and Courts has requested the Legislature to increase most significant aspect of these combined meet vania Courts early recognized, as one of its facilities of his court or courts. ings is the opportunity they afford of providing primary functions, the necessity of acting as a a forum for all trial judges from various parts of liaison between and among the various trial the Commonwealth to meet and express their courts as a means of fulfilling the constitutional 1973 1974 ~ views and philosophies, and to present possible mandate for a "unified judicial system." ~ 52,110,317 51,308,148 solutions to the perplexing problems facing our The Administrative Office, in 1971, sup County's Net Expensesl 76,786,328 46,797,789 24,000,000 24,000,000 judicial systems today .. ported the establishing of a statewide associa Amount Reimbursed 8,000,000 17,000,000 46.06% 46.76% The Conference is managed by its elected tion, the Pennsylvania Council of Trial Court Percent of Reimbursement 10.42% 36.33% officers and an executive committee, whose Administrators. The purpose of this organiza . . .\. t d I 'e f om time to time been excluded. meetings also include the chairperson of each of tion is to increase the proficiency of court .. :11:~9~r separate appropriations, certum accounts prevIous Y repor e lU\., r , the three separate Conference sections (J uve administration through improved court man nile Court, Orphans' Court and Senior Judges), agement techniques, to promote innovative 22 COURT PLANNER-COORDINATOR professional image of the district judge, includ the amount of reimbursement to cover the total estahlished specific guidelines provide unifor ing lectures on standards of judicial conduct and amount of direct costs incurred by counties for mity in recommendations and decisions for The Planner-Coordinator is responsible for on the collection of case flow data to assure the judicial systems. those charged with specific crimes. the daily operation of all grants awarded to the co'mpliance with the Statistical Reporting Pro In the third county, the rules governing the Administrative Office, including fiscal opera gram for District Justices of the Peace. admini~tration of bail stipulate that upon arrest, BAIL PROGRAMS tions and programmatic implementation. bail shall be established at a preliminary The Planner-Coordinator works on a daily JUDICIAL PRISON VISITATION In 1975, the Administrative Office of Pennsyl arraignment by a judge. Where nominal bail has basis with the Court Administrator of Pennsyl vania Courts commenced a study to determine been set by the court or issuing authority, a court vania and his Deputy Court Administrators in The Prison Visitation Program is intended to the similarity of bail procedures employed in bail agency may be designated as surety for the the administration and execution of present implement the recommendation of the N atio~al selected Pennsylvania counties; whether or not defendant. The defendant is thus construed to projects and in developing plans for future Advisory Commission on Criminal J ustlCe the procedures were in compliance with state be subject to the regulations of the court bail projects. Standards and Goals that judges visit all institu and local Rules of Court; how cash bail was agency. The county also has a provision for the tions and facilities to which criminal offenders used; how it was authorized; what procedures payment of a 10 percent cash bail, though not COURT INFORMATION SYSTEM may be sentenced. Judges are mad~ fa~iliar existed for handling balances over and above less than $25. Only the person for whom bail has The Court Information System Program with the physical circumstances of ImprISon cash deposits; and how sureties supported by been set may execute the bond. No surety or represents the first step toward achieving a ment in order to provide a sounder basis for real estate were handled. fidelity company or professional bail bondsman statewide automated data base for court man sentencing decisions, it being felt that no ~erson Three large counties having similar demog may act as the personal representative of the agement information. The State system, when has a greater responsibility or burden I? the raphy, but dissimilar bail programs were defendant. Upon payment of the 10 percent, the developed, will coordinate the activity of the criminal justice apparatus than tl}at ~f the Judge selected for the study, which was conducted court bail agency is assigned supervision of the various county based court information sys in his decisions as to sentences. ThIS program over a period of four months. The types of bail defendant. tems. The criminal activities division of the has also served to foster greater cooperation and studied included R.O.R.; nominal bail; cash The study showed that in the two counties proposed Court Information System. ~ill understending between the judiciary and those deposit bail programs; property bonds; and having a cash bail program, the total number of . become an integral part of the State Cnmmal who carry out correctional programs . surety bond programs. defendants making bail "through some other Justice Information System, which is planned to The study revealed that the administration of means" is traditionally about 7% of those provide computerized communications and AOPC STATISTICAL PROGRAM bail programs varied in each county. In one arrested. In the other county, because of the coordination of the criminal information activi The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania county, the only acceptable forms of bail were nature of its bail system, 27 percent to 30 per ties of all of the Criminal Justice Agencies in the Courts carries out a Statistical Program where bonds provided by professional surety, real cent of all those making bail did so through the Commonwealth. by it compiles the reports of the Courts of estate, government bonds, R.O.R. and total use of professional bondsmen. The Court Administrator represents the Common Pleas and the District Justices in a cash bail. The bail bond form utilized complied The evaluation study took into account struc Pennsylvania judiciary on the Governor's Task uniform system in order to avoid duplicative with the form authorized by Supreme Court tural distinctions within programs, noting that Force on Criminal Justice Information Systems efforts and save costs. Monitoring this informa rules, but this county did not have a percentage the differences largely reflected the philosophy and the AOPC Director of Data Processing tion provides indications of changes in trends cash bail program. of each county. The investigator noted that represents the court systems on the Inter and caseload buildup in particular areas. These In a second county, a percentage cash bail percentage cash bail served to limit the use of Agency Working Group of the Task Force. areas are then addressed through internal man program was established. As such, the bail professional bondsmen; and that experiences COURT OPINION CIRCULARIZATION agement analysis as part of the ongoing process agency acts as surety for the defendant if he with one county's bail system indicated that a of determining how the AOPC can best serve deposits the percentage of cash bail required by great deterrent to bail jumping was imposed on The Court Opinion Circularization Project, the judici!ll system. local rules. Collection of the bail is carried out the defendant when his cash bail was paid either under the direction of Dean Burton R. Laub, of under Supreme Court rule. In this county ten by himself or by a family member or friend, the Dickinson School of Law, provides a PENNSYLVANIA COLLEGE OF THE JUDICIARY percent of the cash amount fixed is automati since there was the expectation that most of the monthly bulletin of recent case abstracts to all cally the amount to be collected. The county cash would be returned at the conclusion of the judges in the Commonwealth, covering deci The Pennsylvania College os the Judiciary rule provides no power to act upon oral (e.g. case. sions of appellate and trial courts which are has been created to serve all components of the telephone) authorizations, and the rule is silent In the three counties studied, as noted, one of likely to be of special interest to the trial bench. judicial systems. Such training h~s been sp~lled on whether or not a defaulting defendant for them did not implement a percentage cash bail This program has the active support of the out in Standard 7.5 of the NatIOnal AdVISOry feits the entire amount of the bail over and program, and adoption thereof was recom Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial Judges. Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and above the ten percent paid in cash. This county mended as part of the study. Since the conclu Goals which recommends that each state de also accepts real estate security bonds, cash bail, sion of the study, however, the court in that DISTRICT JUSTICE ORIENTATION velop its own State Judicial College. government bonds and has an R.O.R. program. county has adopted local rules establishing this There are at present 562 District Justices in The American Bar Association Commission The county bail agency provides a comprehen program. Pennsylvania, most of whom have not gone on Standards of Judicial Administration has sive and equitable bail system which enables through formal legal training prior to pointed out that contin~ing trai~ing.a~d edu?a deserving individuals to be released on bail, FEDERAL GRANTS ~heir elections. Educational programs are proVIded tion for judges is essential to mamtammg a hIgh with predetermined assurances that they will be The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania by the AOPC for all district justices, consisting level of professional competence in the judi present at all stages of the judicial proceedings. Courts has utilized Law Enforcement Assist of a basic forty hours training program, supple ciary. This county's program also provides an inter ance Administration funds received through the mented by in-depth seminars on specific topics. Pennsylvania has many nationally recognized view procedure whereby the recommendation, Governor's Justice Commission for a number of legal scholars on and off the b~nch, incl~di~g or lack thereof, by the interviewer is given Special attention is givn to criminal procedure programs. These monies have permitted a vari and the rules governing the admissibility of court administrators who prOVIde expertIse m weight in bail determinations in the defendant's ety of programs to be initiated in the Common evidence in criminal proceedings. Attention is the programs now being presented by the Col case. In effect, the system in this county func wealth. The following projects are currently in lege. tions almost automatically, in the sense that operation. also given to topics which aim at improving the 25 24 ~...... ,- '" -.-." JUDICIAL TRAINING PROGRAM Judge and Court Administrator of the judicial PART III district. The Judicial Training Program provides training and refresher courses for members of STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS the judicial systems at nationally recognized Reports of Supreme schools and colleges. These programs -are The Standard Jury Instructions Committee offered in addition to regularly scheduled pro has as its mission the preparation of jury instruc Court Committees grams offered throughout the Commonwealth. tions for use by trial judges in criminal cases, in . The AOPC believes that a major benefit the hope that errors which may lead to reversals and Related Court derived from these out-of-state training sessions can be avoided. The program is intended to is the interchange of ideas among persons from help prevent costly and time consuming appeals Agencies all regions of the nation. This prevents provin and reversals which often require new trials. By cialism in thinking and affords participants the thus expediting the proper trial of cases, the use opportunity to deal with problems of judicial of Standard Instructions should result in administration in a more eclectic manner. reduced backlogs and more rapid clearing of court dockets, allowing additional time for TRIAL. COURT EVALUATION other phases, in the 'processing of criminal cases, The Trial Court Evaluation Program pro thereby improving the overall administration of criminal justice. vides an in-depth analysis and evaluation of the functions, needs, and requirements for adminis trative policies, practices and procedures at the DISTRICT JUSTICE STATISTICAL trial court level. Survey teams, headed by John REPORTING UNIT B. Cutler, a retired veteran Trial Court Adminis The Statistical Reporting Unit for District trator, make on-site visits to selected judicial Justices of the Peace Courts refines all input districts and conduct interviews with all court forms and collects case volume statistics from related personnel, including judges, district every District Justice of Pennsylvania. This attorneys, clerks of courts, prothonotaries and information is coded and input to the Adminis court administrators. trative Office computer for comparative analy Substantive reports are issued relative to each sis. The Administrative Office has developed a evaluation, addressing on a point-by-point basis new docket transcript form for statewide use. all aspects of management of the judicial dis The statistical reporting staff is responsible for trict. The reports are issued in final form to the receiving and processing the court information Administrative Office and to the President section of the docket transcript. FUNDING SUMMARY-FISCAL YEAR 1975-76 LEAA GRANT PROGRAM BLOCK AOPC NUMBER TITLE GRANT . FUNDS --TOTAL DS-74-C-J-9,9 33 Court Information System $ 75,774 $12,200 $ 87,974 DS-74-C-A34-9-552 Court Opinion Circularization $ 17,747 $ 2,228 $ 19,975 DS-74~C-A34-9-562 _ District Justice Orientation II $ 16,393 $1,880 $ 18,273 DS-14-C-A34-9-563 District Justice Orientation l $ 18,609 . $ 2,480 $21,089 DS-74-C-A34-9-569 Judicial Pdson Visitation $24,248 $ 2,688 $ 26,936 OS.;74-C-E2-9-570 - AOPC Statistical Program $ 50,960 $ 8,140' .. $59,100 DS-74-C-A34;;9-572 Judicial Training Program $ 74,187 $42,653. $116,840 DS-74-C-E4-9':(580 Trial Court Evaluation $ 18,420 $ 6,400 $ 24,820 DS-74-8-E4-9-586 Standard Jury Instructions . $37;745, $14,850 $ 52,595 ])S-75-C-7A-9-671 Judicial Training Center of $1l5,275 $13;250 $128,525 Pennsylvania DS-75-C-7B-9-683 Court Planner Coordinator $ 20,200 $20)200 $ 40,400 DS-75-C-3B-9-692 District Justice'Statistical $ 33,010 $33,01q $ 66,020 .- Reporting.Unit TOTAL $502,568 $159,979 $662,547 i- 26 ______~~c_"-" ------~--- ---~------~-~-~ ------~------U PARTIU n, REPORTS OF SUPREME COURT COMMITTEES . AND RELATED COURT AGENCIES CIVIL PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE 4. Rule 1009(f) governing the form of Notice The past year has been one of unparalleled to Defend in Service by Publication activity. Most of it has been engendered by the Rule 1009(f), effective August 1, 1975, procedural due process, equal protection and adapts the Notice to Defend required by Rule consumer revolution which has engulfed the 1018.1 to apply to service by publication and judicial system, requiring extensive changes in provides the mandatory content of the publica civil practice and procedure. tion. There have been eight major revisions or 5. Amendments to Rules 2039, 2051, 2064, 2206 amendments submitted to and approved by the and 76 governing Minors, I,ncompetents Court, three proposed recommendations for and Wrongful Death ,. Amendment Nos. 40, 41 and 42 have been These amendments, effective June 23, circulated or are being prepared for circulation 1975, incorporate into the Rules important to the Bench and Bar for comment and sugges changes in the Probate, Estates and Fiduciaries tion before submission to the Court, and three Code made by Acts 293 and 295 of 1974. These major revisions of important civil procedural changes include an increase to $10,000.00 in the subjects are under active review. A summary of amount which can be paid for the benefit of a these activities follows: minor or incompetent without the appointment 1. Rule 3129 governing Notice of Execution of a guardian, including actions for wrongful Sale of Real Estate death; the introduction of the "sequestered Rule 3129, prior to its amendment, pro deposit" account up to the insured limits in vided for notice of sale by posting and publica insured savings and loan associations and an tion only. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania enlarged definition of incompetent. in its initial opinion in Luskey v. Steffl'on, Inc., 6. Rules 1071 et seq. governing Replevin and .461 Pa. 305, 336 A.2d 298 (1975) held the Rule 3001 governing Transfer of Judgments absence of a separate notice of sale to the Rules 1071 et seq. governing the action of defendant in the execution violated the due Replevin, effective October 1,1975 were com process clause of the United States Constitution. pletely rewritten to meet the requirements of The rule 'was amended to correct this defi due process as stated by the United States ciency. It applies only to writs of execution Supreme Court in Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. issued after November 6, 1975. 67, 92 S. Ct. 1983, 32 L. Ed. 2d 556 (1972) and Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co., 419 U.S. 600,94 S. 2. Rules 2981 to 2986 governing the Action Ct. 1895, 40 L. Ed. 2d 406 (1974). Writs of Required by Section 407 of Act No.6 of replevin are abolished. The rules provide for 1974 (41 P.S. §407) notice and hearing before any seizure of goods Section 407(a) of Act No. 6 of 1974 is authorized. Normally the seizure follows a provides that, as to a residential mortgage, a hearing after the action is commenced but plaintiff shall not have the right to execute on prejudgment seizure in certain- limited situa the basis of any judgment on confession until he tions without prior notice is provided. follo'ws the procedures provided by the Rules of The definition of "judgment" in Rule 3001 Civil Procedure. He must file an appropriate was amended to permit the transfer of a judg action and proceed to judgment as in any origi ment in replevin to another county if the goods nal action. are in that county. 3. Rule 1018.1 gov.erning the Notice to Defend 7. Amendment to Rule 3123{a) governing Rule 1018.1, effective July 1, 1975, Debtor's Exemption requires a Notice to Defend on all complaints Hule 3123(a) was amended effective other than complaints in confession of judg June 23, 1975 to conform to the opinion of the ment. The notice contains relevant information Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Mayhugh v. as to the defendant's rights together with spe Goon, .460 Pa. 128,331 A. 2d452 (1975) invali cific reference to the agencies which can make dating contractual waivers of a debtor's exemp available legal assistance if needed. tion. 29 tice Act of 1975 left to the Civil Procedural BuIes 8. Amendments to Rules 1 to 13, 51, 52, 76, 202, pretation problem noted by the Court in conduct of class actions are in process of final Committee the implementation ?f proc~dures Commonwealth v. Mullen, 460 Pa. 336, 333 283,223,1044,1461 and 2231 and to various preparation for circulation to the Bench and Bar for appeals to the common pleas court from the Committee Notes A:2d 755 (1975). prior to their submission to the Court. They are malpractice arbitration panel. The Committee These amendments are "technical" in designed to provide the procedure for the flood is working in conjunction with the Health Care 4. Examination and Challenges of Trial nature. Except for Rules 1 to 13 they involve no of class actions expected in our courts following Administrator, so that rules governing appeals Jurors (Rules 1106, 1108) substantive changes. Obsolete references in recent decisions of the United States Supreme can be issued in connection with the proposed Former Rules 1106 (Voir Dire in non-capital Rules and Notes to now non-existing courts Court. That Court has limited such actions in the regulations to be issued by the Health Care cases) and 1107 (Voir Dire in capital cases) 'which were abolished by the new Judicial Federal Courts to cases in "vhich there is both Administrator for Arbitration Procedures. were combined substantially and restruc Article were deleted. Statutory references were diversity of citizenship and each individual In addition to the activities noted above, thr tured to provide for one Rule with two sepa made current. Rules 1 to 13 were deleted since member of the class has a claim in excess of rate voir dire options-an Individual Chal appeals from administrative agencies covered Committee, also during the course of the year, $10,000. has considered numerous suggestions for lenge System and a List System of Chal by these Hules now go to the Commonwealth lenges. In addition, Rule 1108 (relating to Court. (b) Revision of the Rules of Civil Proce amendments from the Bench and Bar, answered dure Governing Deposition and Dis innumerable inquiries concerning the BuIes of alternate jurors) was restructured to allow for 9. Amendments to Rules 1092, 1112, 1503 and covery. Civil Procedure and has carried out a number of more than two alternates, if these became 2103 Proposed amendments completely miscellaneous assignments from the Supreme necessary in the judgment of the trial court. These amendments, governing venue, revising the rules on deposition and discovery Court dealing generally with judicial adminis 5. Sentencing Proceeding& (Chapter 1400) effective June 24, 1976, "technical" in nature, adapting the Pennsylvania procedure to the tration as distinguished from specific rules of After careful study, certain pmtions of the made necessary by the transfer of exclusive recent amendments of the Federal Rules of civil procedure. Sentencing Code of 1975 deemed procedural jurisdiction in certain instances to the Common Civil Procedure are in process of completion for in nature were suspended as inconsistent with CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL RULES wealth Court in actions against the Common circulation to the Bench and Bar prior to their this Chapter. At the same time, Hule 1406 was wealth or its agencies. The amendments remove submission to the Court. COMMITTEE amended to delete a paragraph felt to be obsolete references to the Dauphin County 12. Future Work During the calendar year 1975, the Criminal more properly statutorily covered by Section Common Pleas Court in which such actions The Committee presently has an enor Procedural Rules Committee continued to ana 1357 of the Sentencing Code. were originally brought before the establish lyze and expand the Rules of Criminal Proce Rule 1401 was amended to allow, in certain ment of the Commonwealth court. mous workload and in addition to its regular work has under active consideration the follow dure and to propose reviews in response to instances, sentences to be imposed by a judge 10. Recommendation No. 40, Proposed ing major subjects: need. In addition to particular rule revision, the other than a trial judge. Amendments to Rules of Civil Procedure Committee undertook broader general studies In view of new appellate rules on the (a) Revision of the Rules Governing of the areas of preliminary and pretrial proceed subject, the Supreme Court, on its own 205.1,221 and 227.1 Foreign Attachment. These important revisions being circu ings, A.R.D., prompt trial, and the institution of motion and after communication with the The United States Court of Appeals proceedings in summary and court cases. Committee, suspended Chapter 1600 (In lated to the bench and bar for comment and for the Third Circuit in a unanimous decision, Numerous additional studies are in progress. Forma Pauperis) and amended Hule 6001 suggestion make significant changes in present ] onnet v. Dollar Savings Bank, et aZ., practice as follows: The following Rules and amendments were (relating to transfer of cases fronl Municipal 530 F. 2d 1123, (1976), declared the historic promulgated by the Court upon the recommen Court to Common Pleas, in Philadelphia). (a) New Rule 205.1 is added authorizing practice in foreign attachment unconstitutional. filing by mail with the prothonotary, sheriff or dation of the Committee: A major aspect of the Committee's function Our rules must be amended to correct the due is its liaison with other organizations and other officers of papers not requiring prior process deficiencies pointed out by the court. 1. Instituting Proceedings in Summary Cases action by or signature of the judge. It is designed (Chapter 50) individuals in the criminal justice system. The (b) Declaratory Judgments. to facilitate the statewide practice authorized These Rules, representing a total restructur Committee is not empowered to render advi by Rules of the Supreme Court and to suspend The addition of a new chapter of ing of the citation and summons system, were sory opinions interpreting the Rules, but with rules on declaratory judgment which is pres local rules requiring personal presentation. promulgated by the Court in 1974; however, that limitation, does attempt to further under (b) Rule 221 is amended to authorize the ently not governed by rule is under active con standing of the Rules. sideration. in order to provide for substantial prepara court to achieve a fair dish'ibution of peremp tion time by law enforcement and court The Committee has had various occasions to tory challenges where the number of parties on (c) Appeals from Local Administrative work co-operatively with the Administrative Agencies. administration personnel, the effective date each side entitled to the present four peremp was extended until September, 1975. Amend Office of Pennsylvania Courts and other Com tory challenges are unequal. The Local Administrative Agency ments also were made in response to changes mittees of the Supreme Court. Committee Law of 1968 which provides generally for (c) Hule 227.1 in the substantive law. representatives have continued to meet with This proposed new rule provides a appeals from local administrative agencies particular individuals apd court group represen uniform 10-day period for filing post-trial where no appeal is specifically provided by 2. Instituting Proceedings in Court Cases tatives in order to discuss matters of concern motions after non-jury and equity trials. No statute contains no procedural provisions. (Chapter 100) and viewpoints. Additionally, extensive corres uniform time limit exists under present local These must be provided by rule. Further, where Amendments were made In this Chapter to pondence has continued with the many inter rules and the time varies from four to t'vventy appeals are authorized by statute there is a lack parallel the Chapter 50 amendments (above), ested persons throughout the Commonwealth days in various counties. of uniformity among the multitude of statutes as and for substantially the same reasons. The who have offered helpful suggestions and con to time for appeal and as to methods of proce amendments also take into consideration 11. Amendments and Revisions in Process structive criticism. Finally, where appropriate) dure. This has led to suggestions for a uniform changes in arrest powers made by substantive the Committee has tried to maintain contact (a) Hules of Civil Procedure Governing set of rules, Clrafts of which are under active law. Class Actions. with those individuals in the Executive and consideration. Legislative branches responsible for imple Proposed rules providing a com 3. Preliminary Hearings (Bule 141) (d) Medical Malpractice Arbitration. H.ule 141 was amended to address the inter- menting and initiating action in the area of plete procedure for the commencement and The Health Care Services Malprac- 31 30 criminal justice, in an attempt to avoid duplica by the Court on June 30, 1975, to become effective date was deferred until November 15, tion of efforts. cases. This action was taken by the Committee by mail ballot, as an emergency matter, to effective immediately. Although the changes to 1976 to allow further time to consider sugges The Committee maintained its analysis and accommodate a change in the United States Hules 481 and 482 were technical, the amend tions and recommendations by legislators and supervisory project relating to local court rules, Postal regulations, effective March 1, 1975, ments to Rules 407 and 409 were in response to constables' associations. compiling a complete record and catalogue of whereby registered or certified mail could no the case of Mauhugh v. Coon, such rules, 1\1ore extensive efforts are planned to longer be marked by the legend "deliver to 460 Pa. 128,331 A. 2d 452 (1975) \vhich held that THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON APPEL review the local rules for compliance with the addressee only", a new "restricted delivery" a debtor's ,'ltatutory $300 exemption (12 P:S. § LATE COURT RULES statewide Rules of Criminal Procedure. system having been adopted which would per 2161) cannot be waived by the debtor, eIther Throughout 1975, the full Committee met expressly or by implication. The Advisory Committee on Appellate Cou~t mit delivery to an agent of the addressee as well Hules was created by the Supreme Court 111 seventeen meeting days. Additionally, subcom as to the addressee personally. This amendment At a regular meeting on December 19, 1975, mittee meetings and extensive regular Staff the Committee recommended amendments to October, 1973. The Committee was charged was adopted by the Supreme Court on March with the responsibility of making a compl~te meetings were held. The Cqmmittee's practice 26, 1975, to become effective March 31, 1975. Hules 307 315,402,403,412,506,507,508,801, of extensive preparation .for each meeting was 808, 816 ~nd 1009 of the Hules of Civil Proce~ review of the practice in the Supreme, Supenor continued by the Staff preparation of extensive At a regular meeting of the Committee on dure for Justices of the Peace. These amend and Commonwealth Courts. In May, 1975, the written research materials on each agenda item. March 21, 1975, the Committee recommended ments were approved by the Supreme Court on Committee submitted to the Supreme Court a In 1975, Joanna K. Weinberg, Esquire, pre amendments to Rules 4, 7, 15, 101, 112,305,314, January 29, 1976, to become effective thirty (30) proposed draft of Pennsylvania Hules of Appel viously Staff Counsel, was named as Staff 315,318,324,481,504,506,508,517,1004,1005 days after that date. The amendment to rule 307 late Procedure. As a result of consideration by Counsel and Director of Research and Mark and 1011 of the Rules of Conduct, Office Stand permits the justice of the peace to effect .out-of the Court and questions raisEld by it, revisions to ards and Civil Procedure for Justices of the Lipkowitzs Esquire, joined the Staff as Staff county service in trespass and as~umpsIt ca~es the draft were submitted in September, 1975. Peace, These amendments were adopted by the Counsel. In February, 1976, Stanford Shmukler, by sending a copy of the. complamt fo: serv~ce By order of November 5, 1975 the Supreme Esquire, became Secretary after serving ably as Supreme Court on October 17,1975, to become to a justice of the peace m the county m whIch Court promulgated the new appellate rules, Secretary and Executive Director for several effective ninety (90) days after that date. While 3ervice is to be made, instead of restricting such effective July I, 1976. Many sugg.ested changes some of these amendments were of a technical years. service to deputized service by a sl~eriff as ,,;,as are still being received and consId~red. nature, many of them were to make marked Membership remained unchanged in 1975; previously the case,. although d~putIzed servI?e The new rules represent the fIrst gene;al during the first half of 1976, terms were set for improvements in the justice of the peace sys by a sheriff may stIll be used If thought deSIr revision of Pennsylvania appellate practIce all committee members and four new members tem. For example, the amendment to Rule 4 able. The amendment to Rule 402 clarified the since the enactment of the Practice Act of 1897. were appointed by the Committee. It must be required the wearing of judicial robes by justi procedure for entering a justice of the pe~ce It is noted that Rule 5107 allows for transitional noted that the Committee suffered a tragic loss ces of the peace while conducting hearings and jtidgment in the court of co~mon pleas .. 1 he problems to be dealt with until July 1, 1977. upon the death of Vice-Chairman Martin Vin trials, thus enhancing the dignity of these pro amendment to Rule 412 reqmres the shenff or ikoor in March, 1976. His dedicated service to ceedings. The amendment to Rule 15 contained constable, upon an execution sale of r:ersonal JUDICIAL INQUIRY AND REVIEW BOARD provisions governing the political conduct not the Committee and the Court extended from property, to mail a copy of the ha11(;l12Ill t~ ~he 1962 to his death. only of justices of the peace but also candidates defendant at his last known address, m addItIOn The Judicial Inquiry and Review Board was for that office. The amendment to Rule 314 to the methods of giving notice of sale otherwise created constitutionally by amendments to the permitted reinstatement of complaints in tres Judiciary Article adopted by th~ v.oters in 1968. MINOR COURT CIVIL PROCEDURAL required by the rule. The amendment to. Ru~e This Board is the Supreme Court s mstrumental RULES COMMITTEE pass and assumpsit cases which had been dis 506 requires that service of the complamt m missed without prejudice because of failure of landlord and tenant cases be made both by first ity for managing all disciplinary and compe~ Pennsylvania district justices of the peace, service in the time required by the rules. The class mail and by service upon the tenant or an ency matters involving members of the J ueh like all other classes of judges, are under the ~h<:: amendment to Rule 315 required that a cross adult person in charge of ,the premises, or, if no ciary. As noted elsewhere in this report, supervision of the Supreme Court through its complaint in a trespass or assumpsit action be Board is constitutionally deI;ined and con tams such person is found, by po~ting. This .am.end administrative arm, the Office of the Court filed at least five (5) days before the date set for nine members, of whom there are judges of the Administrator of Pennsylvania, known as the ment was intended to obVIate constItutIOnal the hearing, thus giving the justice of the peace objections raised as to the sufficiency of service common pleas from different judicial districts, Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts time to notify the plaintiff or his attorney of the under the former rule. The amendments not and two are judges of the Superior Court, all of the judge members being selected by the (AOPC). Litigation rules are prepared by rules new hearing time and date set because of the specifically referred to above are generally of a committees and submitted to the Court, usually cross~complaint so that the plaintiff will not technical nature. Supreme Court. In addition, there are four n011- on its request. The Criminal Procedure Rules arrive at the office of the justice of the peace judge members, two members of the Bar, and Committee provides this service as to criminal only to find that the original date of the hearing At its December 19, 1975 meeting, the Com~ two 'non-law electors. The four non-judge procedure matters handled by the district justi will be changed to a later date. The amend mittee also proposed a set of thirteen rules to members are selected by the Governor. All of ces. The Minor Court Civil Procedural Rules ments to Rules 318, 324,1005 and 1011 required govern the standards of conduct ~or consta~les. the functions and prerogatives of this Board ar~ Committee, on the Court's request, has pro (Rules 318 and 324) or permitted (Rules 1005 Hules on this subject obviously bemg authonzed minutely spelled out in Section 18 of the J udl- vided suggested texts for promulgated civil and lOll) certain notices and documents to be under the authority of § 10(c), Article V, of t~e ciary Article. , rules since 1969, including also Rules governing given to attorneys of record of the parties. 1968 Constitution of Pennsylvania, the CommIt The following is a report of activities of the Standards of Conduct of Justices of the Peace. tee felt that the time had come to provide a Judicial Inquiry and Heview Board for the year By mail ballot, as an emergency matter, the 1975: On February 27,1975, the Committee sent to Committee decided to propose to the Supreme definite set of standards for constables, ,,,ho are During 1975 the Supreme Court ordered the Supreme Court a recommended amend Court amendments to Rules 407,409,481 and the most commonly used enforcement arm o~ ment to Rule 308 of the Rules of Civil Procedure 482 of the Rules Governing Actions and Pro the minor court system. These new constables action on six cases which are now closed. The Court ordered admonishments in two matters Govetning Actions and Proceedings before ceedings Before Justices of the Peace. These rules were adopted by the Supreme Cou~t on Justices of the Peace. Rule 308 deals with service proposed amendments transmitted to the January 29, 1976, to become ef~ective nmety involving district justices and removed a third district justice from office. Three judges were upon individuals in ttespass and assumpsit Supreme Court on May 1, 1975, were approved (90) days after that date. On Apn115, 1976, the 32 33 .;, 11 I admonished on orders from the Supreme Court between the investigator and complainants and 'f of Pennsylvania, since 1972, has had exclusive number of types of dispositions such as dismis and were directed to turn over to the treasury of between witnesses and judges has improve~l the I jurisdiction, subject to Supreme Court review, sals, informal admomitions, private repri t~e ComI?onwealth monies representing cash } quality of the Board's work. However one I to manage all disciplinary matters involving mands, or imposition of public discipline (i.e., . . , ! gIfts receIved by them at testimonial dinners J lawyers in Pennsylvania. Thi~ Board and its public censure, suspension or disbarment). As given in their honor. mvestigator cannot cover the state. Conse- quently, the Board is compelled to be selective I complex and regionalized systems were created of December 31, 1975 there was a total of 901 Two testimonial cases remain open. The with its very limited facilities. The Board is ,; by a comprehensive set of rules promulgated by active complaints on hand requiring further judges were admonished on orders from the forced to refer certain investigations to the 'I the Supreme Court on March 21, 1972, pursuant action. New complaints averaging around 150 Supreme Court and have paid some of assess Pe~nsylvavania Department of Justice, the to constitutional power granted to the Court in in number continue to be received each month. ments levied, with balances being paid off in the Judiciary Article as amended in 1968. This On a cumulative basis over the period of The installments. offIce of the State Court Administrator, and to others. The Board is increasingly feeling the II','!! innovative Board, although its members are Disciplinary Board's active operational exist Two district justices charged with criminal need to expand its investigative staff. appointed by the Supreme Court, maintains a ence from November 1, 1972 through offenses are under interim suspensions entered The Board is continuing to meet excellent separate status, free from all branches of the December 31, 1975, there have been 5,467 by the Supreme Court on the Board's recom 'lI State Government. Indeed, it accepts no State complaints received of which 4,566 have been mendation. c.ooperation from judges, including district jus l tlCes .. However, occasionally there are unseemly funding, but derives its operating funds solely finally disposed. The Board instituted formal proceedings in from registration fees paid by the lawyers annu reactIOns to Board investigations. Most of these l, the following tabulation presents a summary 1975 against certain district justices and judges. arise from a lack of appreciation of the vital I ally as licensing charges. of disciplinary actions for the various periods Hearings were held during the year and oral importance of a single agency commissioned to r During 1975 there were 1,761 complaints indicated: argument was heard before the Board in some 1 received and 1,716 which were disposed of by a receive complaints and to process them to the 11-1-72 1-1-74 1-1-75 of these cases. The Board, in such matters files H to 10 to proper conclusion. Admittedly the number of f f Cum. its Report, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of judges who should be deprived of office by f'f 12-31-73 12-31-74 12-31-75 Tolal Law with the Supreme Court. (A) Disciplinary Cases: compulsory r~tirement, suspension or perma II, I Of the many open cases, two matters con nent removal IS small. However, such action is 11 1. Informai Admonitions 37 81 71 189 cerning district justices and one matter concern e.ssential to improve the administration of jus 2. Private Reprimand o 6 8 14 ing a judge are awaiting hearing. Formal tIce. Informal admonishments and censures 3. Public Censure o 2 5 7 11 4. Suspensions charges are being prepared in one case involv have proved to be useful implements toward 3 12 12 27 a justice and in one case involving a 5. Disbarments 3 4 6 13 ~ng dis~ric~ ~he . san;-e purpose. Every judge meting out II Judge. Fmdmgs of Fact and Recomrrlendation JustIce 111 the public forum of the courtroom n Total of Disciplinary are bei~g prepared for filing with the Supreme must realize that he should consider himself Actions 43 105 102 250 Court 111 a case involving a district justice. One U accountable to answer for his conduct to this t (B) Reinstatement Cases: case concerning a district justice is awaiting Board, the constitutionally designated agency decision by the Supreme Court and a case .! 1. Petitions for Reinstatement Granted 1 2 2 5 to investigat~ and report to the Supreme Court. concerning a judge is being held in abeyance 2. Petitions for ReinstatementDenied 1 2 2 5 Most members of the judiciary accept this with 11lJ a,,;aiting outcome. of criminal proceedings. In a proper spirit of cooperation and realize that thIS latter case the Judge has, on his own request, In addition to the above a total of 20 discipli priate discipline in the disposition of a case. the Board is an effective agency for the protec nary matters prosecuted were dismissed after The raw statistics presented above, however, been granted leave without pay and is perform tion of judges unfairly accused. Ij ing no judicial function. hearing and review by the Board. do not present the complete story. Another area of misinterpretation arises out 11 As of December 31, 1975 there were 69 cases In this day of "consumerism" it is imperative Early in the year the Board determined that of a misunderstanding as to the limited author ~i in various stages of formal proceedings which that persons with complaints have some forum its Rules of Procedure adopted June 27 1969 ity of the Board. It is apparently not completely I! had not finally been determined and an addi for the presentation, consideration and disposi should be reviewed. As a result" of a Board understood that the Board only investigates, 1'1 i') tional 20 matters where formal prosecution of tion of their grievances. In many cases, it was study, proposed amendments were submitted hears and makes recommendations to the l' f charges was determined necessary but on which apparent that there had been abona fide misun to the Supreme Court and adopted by the Court S~preme Co~rt and that the Court may accept, filing of petitions for discipline were pending. derstanding or a breakdown in communications on June 30, 1975, effective July 1, 1975. Among reject or modIfy such recommendations, or may tI between the client and his attorney or there had the ch~nges was the creation of an investigating order further investigation. If The burden of considering complaints go~ng been some slight neglect by the attorney and the commIttee empowered to compel attendance There appears to bo :1 need for broader through formal proceedings by the hearing filing 9f the complaint activated the attorney in and testimony of witnesses. No member who dissemination of information to the judiciary so U I committees, the Disciplinary Board and the taking appropriate action which satisfied the has ser,vecl ?n an investigating committee may that the judges may more fully understand ! Supreme Court continues to be a significant client. In such situations, the Disciplinary Board thereafter SIt as part of a hearing committee on ~oard procedmes and realize that Board ques I one in terms of numbers and hours dedicated to Staff serves as both ombudsman and catalyst the same case. Another addition is the allowance tIons, addressed to them in preliminary investi '1 this task. To alleviate somewhat tllis burden, and renders a valuable service to the public and of the .ta~ I ...... ~ .... ------,,------~------~ tatively approved subject to an examination of insurance); Indecent Assault and Exposure; plinary Enforcement and the Board Rules are adelphia on the theory that the Board is "an Official Oppression; Speculating or Wagering being reviewed in an effort to ascertain possibil employer" under Title VII of the Act. The the Health Care Services :Malpractice Ac..~ to see if the Act required any changes or additions. on Official Action of Information; offenses ities of expediting the process without infring Board contends that it is not" an employer" and under Chapter 39 of the Crimes Code (Theft in$ on due process requireIpents. The time lag, that the E.E.O.C. has no jurisdiction over the The Subcommittee approved an instruction on imputation of a driver's negligence to a passen and Related Matters-26 instructions); offenses particularly in cases involving serious charges, Board. under Chapter 43 of the Crimes Code (Offenses between the filing of the complaint and ultimate ger, one on the loaned servant doctrine, an instruction on the duty of care of an owner/oc Against the Family-l0 instructions); offenses disposition by the Board and the court is a under Chapter 51 of the Crimes Code particularly disturbing item. While there had COMMITTEE FOR PROPOSED STANDARD cupier of land, and a draft of the concluding instructions to be given to the jury. A "negative (Obstructing Governmental Operations-20 been tremendous improvement in this respect JURY INSTRUCTIONS instructions); offenses under Chapter 55 of the as contrasted to the inordinate delays which instruction" on assumption of the risk, consist The Supreme Court's Committee for Pro ing of a note on the subject, was reviewed, but Crimes Code (Riot, Disorderly Conduct, and were inherent in the old system, nevertheless the posed Jury Instructions submitted the following Related Offenses-14 instructions). These time consumed in disposing of some of the cases some question remained as to whether the note report: was sufficiently complete. It was decided to instructions were approved by the Subcommit remains continually vexing. tee after changes were made in a number of On the encouraging side of the ledger, it is a 1. Civil Instructions Subcommittee examine the No-Fault Motor Vehicle Insurance Act to see if that Act required changes or them. pleasure to report that the docket of The-Disci On February 9, 1975, the Civil Instructions The Criminal Instructions Subcommittee will plinary Board is completely current. additions to the instructions on damages or their Subcommittee met to consider a number of notes that had previously been approved by the prepare instructions on all important offenses In summary, the disciplinary system, after drafts prepared for the meeting. Eight instruc and matters in the Crimes' Code for which initial "growing pains", is maturing as all had Subcommitttee. tions on agency law were reviewed and gener In addition to the matters still under review instructions have not yet been con1pletecl. hoped to a point of increasing effectiveness. ally approved. However, the reporter was The Disciplinary Board, viewed nationally as a mentioned above, the Civil Instructions Sub requested to rewrite the notes to these instruc committee intends to prepare instructions on 3. Socio-Legal Subcommittee model system, and its members, have assisted tions in accordance with decisions taken at the other jurisdictions by sharing rules, procedures, warranty and punitive or exemplary damages. In 1975, the work of the Socio-LegalSubcom meeting. Also reviewed was an instruction on This will complete the work of the Subcommit forms and experience. res ipsa loquitur drafted in accordance with mittee consisted of a review by the research Gilbert v. Korvette, 457 Pa. 602, 327 A.2d 94 tee. director of the Subcommittee, a psychologist silecializing in communications, of draft (1974). The instruction was approved but it was 2. Criminal Instructions Subcommittee STATE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS determined that the note should be ~·evised. instructions prepared by the reporters of the Civil and Criminal Subcommittees. This review The activities of the State Board of Law At its meeting on June 1, 1975, the Subcom . On February 8, 1975, the Criminal Instruc Examiners during the year 1975 follows: tions Subcommittee met to consider reporters' was for understandability of the instructions by mittee looked again at the agency instructions the average jury member. Some of the resulting For the Bar examination in February, 1975, and approved eleven of them. A draft instruc drafts on the following subjects: Murder (all 370 examinees took the examination und 237 degrees and penalty instructions); Voluntary suggestions were adopted by the General tion on the imputation of a driver's negligence to Reporter and later by the respective Subcom passed, or a passing rate of 64%. For the July Bar a passenger was discussed, and the decision was Manslaughter (as a lesser included offense to examination 1,649 examinees took the examina murder and when charged alone); Arson (var mittee. In 1976, the research director will be made to rewrite it in accordance with the direc assisted by another psychologist, and it is tion and 1,389 passed or a passing rate of 84%. tions of the Subcommittee. The doctrine of ious kinds); Burglary; Bribery (various kinds); Anthony S. Minisi, Esq., of Philadelphia was Threats in Official or Political Matters; Retalia expected that this will enable the Socio-Legal assumption of the risk was debated, and it was Subcommittee to broaden the scope of its func appointed a member of the Board in the place determined that this doctrine probably was tion for Past Official Actions; and a revised of Judge Abraham Lipez, who after fifteen now of very limited application, and a "nega instruction on the defense of insanity. After tions. years of faithful service requested the Supreme considerable discussion and a number of tive" instruction was to be prepared consisting 4. Funding and Administration Court not to reappoint him. - of a note explaining the matter. A draft instruc changes, these instructions were approved by Due to the increasing mobility of lawyers, tion on reckless and wilful misconduct was the Subcommittee. The Supreme Court Committee for Proposed particularly those employed in the Legal reviewed, but a different theory was adopted On June 7, 1975, the Subcommittee met to Standard Jury Instructions is funded in part by Departments of corporations, there has been an by the Subcommittee calling for a redraft. A consider the following draft instructions; an LEAA sub grant from the Governor's Justice increase in the number of lawyers seeking draft instuction on impeachment by inconsist revised instruction on Presumption of Inno Commission. As in the past, the project is admission to the Bar on motion. ent statements was adopted. At the conclusion cence, Burden of Proof, Reasonable Doubt; administered, except for funding matters, by Two actions were brought against the Board of this meeting it was determined that the Justification (11 instructions); Criminal Tres the Pennsylvania Bar Institute. (1) by a patent attorney in the U.S. District instructions previously adopted on products pass (various kinds); offenses tmder Chapter 29 Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. liability would have to be reconsidered in light of the Crimes Code (Kidnapping, False THE JUVENILE COURT JUDGES' He is a patent lawyer employed in Pennsylvania of the decision in Berkebile v. Brantly H elicop Imprisonment, etc.,-16 instructions); offenses COMMISSION by a corporation. He contends that his practice tel' Corporation, Pa. ,337 under Chapter 31 of the Crimes Code (sexual The Commission noted the following activi offenses-8 instructions); offenses under Chap before the U,S, Patent Office in Washington, A.2d 893 (1975). The Subcommittee also ties in 1975: D.C., constitutes practice of the Law outside of decided to take another look at the instructions ter 49 of the Crimes Code (Perjury and Other Falsification in Official Matters-16 instruc Distribution of $1,232,108 to the fifty-six Pennsylvania and should qualify him for admis on professional negligence of physicians which Juvenile Courts of Pennsylvania that follow the sion on motion, and (2) a complaint of discrimi had previously been considered. \,I tions). After a number of changes were made, these instructions were approved by the Sub Juvenile Court Judges' Commission employ nation filed by a Philadelphia attorney on behalf At its meeting on December 14, 1975, the 11 ment and program standards. of certain black and Puerto Rican examinees Subcommittee approved ten instructions on Ii committee. The Commission also distributed $75,351 to who failed the February, 1975 Bar examination. products liability, subject to a change in the note On December 13, 1975, the Subcommittee 1 reviewed the following draft instructions sub twenty-two counties for special projects. These The Complaint was filed with the Equal to the first instruction. Nine instructions on 1 projects involved assisting the local juvenile Employment Opportunity Commission in Phil- professional negligence of physiCians were ten- mitted by the reporters: Arson (intent to collect 37 36 f 1 rli I W courts to program innovative activities to other interested parties. This report systemati improve juvenile probation services. cally analyzes the juvenile court process and MEMBERS OF SUPREME COURT CtOMMITTEES The Juvenile Court Judges' Commission identifies the critical decision-making points, sponsored eleven training programs ranging and provides systematic and objective stand from two to four days duration for juvenile ards to help the court and the juvenile probation AND RELATED COURT AGENCIES probation officers. Three hundred and fourteen officer in the decision-making process. juvenile probation officers were trained in treat Studies of volunteers in probation programs, ment, rehabilitation and the law. juvenile court intake process, and the use of The Commission staff conducted forty nine Masters in Juvenile Court were initiated to field visits. These staff visits included providing formulate standards and recommendations to advisory services to probation personnel and improve the operation and services of these CIVIL PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE judges and conducting comprehensive evalua critical areas. 1103 Western Savings Bank Bldg. Temple University School of Law tions of probation departm~nts and preparing Programs were also commenced to analyze Broad and Chestnut Streets North Broad St. at Montgomery recommendations for program. the training needs of juvenile court judges, and Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 Philadelphia, Pa. 19122 The Commission promulgated the Caseload provide for judicial visitation of facilities for the (215) KI5-6000 (215) 787-7170 Classification and Supervision Appt'Oaches commitment of juveniles adjudicated delin report to juvenile pro bation officers, judges and quent. Philip W. Amram, Esq. Professor James Strazzella Chairman Chairman Washington, D.C. 20005 Temple University Law Center (Appointed Chairman 5/2/58) North Broad at Montgomery Philadelphia, Pa. 19122 John A. Metz, Jr., Esq. Vice-Chairman Michael J. Collins, Esq. Hon. Fred W. Davis Hon. F. Joseph Thomas F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Esq. William H. Eckert, Esq. Hon. C. Thomas Cates Richard Henry Klein, Esq. Hon. Thomas D. Gladden Philip H. Strubing, Esq. Charles B. Jarrett, Esq. Morton Meyers, Esq. Frank P. Lawley, Jr., Esq. Charles H. Welles, III, Esq. Abraham J. Brem Levy, Esq. John C. Cent, Esq. Carol Los Mansmann, Esq. Philip Price, Esq. Carlton M. O'Malley, Sr. Stephen M. Feldman, Esq. Hon. Max Rosenn Judd N. Poffinberger, Jr., Esq. H. David Rothman, Esq. Hon. Dale F. Shughart Hon. Robert I. Shadle Hon. Albert E. Acker Bernard L. Siegel, Esq. Herbert Fishbone, Esq. Hon. Robert Van der Voort Hon. John J. McLean, Jr. Leroy S. Zimmerman, Esq. Rod J. Pera, Esq. Hon. Lawrence Prattis Stanford Shmukler, Esq. . Secretary and Executive Director Sidney Schulman, Esq. 12th Floor, 1314 Chestnut Street Executive Director Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 1103 Western Savings Bank Bldg. Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 Joanna K. Weinberg, Esq. Staff Counsel & Research Director Hon. Ruggero J. Aldisert Temple University Law Center Consultant to Committee North Broad St. & Montgomery Ave. Philadelphia, Pa. 19122 38 39 MINOR COURT CIVIL PROCEDURAL JUDICIAL INQUIRY & REVIEW BOABD STATE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINELS JUVENILE COURT JUDGES' COMMISSION* RULES COMMITTEE 2010 Two Girard Plaza, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102 (215) LO 4-1724 Robert W. Lentz, Esq. Hon. J. Sydney Hoffman Chairman Hon. William W. Lipsitt Chairman Chairman West Chester, Pa. 364 City Hall Desmond J. McTighe, Esq. Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 Hon. R. Paul Campbell Anthony J. Giangiulio, Esq. Chairman 11 E. Airy Street Hon. Albert E. Acker Vice-Chairman Hon. William F. Cercone Norristown, Pa. Norristown, Pa. 19401 Hon. Fred. P. Anthony Vice-Chairman Hon. John J. Brosky Hon. Richard DiSalle Kenneth P. Christ-!11an, Esq. Justin M. Johnson, Esq. Hon. Edward H. Carney Vice-C hairman Hon. Abraham H. Lipez Frank T. Hazel, Esq. Hon. Robert A. Wright Hon. Harvey N. Schmidt William D. Balitas, Esq. Harold E. Kohn, Esq. John W. English, Sr., Esq. Hon. James L. Stern Edward E. Russell, Esq. Homer W. King, Esq. David R. Gold,- Esq. Anthony S. Minisi, Esq. William Penn Hastings James W. Scanlon, Esq. Mr. Christian Zander William J. IviIl, Jr., Esq. J. Donald Plunkett Executive Director \ James Morgan, Esq. Hon. Robert J. Hourigan Towne House Apartments Angelo Skarlatos; Esq. Susan L. Anderson, Esq. Secretary-Treasurer 660 Boas Street Ricardo Calvin Jackson, Esq. Richard E. McDevitt, Esq. Harrisburg, Pa. 17102 Charles D. Agresti, Esq. Executive Director Ms. Frances A. Williams 3 Parkway, 20th Floor Assistant Secretary Gilbert G. Ackroyd, Esq. Philadelphia, Pa. 19102 °The Commission members are appointed by the Governor Acting Secretary from names of judges submitted by the Chief Justice. P. O. Box'1027 104 South Street Harrisburg, Pa. 17108 LAWYERS' DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF PENNSYLVANIA ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROPOSED STANDARD JURY APPELLATE COURT APPELLATE COURT RULES J. Leonard Ostrow, Esq. INSTRUCTIONS COMMITTEE NOMINATING COMMISSION Chairman Erie County George J. Barco, Esq. James A. Montgomery, Jr., Esq. Chairman Chairman Chief Justice Benjamin Jones Alexander Unkovic, Esq. 357 Center Street Chairman Vice-Chairman P. O. Box 497 464 City Hall Arthur Silver blatt, Esq. Meadville, 'Fa. 16335 Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 Vice Chairman Henry T. Reath, Esq. Thomas J. Foley, Jr., Esq. James E. Beasley, Esq. George C. Burgwin, III, Esq. Daniel J. McCauley, Jr., Esq. William C. Archbold, Esq. Hon. R. Paul Campbell Bernard G. Segal, Esq. Robert S. Ryan, Esq. John J. Aponick, Jr., Esq. Hon. Homer L. Kreider Nevin Stetler, Esq. Carroll F. Purdy, Jr., Esq. Dennis C. Harrington, Esq. Hon. Loran L. Lewis Roberta Scott Ehrenberg William H. Lamb, Esq. Charles V. Henry, III, Esq. Hon. Abraham B. Palmer Edward Popil William B. Ball, Esq. John C. Anderson, Esq. Hon. Frank L. Pinola Frank Pasquerella Russell J. O'Malley, Esq. Hon. Samuel Strauss John M. McLaughlin, Esq. Mrs. Nan M. Cohen Joseph G, Feldman, Esq. Wendell G. Freeland, Esq. Secretary Milford J. Meyer, Esq. Bernard M. Borish, Esq. Sixth Floor, 100 Pine St. Hon. James R. Cavanaugh Raymond Pearlstine, Esq. P. O. Box 806 Martin H. Belsky, Esq. Gerald Gornish, Esq. Harrisburg, Pa. 17108 David B. Fawcett, Jr., Esq. Gilbert G. Ackroyd, Esq. James F. McClure, Jr., Esq. Attorney Registration Fee Inquiries Secretary Administrative Office of Pennsylvania P. O. Box 1027 William E. Zeiter, Esq. Courts 104 South Street Executive Director (215) 567-3071 Harrisburg, Pa. 17108 40 41 PHILADELPHIA TRIAL COURT LIAISON COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION PENNSYLVANIA CONFERENCE OF JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF PENNSYLVANIA AFFECTING THE JUDICIAL BRANCH NOMINATING COMMISSIQN STATE TRIAL JUOGES Han. Herbert S. Levin Hon. Benjamin R. Jones SUPREME COURT MEMBERS Chairman Han. Edwin E. Lippincott, II Chairman President 464 City Hall Han. Samuel J. Hoberts 1401 Walnut Street Philadelphia, Pa. 19102 Delaware County Courthouse Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 Han. Thomas W. Pomeroy, Jr. Media, Pa. 19063 Han. Hobert N.C. Nix, Jr. Carol L. Ackerman Hon. Michael J. Eagen Zygmunt Bialkowski, Esq. Hon. Richard P. Conaboy Vice Chairman Dr. William P. Garvey 1st Vice-President it Churchill Kohlman Lackawanna County Courthouse Hon. Alexander F. Barbieri HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE MEMBERS Scranton, Pa. 18503 Secretary , ~ . \ Han. Norman S. Berson, Chairman, Judiciary Committee Hon. J olm G. Brosky Hon. Joseph R. Glancey Han. William H. Eckensberger, Jr. Chairman, 2nd Vice-President Hon. James S. Bowman Law and Justice Committee 645 City-County Bldg. Ricardo Calvin Jackson, Esq. Han. Anthony J. Scirica, Member, Judiciary Committee Pittsburgh, Pa. 15219 Han. Henry Ellenbogen . Hon. James B. Dwyer Han. W. Richard Eshelman Richard Henry Klein, Esq. SENATE MEMBERS 3rd Vice-President Hon. Richard DiSalle Berks County Courthouse Bon. Clinton Budd Palmer Han. Louis G. Hill, Chairman, Judiciary Committee Reading, Pa. 19607 James StrazzelIa, Esq. Hon. Henry G. Hager, Member, Judiciary Committee Han. Robert Lee Jacobs Han. James R. K ell <::y, Chairman, Hon. Charles G. Sweet Gilbert J. Helwig, Esq. Law and Justice Committee Secretary Washington County Courthouse PHILADELPHIA JUDICIAL COUNCIL Washington, Pa. 15301 Hon. William W. Caldwell Lewis H. VanDusen, Jr., Esq. Treasurer ORPHANS' COURT RULES COMMITTEE Chairman Dauphin County Courthouse Harrisburg, Pa. 17101 M. Paul Smith, Esq. Han. D. Donald Jamieson Chairman Han. Ethan Allen Doty . 60 E. Penn Street Han. Charles Klein Norristown, Pa. 19401 Han. Frank J. Montemuro, Jr. Han. Joseph R. Glancey Han. Hugh C. Boyle Han. John J. McDevitt, III Han. Abraham H. Lipez Han. James L. Stern Han. Charles D. Copeland Han. Edward J. Bradley Han. Edmund S. Pawelec Marvin Comisky, Esq. William H. Eckert, Esq. Louis J. Goffman, Esq. Cuthbert H. Latta, Esq. David Berger, Esq. William McC. Houston, Esq. John R. McConnell, Esq. Francis E. Shielqs, Esq. Henry T. Reath, Esq. F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Jr., Esq. Nathan 4. Posner, Esq. 42 43 , ...f' ' PART I~' Appellate Court Statistics I , . 1 J I! ! I I I 1 l 1 I! rl ,;i I t-I rJ ! i ',1 t f ! 't 1 1 '\ .f I I rl n! I! "J I f t :;i J t I ______1_' ______'" i'~~ __"""""""""""""""""'~"~"'-J:""i'-V ~~~~====~ '.1 ... _. ______~-~'77 •. ;;:;_r _ •• ~ _5- ~ ~ ~l~:_,_ ~ ______~ ______~~_. ~. ~~ PART IV . SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYlVANIA CHIEF JUSTICE Benjamin R. Jones ." ...... Wilkes-Barre JUSTICES Michael J. Eagen ...... Scranton Henry X. O'Brien ...... Pittsburgh Samuel J .. Roberts ...... Erie Thomas W. Pomeroy, Jr...... Pittsburgh Robert N. C. Nix. Jr...... Philadelphia. Louis L. Manderino ...... Mone'ssen COURT ADMINISTRATOR OF PENNSYLVANIA Alexander F. Barbieri ...... : ...... Philadelphia PROTHONOTARY Sally Mrvos ...... :...... Philadelphia Pittsburgh Harrisburg 47 ,----- ,-" I"., , " STATISTICAL REPORT SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 1971 - 1975 OFFICE OF PROTHONOTARY NO. NO. DAYS NO. CASES PETITIONS PETITIONS ALLOCATUR APPEALS COURT HEARD NO. CASES NO. CASES OPINIONS WITH M.P. FOR PETITIONS YEAR DISTRICT FILED CASES ARGUED SUBMITTED FILED a NUMBERSb ALLOCATURc GRANTED 1971 Eastern 492 38 244 61 599 577 430 93 Western 212' 12 95 20 103 233 30 Middle 59 4 34 13 35 39 4 TOTAL 763 54 373 94 737 702 127 1972 Eastern 514 35 265 65 247 613 413 94 Special Session 3 12 Western 176 8 90 15 124 177 216 35 ,.,.. Middle 71 3 24 11 26 76 34 11 cc TOTAL 761 49 391 91 397 866 663 140 1973 Eastern 523 36 237 72 406 854 435 38 'Western 169 11 117 21 149 173 175 30 '1'7 Middle 48 3 18 6 47 77 VI 10 TOTAL 740 50 372 99 602 1104 647 78 1974 Eastern 598 43 352 80 457 1079 414 79 Western 218 9 98 17 139 208 197 26 Middle 67 4 40 8 31 120 53 3 TOTAL 883 56 490 1::')5 633 1407 724 108 1975 Eastern 605 32 246 83 389 1026 552 52 Western 156 10 88 17 137 304 252 32 Middle 67 3 28 --5 35 70 64 6 TOTAL 828 45 362 105 561 1400 868 90 (a) All-not broken down. (b) Petitions with M.P. numbers filed in Miscellaneous & Appeal Dockets. (c) Figures does not include Petitions for Leave to File l)etition For Allocatur or Petition for Reconsideration, 1971-1973, 0 m ::n G) C- ::n G) ::::T Q.. 0 ~ 0 Pl 0- :E en 0- ::!. 3 CD I c Al' '< CD I» (\) ~ -< Q.. ~ ::J ...... -+ ~ (J) 3 3 ::J 0 Q.. < CD r » Pl :-n '< CD 0:: OJ ::J ?> CD 0 I I (J) Q.. -0 C- ~ O ~ CD 0 Pl ""0 CD ~ -. Pl .-+ :. CD Pl ., o· 0 -. 0 A ::J CD SO 0 0 (J) ..... 3 ::J < ::J Pl 0- (J) ::::T 0 C- CD (J) ::J== - .,0 =-' ::J CD C- ..... =-' cC'I:I -C m a:::c -c :::c -c :::c ~ :::c m Q Q C'I:I -i C ::z: c:... c :::c ,.,.. 0 c m -i .. -.. _...... -0 -0 -0 :::r ::::T ::g -0 -0 ::::T Pl Pl ..... ;::;:..... ;:;:..... Pl 0. 0. (J) (J) (J) 0. 0 » CD CD 0- 0- 0- CD ll,>; ~, 5- ""0 ""0 C., .,C .,C ""0 ::!. . :::r ::::T Cij' Pl co co co ::::T =' Pl Pl :::r :::r ::::so Pl co 0. i,~ l~ '~ & .' STATISTICAL REPORT SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 1971 - 1975 OFFICE OF PROTHONOTARY IIIt NO. NO. PETITIONS NO. DAYS NO. CASES NO. CASES NO. CASES APPEALS FILED (inc!. COURT HEARD ORAL SUBMITTED OPINIONS II,j YEAR DISTRICT FILED Misc. Docket) CASES ARGUMENT ON BRIEFS FILED IJ 1971 Philadelphia 1719 3618 26 429 403 522 I\' ,J Harrisburg 96 109 .1. 18 42 55 ,,'III tl Pittsburgh 522 283 10 190 155 409 TOTAL 2337 4010 37 637 600 986 I':~ ,I 1972 Philadelphia 1849 3927 26 450 325 770 Harrisburg 110 100 1 16 30 55 I Pittsburgh 474 260 9 202 90 294 ClT I 0 TOTAL 2433 4287 36 668 445 1119 :1 1973 Philadelphia 2017 u 3334 30 534 357 853 Harri~burg 104 119 2 27 28 60 Pittsburgh 549 275 10 225 83 296 TOTAL 2670 3728 42 786 468 1209 1974 Philadelphia 1500 3726 28 522 715 861 Harrisburg 165 319 2 29 44 74 Pittsburgh 538 686 11 245 100 333 TOTAL 2203 4731 41 796 859 1268 1975 Philadelphia 1986 4078 25 538 692 960 Harrisburg 130 169 1 31 56 78 Pittsburgh 880 --1201 13 283 --191 308 TOTAL 2996 5448 39 852 939 1346 (a) NOTE: as of 5/22/73-on Judgment of Sentence-l appeal for as many indictments under the same term filed by Appellant. G) c- c- m G) -I :0 I PJ PJ o. CD ::y 0 PJ CD CD .... 3 :E ::J ::J '< .... 3 PJ CD 0 '< CD CD .... < a. ::J ~ w w a. a;. 0 » (j) .... m X- OJ < CD 9 CD ::J /\ OJ 0 $: w ~ 0 OJ OJ CD Q PJ .... 0 tll ::J c :E ...... ill :0 (') ::J 3 x- ..... 0 CD - CD 3 3 CD .... c- .... tll J. .... CO :"I w (D.... ::y ::J W c- :"I C":) I:) 3: 3: I:) z :E I"n ." >r- ." ::c -t ::c rn ::c Q en -t l:.- e C":) ::c c:: rn Q Q e c:: ClT Q z l-' Z -I ::c Q rn -t en I:.- -t c:: I:) ::c> e ." Q ." -< rn rn ::z: z en - ~ -U CD ::r I I w (j) OJ -U I tll tll ..... ;:::t: tll .... 3 ~ ..... ill ...... 0 CD w 0- :::!. :::!. :::!. ::y (D (D Ul Ul .....::y ...., 0- Ul 0- 0- CD 0 c 0- Ul -0 .... -0 C C C ..... 0 ::J ::y ...... CD ..... co ..... CO co ..... ~ CD ::y tll co j...,-,"' Ii ~ ';': It ,I! .. STATiSTICAL REPORT COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 1971 - 1975 OFFICE OF PROTHONOTARY CASES DOCKETED 1971 1972 1973 1974 ' 1975 Original Jurisdiction 246 241 336 259 273 Appeals from Courts of Common Pleas 449 460 618 545 627 Direct Administrative Appeals 533 611 823 888 1026 27 21 42 Transfers from Other Courts 73 --35 TOTAL 1301 1347 1804 1713 2027 DISPOSITION Cases listed f<;>r argument 596 538 751 910 1128 Cases argued ·'163 388 551 687 870 CTI Continued to future list 131 44 46 65 47 ~ Continued generally 24 Withdrawn or Discontinued 68 62 109 100 187 Remanded, Transferred or Dismissed 45 Dismissed for lack of prosecution 34 44 45 58 33 NUMBER OF DAYS OF ARGUMENT COURT 65 55 51 53 50 Number of .evidentiary hearings, original jurisdiction cases and de novo hearings in ~ -.f., ••• , .... direct administrative appeals 95 106 215 302 263 Number of Opinions handed down involving Current and Prior Year Cases 293 360 494 731 821 CASES DISPOSED OF AS FOLLOWS: By Opinions 141 494 731 821 Withdrawn, Discontinued and by Order of Court 397 393 371 436 ~ c- n c 0 <9-: 3 -g. __o nnO n :J~ ", C m C 0 :a :I -- -II' :; -t fI)()CZ" < enf» C'D- (D m tI) ------ PART V COURTS OF COMMON PLEAS JUDICIAL CASE VOLUME The number of new cases filed vvith courts of filed in Municipal Court in 1975, and 32,275 common pleas in 1975 was 290,757 for an cases disposed of. The inventory of cases at the increase of 27,398 or 1004 percent over 1974. end of 1975 was 4,258 cases. This 'Nas the largest number of cases filed in the If the criminal case volume of the Municipal system since 1970. Case filings per authorized Court is added to total case volume of courts of judgeships were 1,020 1 in 1975. common pleas, the total case volume is There were 277,812 cases disposed of in 1975 markedly changed.2 Total cases filed in 1975 or 16,083 or 6.1 percent more than 1974. As with then becomes 322,510 (1,071 per authorized filings, this was the largest number of disposi judgeship); 310,087 disposed of (1)030 per au tions since 1970 and rep res en ts 975 1 case disposi thorized judgeship); and inventory of 100,855 I tions per authorized judgeship. cases (335 per authorized judgeship). The inclu 1 I The inventory of cases increased to 96,597 at sion of Municipal Court cases for statistical l. the end of 1975. This was the largest inventory purposes increases filings per judge by 51 cases; !1· of cases reported since 1972 when 96,986 cases dispositions by 55 cases and decreases the \; were pending. The inventory change in the inventory by four cases.3 No attempt has been f: 1974-1975 period was 7,412 cases for an increase made to fix an acceptable limit on filings and !. i of 8,3 percent. Total inventory of pending cases dispositions per judgeship. amounts to 339 1 cases per authorizecljuclgeship. Indictable criminal, domestic relations, juve 1 Based on the 1975 disposition rate of all cases, uile court and divorce cases accounted for 67.7 11 this amounts to approximately 4.2 months of percent of total new cases filed in 1975 ancl66.9 i 1 i I judicial work. percent of total cases disposed of.3 While these f .1 11 The law trained judges of the Municipal cases account for a substantial percentage of Court of Philadelphia have jurisdiction to try new cases and dispositions, they make up 57.7 !I without a jury certain classes of criminal percent of pending cases. On the other hand, offenses which are punishable by imprisonment civil trial and arbitration cases comprise 16.8 of not more than five years, including some percent and 17,1 percent of total new cases and misdemeanor offenses under the .Motor Vehicle total dispositions respectively and account for rI Code, with the right of appeal for de novo 21,0 percent of the total inventory of pending I' t l treatment, and jury trial if desired, in the Court cases. This points up the fact that criminal cases :I of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, in high volume are disposed of in a more timely I,I There are currently 16 law trained Municipal manner than are civil matters. i Court judges. There were 31,753 criminal cases ! .!\ Ilnclucles arbitration and divorce matters which arc handled by ! boarels of arbitration and masters in most jurisdictions. , 2The PhiluCtelphia Municipal Court also handles work done by ·1 District Justices in other counties. It hus regular assistance from i Com mop Pleas judges. \ '3Exclusive of Philadelphia Municipal COllrt. ~ . 55 J JUDICIAL CASE VOLUME-1971-1975 1975 NEW CASES DISPOSITIONS I! TOTAL JUDICIAL CASE VOLUME ", 1971 .1972 1973 1974 1975 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975! FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS T CRIMINAL4 I 60125 61086 56995 60638 70895 54978 57035 57492 60420 64938 11 CIVIL COURTS OF COMMON PLEAS 22201 22235 19293 19597 19959 29967 20145 20478 19134 18629 I ARBITRATION 34463 27985 27782 27812 28902 j 27797 29756 28467 30392 287701 Authorized DIVORCE 28574 31320 33957 35465 38313 Law Popu- % State New Dispo % New 26206 28016 33593 33621 36332 1 County/ JUVENILE Jurisdiction Judges lation Population Cases sitions Cases 29242 24770 27094 35120 39882 I ,•. 28798 24342 27483 33990 38350 i Philadelphia 1,948,609 16.5 % DOMESTIC RELATIONS 44874 35597 37614 41806 47841 I 41231 35788 36927 42133 462371 Common Pleas 81 78,125 77,182 26.9 27.8 ORPHANS' COURT AUDITS 15558 18043 21127 21662 22010 ! 31,7536 32,2756 15275 17908 20963 21756 21677.1· Municipal Court 16 POST CONV. APPEALS 678 547 778 734 Allegheny ,39 1,605,016 13.6 49,727 44,934 Ii.i 16.2 686 500 594 728 CUSTODY :I 15,247 14,567 5.2 5.2 1716 2224 2605 3138 Montgomery 12 623,799 5.3 1758 2069 2538 2977 '1 12 600,035 5.1 11,809 10,220 4.1 MENTAL HEALTH 5448 5505 Delaware 5655 5697 5480 5412 5575 5679 ;\1 :3.5 3.5 ADOPTIONS Bucks 9 415,056 3.5 10,053 9,704 6344 6641 6860 6874 d 6322 6578 6688 6860 ,! Lancaster 4 ,319,693 2.7 7,291 7,187 2.5 2.G MISCELLANEOUS 4162 5466 4536 :1 5361 6512 3942 5263, 4700 4888 6635:\:, Westmoreland 6 376,935 3.2 6,857 5,680 2.4 2.0 TOTALS 239199 240688 243315 2633.59 290757 -- -- -:.! York 5 272,603 2.3 6,663 7,199 2.:3 2.6 228194 232499 244662 261729 277812 II 2.0 ,{ Erie 5 . 263,654 2.2 6,571 5,532 2.3 4Does not include Philadelphia Municipal Court. There were 31,753 indictable cases filed and (16083/614%):\ Dauphin 6 223,834 1.9 6,471 6,274 2.2 2.,3 32,275 cases disposed of in the Philadelphia Municipal Court in 1975. The inventory of cases was Berks 5 296,382 2.5 5,716 4,984 2.0 1.8 4,258 at the end of 1975. 1! ,.t Chester 6 278,311 2.4 5,525 5,194 1.9 1.9 Lehigh 5 255,304 2.2 4,918 4,322 1.7 l.G Northampton 4 214,368 1.8 4,309 3,847 1.5 1.4 Luzerne 7 342,301 2.9 4,268 3,963 1.5 1.4 INVENTORY CHANGE Washington 5 210,876 1.8 3,472 3,540 1.2 1.3 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1974/1975 % Beaver 5 208,418 1.8 3,384 3,201 1.2 1.2 CRIMINALS 28941 32829 27853 26804 27238 434 1.62% Cumberland 2 158,177 1.3 3,277 3,180 1.1 1.2 2,585 1.0 .9 CIVIL 18037 20127 18486 18949 20279 1330 7.02% Cambria 4 186,785 1.6 2,898 2 135,356 1.2 2,758 2,419 .9 ,9 ARBITRATION 20200 18429 17720 15140 15272 132 .87% Blair Fayette 4 154,667 1.3 2,743 2,.329 .9 .9 DIVORCE 9512 12816 11805 13649 15630 1981 14.51% Lycoming 2 113,296 1.0 2,730 2,235 .9 .8 JUVENILE 3284 3712 3258 4388 5920 1532 34.91% Lackawanna 5 234,107 2.0 2,631 2,320 .9 .9 D9MESTIC RELATIONS 5215 5024 5632 5305 6909 1604 30.24% Butler 2 127,941 1.1 2,610 2,464 .9 .9 ORPHANS' COURT AUDITS 1420 1555 1490 1396 1719 323 23.14% ivIercer 2 127,175 1.1 2,345 2,093 .7 .8 POST CONV. APPEALS 186 217 401 407 6 1.50% Schuylkill 5 160,089 1.4 2,249 2,340 .8 .8 CUSTODY 2 99,665 .8 2,166 1,866 .7 .7 208 354 421 582 161 38.24% Lebanon 2 81,342 .7 1,983 2,013 .7 .1"" MENTAL HEALTH 117 208 288 306 18 6.25% Cnnvforcl 1,761 .6 .6 ADOPTIONS Franklin/Fulton 2 111,609 1.0 1,888 611 670 842 856 14 1.66% .f) . Centre 1 99,267 .8 1,825 1,707 .6 MISCELLANEOUS 22611282112916021479 - 123 - 7.68% Northumberland 2 99,120 .8 1,726 1,515 .G .6 TOTALS 88870 96896 88822 89185 96597 7412 8.31% Clearfield 1 74,619 .6 1,581 1,456 .5 .5 Lawrence 2 107,374 .9 1,542 1,441 .5 .5 Monroe/Pike 2 57,240 .5 1,383 1,565 .5 .6 Columbia/Montour 1 71,662 .6 1,332 1,198 .5 A Bradford 1 57,962 .5 1,291 1,236 .if .4 Indiana 2 79,451 .7 1,275 1,232 .4 .4 5The Inventory of criminal cases In the Philadelphia Municipal Court was 4258 at the end of 1975. 0Philadelphia ~lunicipul Court figures include only criminal court cases which arc n(Jt included in ~tatl'\\'idt, totals. 56 57 ·...... (Continued) 1975 Criminal Case Volume: Criminal case input Even though there was a significant increase in TOTALJUDICIAL CASE VOLUME exceeded dispositions in 1975 by 5,957 cases. At new cases and a lesser increase in dispositions, the end of 1975, the inventory of criminal cases tlie inventory of cases grew by 434 cases or 1.6 FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS was 27,238 reflecting thE' first increase in crimi percent in the 1974-75 period. This was the COURTS OF COMMON PLEAS nal inventory since 1972. There was an increase result of adjustments for the termination of of 10,257 or 16.9 percent in new criminal cases inactive cases, fugitives, etc. By adjusting crimi Authorized filed in 1975 over 1974. There ,vas also an nal cases, an accurate inventory of the status of County/ law Popu- % State New Dispo- % New % increase in dispositions of 4,518 cases or 7.5 active defendant records is presented as shown Jurisdiction Judges lation Population Cases siiions Cases Disp. percent in the same period. beIO\-\': Tioga 1 39,691 .3 1,218 1,142 .4 .4 Armstrong 1 75,590 .6 1,215 1,108 .4 .4 Change Somerset 2 76,037 .6 1,099 951 .4 .4 1971 1972._ --,1973 1974 1975 ---1974/75 -.% Carbon 1 50,573 .4 1,089 1,053 .4 .4 New Cases 60,125 61 086 56,995 60,638 70,895 10,257 16.9% ~vIifflin 1 45,268 .4 1,077 1,133 .4 .4 1 7.5% Adams 1 56,937 .5 1,044 1,049 .4 .4 Dispositions 54,978 57,035 57,492 60,420 64,938 4,518 27,238 1.6% Venango 1 62,353 .5 987 976 .3 .4 Inventory 28,941 32,829 27,853 26,804 431 Greene 1 36,090 .3 952 873 .3 .3 Snyder/Union 1 57,872 .5 908 801 .3 .3 Forest/\Varren 1 52,608 .5 896 865 .3 .3 ~vrcKean 1 51,915 .4 796 631 .3 .2 Clinton 1 37,721 .3 788 749 .3 .3 STATUS OF ACTIVE UNDISPOSED DEFENDANT RECORDS Huntingdon 1 39,108 .3 781 725 .3 .3 1974 Cameron/Elk 1 44,866 .4 781 821 .3 .3 ~ 10,223 38% 9,894 36% Juniata/Perry 1 45,327 .4 742 646 .3 .2 Defendants Not Indicted 13,238 49% 14,044 52% Bedford 1 42,353 .4 674 644 .2 .2 Defendants Indicted-Not Tried Defendants Tried-Not Sentenced 3,343 13% . 3,300 12% Jefferson 1 43,695 .4 649 585 .2 .2 -- Susquehanna 1 34,344 .3 549 537 .2 .2 26,804 100% 27,238 100% Clarion 1 38,414 .3 524 537 .2 .2 Wayne 1 29,581 .3 517 495 .2 .2 A breakdown of the status of all active undis Sullivan/Wyoming 1 25,043 .2 492 465 .2 .2 In the 1974-1975 period, the status of defend ants not indicted decreased by 2 percent while posed defendan~ case records for all counties is Potter 1 16,395 .1 340 329 .1 --.1 defendants indicted-not tried increased by 3 shown for comparative purposes. It should be Totals 285 1l,793,909 100% 290,7576 277,8126 100% 100% percent. This indicates that defendant records pointed out that, in addition to reflecting at are being processed faster prior to grand jury what point each defendant record is being i ! action and on information filed, which means processed by each county, the chart indicates I f that more defendants are in the trial stream. The' how local jurisdictions manage their criminal calendars. 1, quicker processing of defendants may also have f an impact on the increased number of disposi tions in the same period. '1 i r .t ! i I 1 .I, i I 1 I, I ! ! I ·1 \ I 58 ! 59 , If .;j ~~~ .. :~ ;il I (Continued) STATUS OF UNDiSPOSED DEFENDANTS STAT~S OF UNDISPOSED DEFENDANTS WITHIN SYSTEM WITHIN SYSTEM (As of December 31, 1975) (As of December 31, 1975) Defendants Defendants Defendants TRIED NOT Indicted Defendants NOT Counties Indicted % . NOT TRIED % Defendants Defendants TRIED SENTENCED % TOTAL RANI( NOT Indicted NOr Luzerne 39 15% 203 Caunlies Indicted % NOTTRIE~ % SENTENCED % TOTAL RANK 76% 23 2G5 2.'; Lycoming 47 12% 275 69% 74 19% :39() l~) Adams 28 35% 41 51% 11 14% 80 49 McK~n 34 68% 7 14% 9 Alleglll'ny 1,483 41% 1,701 48% 375 11% 3,569 2 50 57 Mercer 111 37% 153 51% 37 12% Armstrong 97 68% 27 19% 18 13% 142 40 :301 26 Mifflin 14 10% 88 64% 36 26% Beaver 120 34% 171 48% 66 18% :357 22 138 41 Monroe 24 29% 43 52% 15 Bedford 145 91% 9 5% 6 4% 160 37 18% 1)2 ·Hi 'Montgomery 501 24% 1,542 72% 82 4% 13 ('rks 168 35% 224 47% 88 18% 480 l4 2J~5 :3 Montour 15 40% 17 46% 14% Blair 166 48% 170 49% 12 3% :348 24 5 :37 ·59 Northampton 248 58% 94 22% 86 20% Bradford 85 34% 96 39% 68 27% 249 29 ·128 Hi Northumberland 191 54% 157 44% 2% Bucks 115 15% 388 51% 25.'3 34% 756 7 8 356 2..1 Perry 51 94% 3 6% 0% Butler 30 13% 125 54% 78 33% 2.'3:3 :30 o 54 56 Philadelphia" . 907 19% 3,154 68% 599 ]:3% Cambria 180 40% 222 50% 46 10% 448 16 ·1,GGO I Pike 36 100% 0 0% 0% :3G GO Cameron 5 100% 0 0% o 0% 5 65 o Potter 29 76% 5 13% 4 11% Carbon 57 84% 6 9% 5 7% ()8 52 38 58 Schuylkill 78 25% 114 36% 123 39% Centrl' 103 76% 0 0% 3.'3 24% 136 :315 25 Snyder .54 74% 18 25% 1 1% 7:3 51 Clll'ster 202 25% 485 61% 107 19% 79·1 Somerset 78 46% 61 36% .30 18% Clarion 88 85% 6 6% 9 9% 103 169 :35 Sullivan 0 0% 7 64% 4 36% Clearfit'ld 130 76% 41 24% () 0% 171 I 11 G4 ! Susquehanna 0 0% 0 0% Clinton 37 62% 8 13% 15 25% 60 o 0% o ()7 I Tioga 121 73% 39 24% .'3% Colulllbia 71 46% 70 45% 13 8% 154 5 lG5 :3() Ij Union 16 26% 33 53% 13 Crawford 159 68% ,14 19% 30 13% 23:3 21% G2 .5:3 Venango 54 24% 167 76% . 221 :32 CUllll){'rlancl 278 75% 12 3% 80 22% :370 o 0% 1 . Warren 70 60% 16 14% 26% 1l() Dauphin 171 33% 303 58% 47 9% 521 12 30 ·1:3 . Washington 104 23% 345 76% 7 Delaware 954 86% 61 6% 88 8% 1,103 ·1 j 2% 456 15 Wayne 40 44% 49 54% 2 2% Elk .'32 100% 0 0% o 0% .'32 61 \. 91 ·W I Westmoreland 387 50% 291 38% 96 12% 774 8 o 0% 541 99% 7 1% 548 11 , Wyoming 30 40% 42 56% 3 4% Fa)'t'ttt' 188 42% 193 43% 66 15% 447 17 75 50 1 York 89 18% 357 70% 61 12% 507 1:3 Forest 2 18% 9 82% o 0% 11 G:3 ! Franklin 69 2.'3% 182 62% 43 15% 294 27 t STATE AVERAGE 36% 52% 12% 1 Fulton 1 4% 22 96% o 0% 2.'3 62 t HDoes not include Philadelphia ~!llnicipal Court. Cr('el)(' 66 75% 16 18% 6 7% 88 47 Huntingdon 42 45% 11 12% 40 43% 93 45 rl. , rndiana 10 7% 135 90% 4 3% 149 39 .,i Jefferson 117 63% 49 27% 18 10% 18·~ .'3:3 Disposition of Criminal Cases: Although There has been a noticeable trend in the Juniata 4 100% 0 0% o 0% 4 6G there was an increase in the number of criminal increased utilization of the Accelerated H.eha Lackawanna 167 28% 346 .59% 78 13% 591 10 cases disposed in 1975, the percentage of cases bilitative Disposition (ARD) program, and con Lancast('r 469 54% 3·10 39% 63 7% 872 5 I disposed by manner of disposition showed little tinuedlimited application of disposition in lieu ! change in the 1974-1975 period. Most cases (47%) Lawrence o 0% 54 92% 5 8% 59 55 of trial. This trend in ARD dispositions is also 11 were disposed of by guilty pleas, while jury apparent in the Philadelphia Municipal Court Lebanon 182 46% 138 35% 73 19% 39.'3 20 t trials accounted for 5 percent of the total dispo System, which handles the majority of ARD Ldligh 146 20% 508 68% 93 12% 747 9 I sitions, with trials without jury, at 12 percent. cases in Philadelphia County. . J I 7]kft'lldant records tl'ans[('rrNI to trial status wlll'11 grand jury abolislH'cI. 60 j 61 '. ". JUVENILE CASES , ' j, Disposition of Criminal Cases by Category Change 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1974/75 ~ (Percent in pm;enthes.es) Filings 29,242 24,770 27,094 35,120 39,882 4,762 13.6% Change 24,342 . 27,483 197'1 1972 1973 1974 1975 1974/75 Dispositions 28,798 33,990 38,350 4,360 12.8% -- Inventory 3,284 3,712 3,258 4,388 5,920 1,532 ,34.9% Guilty Pleas 27,006 26,843 23,874 27,751 30,560 2,809 (50%) (47%) (41%) (46%) (47%) Jury Waived 11,261 12,338 11,257 7,848 8,005 157 Civil Cases: There were 19,959 new civil In the 1973-1975 period there has been a slight (21%) (22%) (20%) (1,3%) (12%) cases filed in 1975, for a slight increase of 362, or decrease in dispositions each year with a corre sponding increase in the inventory. The number Nolle Prossed 8,036 7,643 9,076 8,891 8,410 -481 1.8 percent over 1974. The number of new civil (14%) (13%) (16%) (14.5%) (13.5%) cases entering the system remained stable in the of arbitration dispositions also dc'crt'ased from b 1973-1975 period. In that same period, how 30,392 cases in 1974 to 28,770 cases in 1975 (by b 2,066 A.B.D. 1,407 4,265 6,556 8,662 ever, there was a slight increase each year in the 1,622 cases or 5.3 p(~rcent lc:ss than 1974). There (3%) (7%) (11%) (13%) number of new arbitration cases placed at issue. \vas an increase of .9 perccllt in tlH.' 1975 inven tory of arbitration cases. Tried by Jury 2,397 2,878 2,738 2,937 3,490 553 The number of civil case dispositions in 197,5 (5%) (5%) (5%) (5%) (5%) declined by 505 cases, or 2.6 percent over 1974. Granel Jury Dismissal 3,652 3,454 2,973 3,125 152 (6%) (6%) (5%) (5%) CIVIL CASE TABLES Disposition.in Lieu. of Trial 321 257 -64 (.5%) (.5%) Change 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1974/75 % -658 - Other "Dispositions" C 6,2781\ 2,169 2,828 3,127 2,469 (10%) (4%) (5%) (5%) (4%) -- New Cases 22,201 22,$35 19,293 19,597 19,959 362 1.8% Totals 54,978 57.035 57,492 60,404 64,938 4,534 Dispositions 29,967 20,145 20,478 19,134 18,629 -:505 -2.6% Inventory 18,037 20,127 18,486 18,949 20,279 1,330 7.0% (a) Incl\ldc~ Grand J my ])ismi~sals. {', (b) I!:xclusivc of Philadelphia MUlJicipal Court. (c) Other dispositions include dismissals, withdrawals, transfers to Juvenile Court, demurrers sustained, Pil. H. Crim. P. 315. Disposition of Civil Cases by Category quashed, etc. (Percent of totalin parentheses) 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 Abolition of Indicting Grand Jury: In 1974, Since 1972, the number of grand jury dismis Settlement 9,293 10,031 9,662 9,083 9,371 the citizens of Pennsylvania approved an sals has shown a decline on a statewide basis. In (31%) (50%) (47%) (47%) (50%) 1975, less than 5 percent of total state disposi anH'ndll1l'nt to the Pennsylvania constitution . 3,837 2,157 2,35:3 2,173 tions were grand jury dismissals. It is antici Non-Jury 2,678 providing each Court of Common Pleas with (13%) (13%) (11%) .. (12%) (12%) the option to abolish the indicting grand jury pated that abolition· of indicting grand juries and authorize process by information. Com will speed the processing of criminal cases and Jury Trial 1,993 2,113 1,905 1,857 1,821 mon pleas courts desiring to abolish the indict also provide a significant cost benefit to the (6%) (10%) (9%) (10%) (10%) counties. ing grand jury in a county may do so by petition Settled Before Verdict 1,409 1,233 1,241 1,075 1,40a to I·hc: Supreme Court for approval. At the end (5%) (6%) (6%) (6%) (8%) of 1975, 36 courts had received Supreme Court Juvenile Court: Juvenile court cases are ·855 approval. "counted" \vhen a petition or complaint has Stricken 972 1,335 1,075 959 been filed "vith the court, and as "disposed" (3%) (7%) (5%) (5%) (4%) after a disposition is made by the court. The Transferred to Arbitration 1,452 1,538 1,5,32 ~,:320 Grand Jury Action number of juvenile cases filed with courts has (7%) (8%) . (8%) (1%) increased in the 1971-1975 period, while disposi 1973 1974 1975 ~72 tions have not kept pace with filings, disposi Other "DispqsitiOt1s" 12,463° 1,5Q3., .. 2,935 2,275 1,626 Grand Jury tions have increased by 9,552 cases or 33.2 (42%) (7%) , (14%) (12%) . (H%) Dispositions 3,652 :3,454 2,973 3,125 percent in the period. Inventory of juvenile Total 29,967 20,345 ... -20.,513 19,135 .. 18,629 Percent to cases reached a hig11 peak of 5,920 cases in 1975, which is a percent increase over Total Dispositions 6.4% 6.0% 4.9% 4.8% 34.9 1974. OHe.tJ.t'C:U!}l transfer of 10,655 caSt'S in P.hiladdphia from til{' civil triul'l;~t t() arhitration liS tll(' \'('sult or tlll' i;l('i'l'a~(' to $10.000 in " arbitl'atiort limits, 62 63 I ,.:I '. ;1~t ! . As in past yem's, most (58 percent) civil trial limits to boards of arbitrators. This program Methodology for Reporting Common Pleas nalJusticeStatistics (Form JCJS-30l) by Clerks cases are settled either before trial or verdict. having'its beginning in 1836 in Pennsylvania has Courts Statistics: The Admi11istrative Office of Courts. Settlements are often the result of pre-trial been very successful. It permits courts to devote of Pennsylvania Courts collects statistics from If during the month the sanl(' defendant is conferences in which judges spend long hours their time and attention to the more complex Courts of Common Pleas on three monthly brought into the system under s('parate trans " ' with parties in an attempt to reach an agree and difficult matters. Presently, jurisdiction in reporting forms \vhich are filed with tlw cripts and counted as two cases, but subse ment. The percent of cases disposed of by jury compulsory arbitration is fixed at $10,000 in Administrative Office by the tenth day of the quently both cases are disposed in a single' trial, trial (10%) and trial without a jury (12%) in 1975 counties of the first, second, and second class A, following month. The statistics are compiled by the adjustment is made on the l'c>port. Adjust accounts for virtually the same percentage of and at $5,000 in all other counties. Courts in their representatives in each of the 67 counties. These ments are also used to remove defendants who dispositions in the 1971-1975 period except for a counties do not have to set arbitration limits at forms are prepared by court administrators, cannot be indicted, tried or sentenced within a notable deviation in jury trials in 1971. It the statutory limit. In 1975, Adams and Lacka clerks of courts, prothonotaries and their staffs. reasonable period of time (including those 'who appears on the basis of this analysis that the wanna Counties adopted local rules for arbitra Much of the information, however, is obtained are fugitives, in military service or committed to number of cases disposed in any year, in the tion. Forest, Sullivan and Susquehanna Coun from other related personnel, such as juvenile mental institutions, and thus periodically 1971-1975 period, has had little effect on the ties have not adopted local rules providing for court officers, adult probation personnel, dis removed from the inventory of "active" open percentage in each category of dispositions to arbitration. In these counties, judges must hear trict attorneys, domestic relations court staffs, undisposed cases. (See Pa. H.J .A. 1901 and Pa;' total dispositions. all civil cases, regardless of the amounts at issue. judges' secretaries, and frequently from the H. Crim. P. 1100). In 1975, new arbitration cases accounted for judges themselves. It is through the cooperative At the end of each month the number of un Arbitration Cases: Compulsory arbitration is 59 percent of civil cases placed at issue and 61 efforts of these many individuals that the report disposed "active" defendants is divided into an alternative program which is designed to percent of civil case dispositions. Obviously, of common pleas court statistics is made possi three categories: (a) defcndants not indicted, encompass every civil controversy imaginable without this program, the court systems state ble. The purpose of th e statistical gathering (b) defendants indicted but not tried, and (c) from the court systems and to submit select wide would be overwhelmed by impossible program is to reflect the case volume of the defendants tried but not sentencpd. classes of civil matters within certain dollar civil caseloads. Courts of Common Pleas. The unit of measure The monthly criminal report form also must, of course, be uniform, and provide for the reflects the numbcl' of judges in the report time a case is initiated and when it is terminated month who 'were assigned to try criminal cases, ARBITRATION must be in accordance with standard estab as well as the number of visiting or senior judges Change lished reporting procedures. The methodology so assigned. Each county is required to report 1972 1973 1974 1975 1974175 used for preparing the three rnonth1y reporting the number of "trial days" in the report month, forms-criminal, civil and miscel1aneous-is a trial day being an evidentiary hearing of rec New Cases 27,985 27,782 27,812 28,902 1,097 explained as follc)\vs. ord, as distinguished from judicial time spent on Dispositions 29,756 28,467 30,392 28,770 -1,622 arguments, motions, pre-trial and post-tria1 Inventory 18,429 17,720 15,140 15,272 132 petitions and sentencing. The report is not Criminal Cases: The criminal report form intended to reflect total judicial time spent. designed by the Administrative Office does not require detailed information. It is intended to Divorce Cases: Divorce cases account for a 34.1 percent, while the number of cases dis reflect only the numbers of defendants charged Civil Cases: The only statewide compilation substantial number of cases filed and disposed posed increased by 10,026 cases or 38.3 percent. with misdemeanor and felony offenses, brought of civil caseloads is the one made by the Ad of each year. In 1975, 38,313 divorce cases were The use of masters is optional. They are in into the judicial system, the manner in \vhich ministrative Office. The Office's monthly civil filed (cases are "counted" when master in general use, however, and have provec;l to be an their cas~s are disposed, and the inventory of report form covers specific types of actions, divorce is appointed) and 36,332 cases were effective practice for diverting cases. This acHve defendant case records at the end of each such as assumpsit, general trespass, trespass disposed (final decree entered). In the 1974- procedure has been authorized by Pennsyl month. involving motor vehicles, equity and includes 1975 period, there were increases comparable vania Statutes since 1815 (Act of March 13, 1815, The unit of count used for tabulation is the other less numerous types of triable civil to other increases in the number of cases filed P .L. 150, 6 Sm.L.286 52 as amended). In 1948, defendant. Each defendant involved in a single actions, civil actions such as ejectment, condem and disposed; however, the inventory of such the statutory provisions were suspended abso trial is a separate unit of count, regardless of the nation, mandamus, and statntory civil appeals. cases increased by 1,981, or 14.5 percent. lutely by Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Proce number of indictments or charges. The incep In addition, cases usually "tried" through mas dure. Presently, Rule 1133 contains the control tion of the case for reporting purposes is the ters; such as arbitration and divorce actions, are In the 1971-1975 period, the number of ling provisions for the appointment of docketing of the transcript in the Clerk of included on this form. divorce cases filed increased by 9,739 cases, or masters in divorce proceedings. Courts' office. The case is reported as a disposi Since the vast majority of civil aetiom com tion when the defendant is sentenced, or \vhen menced never reach the h'ial stream, docketed DIVORCE the defendant is acquitted, or has his case cases are not counted until praeciped, or certi dismissed by the grand jury, or nolle prossed. fied as being ready for tria1. Once a case has The sentence is reported solely as a disposition; been so placed at issue, however, it remains Change and the report form is intended to reflect the open and part of the "active" case inyentol'Y . 1971 1972 1973 . 1974 1975 1974/75 Q/o '- .. manner in which the defendant was tried, not until it is tried, settled or transfel'l'ed to an the reslilt. Information as to trial elates, offenses, inactive status. The report reflects only the 31;320 33,957 35,465 38,313 ' 2,848 8,0% Filings. 28,574 representation, ,prior record, fines and. costs, manner in which.the case was disposed: settled, Dispositions 26,206 28,016 33,593. .33,621 36,332 ,2,711. 8.1% probation, commitment, an,d the like, is con tried by jury, stricken, or tried by court without Inventory 9,512 12,816 11,805 : 13,649 15,63D. .J,981 14.5% .' tained in the individual defendant disposition jury. A case initially counted as ready for trial it .. report filed monthly whth the Bureau of Crimi- and transferred to an arbitration panel is con- 65 64 sidcred as a "disposed" civil matter and re~ evidentiary court hearing. It is only counted entered as a "new" arbitration case. once, despite the fact that there may be other Pa. H.J.A. 1901 requires all cases in ",hich related ancillary proceedings. there has been no action for a period of two or The Bureau of Criminal Justice Statistics, in more years to be terminated pursuant to local cooperation with the Juvenile Court JueIges' rules of court. Thus if a civil case i.'\ placed at Commission, has been collecting and compiling issue and no action ,is taken afler a prescribed data on juveniles since January 1969. This pro period, it is removed fron1 the "active" inven gram reflects the activities of each juvenile tory. Docketed cases so removed which were court division of the courts of common pleas. It never "at issue" have no effect on the inventory includes "unofficial" cases as well as "official" since they were not counted initially. cases. The Administrative Office reporting The civil report form a.lso reflects the num bel' procedure, however, includes only "official" of judges assigned and the civil trial days in the cases, those instituted by petition, and which CASE VOLUME BY same manner as provided in the criminal report require an evidentiary hearing and a final adjud [orul. ication hearing. Each such proceeding is con sidered and counted as one case. JUDICIAL DISTRICT, 1975 The same reporting procedure applies to Miscellaneous Cases: This form covers post other miscellaneous actions and, likewise, each FOLLOWS conviction proceedings, juvenile court cases, case is reported when first scheduled for a court domestic relations court cases, custody court hearing. The local county probation offices cases, mental health and adoption petitions, adult, juvenile and domestic relations-are orphans' court audits and other miscellaneous encouraged to maintain detailed statistics and court actions, including criminal appeals from information regarding their internal operations, district justices. 'While the form and reporting but only the judiCial caseload is reflected inlhis procedure is simple, the application and inter report. . pretation by several reporting counties has The miscellaneous form also requires that the proved to be not entirely satisfactOlY for com number of judges assigned to hear "miscellane < ' parison purposes. A new case or defendant is ous" matters be reported each month along with counted when the matter is scheduled for an the total number of "court days", 66 I CRIMINAdAND CIVil CASE VOLUME B)UUDICIAL DISTRICTS 1 . ,------r----r---,--__ t-----r--r---r--+---r----r---r---r--_~ :i ~ ~ ~ ~ Ii: I.;:, ~'" 'q;' ~ #f ;:s ~ <;j ?:t ~ ~ # ~ ~ ~ f1f ~ 11 ii§ ~ ~ tS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .:::>; ~ ~ t; ~ ~I.;:,~~ ~ .::::; .:..; 'q;' ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ & ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .:..; "t' ~ ~ Q::: r..:; ~ C.j Qt ~ ~~ te ~ :s .. '" ~ ~ ~ '" '<: '" '" r------~----r_--r_--+_--+---~--,r---r---r--~--_;--~~--r_--r_~i AUTHORIZED JUDGESHIPS 5 6 5 5)~ 5 6 4 5 5 4 5 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 I---'------l POPULATION 1,948,609 1,605,016 623,799 600,035 415,056 376\935 342,301 319,693 296,382 278,311 272,603 263,654 255,304 J 234,107 223,834 214,368 210,876 208,418 186,785 160,089 158,177 154,667 135,356 127,941 127,175 113,296 111,609 107,374 99,665 99,267 CRIMINAL CASES j r------_;------ir_--r_--+---+---~--~--~--~--_4--_4--~----r_--~~.1 Defendant Records Received 9136 175310399 4120 4072 3652 1919 1285 3421 2025 1811 1861 2083 1548 \ 735 1999 1124 1134 1055 994 729 1005 938 867 654 623 813 684 348 608 613 Defendant Records Disposed 9409 2275 8390 3663 2799 3926 1249 974 3358 1323 1605 1719 1252 1099 651 1800 890 1260 931 780 846 926 720 723 539 489 659 635 337 562 521 by Guilty Pleas 3376 2278 2620 2254 1255 2102 465 573 2660 726 767 949 716 759 299 917 356 524 487 360 413 700 343 424 210 267 377 q93 188 448 343 Tried by Jury 648 N/A 270 169 150 111 31 26 243 108 92 168 68 77 34 121 51 19 120 34 35 31 45 42 41 121 103 53 • 16 12 31 c Jury Waived 2841 7157 3350 44 266 134 45 102 93 6 8 37 3 22 8 152 27 12 26 87 27 33 4 116 6 3 55 31 19 ? 36 Nol Pros 1776 10876 366 324 483 483 208 56 332 60 445 401 155 97 183 23 109 469 151 149 98 117 196 102 37 76 6 118 73 54 71 a A.R.D. 700 119281692 275 645 1038 409 127 3 207 234 36 243 113 90 200 253 221 94 136 269 a 101 22 224 2 92 14 33 33 35 Disposition in lieu of trial 68 0 58 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 22 2 a 7 a a 13 2 a a 31 a! '0 2 3 0 a a a Other "Dispositions" 0 0 92 539 0 50 91 90 27 216 58 128 45 29 37 380 94 15 40 12 4 45 a 17 21 18 23 26 8 13 5 b a a a -322a _82 a a a a a a a a a a a a a Adjustments 717 +195 -1532 -130 1094 O -83 -699 -652 -185 -667 -118 a 0 -179 134 -9 -7 4 -1 -5 -114 _8 a -58 a 86 15 a -119 Grand Jury 55 N/A 1027 141 28 66 148 123 48 26' 52 110 46 54 166 97 I 13 105' 51 23 27 57 76 30 22 70 55 12 28 25 a C 1975 I nventory of Cases 4660 4258 3559 2125 1103 756 774 265 872 480 794 507 548 747 591 680 428 456 ,! 357 448 315 370 447 348 233 301 396 327 59 393 136 1974 Inventory of Cases 4271 4585 4109 1939 952 1096 574 159 940 5031292 660 430 470 673 578 386 553 293 264 455 349 310 348 148 237 355 204 61 372 163 I nventory Change 389 -327 -550 186 151 -340 200 106 -68 -23 -498 -153 118 277 -82 102 42 -97 64 184 -140 21 137 0 85 64 41 123 -2 21 -27 Trial Days 7716 1282 3065 819 555 592 225 260 502 222 . 514 404 117 354 115 364 139 71 181 284 194 48 173 279 77 145 144 100 88 131 75 Visiting Judges-Trial Days 61 670 284 19 123 4 0 0 1 142. 41 o o 41 a 30 12 a 12 37 a 19 a a 22 79 71 4 2 17 1 Civil Cases (Trespass, Assumpsit, Equity & Misc.) New Cases Praeciped forTrial 3804 5088 1129 696 694 1053 539 159 346 538 232 290 419 375 309 371 180 269 254 90 170 206 84 135 174 148 47 135 95 145 Dispositions 4363 3553 881 479 637 682 574 98 312 503 362 2.57 384 352 306 298 165 238 2'17 91 180 103 36 137 152 55 29 110 73 117 by Non-Jury 175 442 62 61 170 18 49 10 128 95 8 . ~~7 87 79 134 31 69 91 107 5 82 a a 27 9 10 8 19 4 20 Jury Verdict 301 250 164 69 61 93 69 20 47 68 10 Ei5 33 74 54 33 11 31 11 29 16 11 5 30 21 19 0 7 10 7 Settlement 633 294 66 72 5 51 58 13 13 10 7 32 12 72 19 5 a 20 9 4 12 a a 11 8 a a a a 2 Hearing - Settled 2962 1872 521 263 358 287 162 49 107 304 47 114 160 127 86 177 83 71 84 28 104 77 28 57 114' 25 20 83 4 74 Stricken 292 66 68: 1 35 35 5 6 7 22 19 79 0 a 52 2 19 4 20 11 11 3 a a a a a 5 12 Other "Dispositions" 0 629 o 13 8 198 231 b o 10 4 289 b o 13 a 13 a a 6 2 5 5 4 a 12 a 1 1 1 50 2 Transfer to ARBITRATION o 698 79 16 77 43 2 7 15 8 2:5 17 34 2 60 11 12 8 a 14 24 8 7 13 2 2 9 a 27 1975 I nventory of Case$ 7856 5337 1096 594 656 488 192 73 97 246 315 114 51 308 28 139 ·87 80 93 o . 40 266 61 92 109 364 39 47 67 14 1974 I nventory of Cases 8415 4500 927 393 676 160 228 14 70 I 226 453 106 33 319 27 126 83 61 64 1 64 187. 21 101 100 273 23 31 45 13 Inventory Change -559 837 169 201 -20 328 -36 59 27 20 -138 8 18 -11 1 13 4 19 29 -1 -24 79 40 -9 9 91 16 16 22 1 Trial Days 2687 1038 359 347 355 59 602 57 68 128 287; 113 153 285 178. 129 38 127 143 63 54 45 5: 77 57 56 112 62 40 23 Visiting Judges-Trial Days 369 o 26 19 4 o 0 o 64 8 0 <0 19 a a 24 1 a 12 30 21 a 10 : 17 38 18 4 1 4 10 Note: Footnotes at the end of chapter. 68 69 ~~f,~ ;\ \. ,") I., .l CRIMINA,IAND CIVIL l " ~ I CASE VOLUME B~I>~UDICIAL DISTRICTS r------,----...,-----r----,-----r------r--;~--,---r--____,__r_---,..iiit . ! ~ ~ ~ is is ~ .~ ~ §j !fj ~ & ~ ~~ ~ is ~t.; fR ~ ~ ~ ::;jif {}J !;} C::' ~ ~ O;f ~ ~!itt ~ ~§j ~ ~~ {Jj ~ .....~ t8 ~I;;;;i ~ q; ~i;j t£ Q:j ~ l§ !§ ~ G ~ 'S ~ ~ c:t c:t '*' C:) $ C:)~ ~ AUTHORIZED JUDGESHIPS 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 POPULATION 99,100 81,342 79,451 76,037 75,590 74,619 71,622 62,353 57,962 57,872 57,240 56,937 52,608 !'I 51,915 50,573 45,327 45,268 44,866 43,695 42,353 39,691 39,108 38,414 37,721 36,090 34,344 29,581 25,043 16,395 F======F===~===F==~====F===~===F===*====F===*===~===F==~==~I; CRIMINAL CASES 1 ~~~--__----~--~--F---~---r--~----r---+----r---+----r---+---~---r--~--~.i Defendant Records Received 580 636 511 363 333 502 359 304 338 258 329 287 338 192 167 194 269. 148 275 271 346 237 237 236 401 157 129 173 70 Defendant Records Disposed 418 730 464 283 266 470 265 309 296 215 247 272 314 152 176 183 322 166 237 249 295 170 209 215 346 153 121 177 58 by Guilty Pleas 284 351· 215 107 118 316 151 35 188 122 154 187 240 1 52 104 74 152 76 155 129 141 112 169 145 171 ~8 8S 130 28 Tried by Jury ! 13 50 i 4 17 13 27 11 13 1 9 39 30 12 1 8 15 29 26 4 4 2 8 11 2 16 26 7 " 2 15 6 Jury Waived 6 4 116 19 a 1 4 o a 1 12 3 8 65 21 23 42 1 2 40 9 13 a 4 2 2 9 3 0 Nol Pros 54 208 50 35 61 60 46 101 58 41 16 20 32 15 15 33 76 27 35 16 67 11 9 28 17 32 13 11 5 A.R.D. 58 100 36 81 64 45 27 130 30 28 19 21 14 8 15 13 18 46 34 24 64 13 18 11 119 12 7 12 14 Disposition in lieu of trial o o a 13 5 3 o 3 o 6 o O· o 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 2 a 2 0 a a 0 1 a Other "Dispositions" 3 17! 43 11 5 18 26 27 19 8 7 11 8 4 6 10 5 11 7 38 4 10 9 11 11 2 5 5 5 a a a Adjustments -133 -52 a -33 -12 -20 -4 -34 -1 -41 -3 -14 a -3 -17 0 -3 17 a 0 0 -9 -36 0 -5 -1 1 0 -12 0 Grand Jury 6 13 22 17 19 26 10 19 23 6 24 8' 14 21 13 9 12 0 7 8 7 2 2 27 17 5 0 6 1 1975 Inventory of Cases 356 233 149 169 142 171 194 221 249 135 118 80 127 50 68 58 138 37 184 160 165 93 103 60 8S 0 91 86 38 1974 Inventory of Cases 333 392 124 139 106 185 114 279 231 139 63 87 120 48 90 59 186 55 153 146 130 64 77 71 51 0 83 108 27 Inventory Change 23 -159 25 30 36 -14 80 -58 18 -4 55 -7 7 2 -22 -1 -48 -18 31 14 35 29 26 -11 37 0 8 -22 11 Trial Days 99 92 92 81 71 85 . 59 84 35 59 173 53 35 43 50 116 99 53 36 48 65 88 24 43 83 34 10 38 7 Visiting Judges-Trial Days 3 a 5 a 26 30 2 o 0 4 o 2 6 6 a 9 2 a 0 24 10 4 2 2 5 a 0 1 15 , Civil Cases (Trespass, i Assumpsit, Equity & Misc.) New Cases Praeciped for Trial 53 99 75 137 70 140. 69 23 89 72 139 34 63 63 49 104 29 106 32 15 41 11 60 27 27 42 71 22 23 Dispositions 39 104 66 109 59 124 61 33 78 39 11B 31 52 49 53 53 33 129 25 11 31 19 63 32 26 27 55 19 21 by Non~Jury 6 37 3 19 1 1 2 4 11 3 18 2 5 0 1 17 2 50 a 0 6 3 2 a 1 a 2 0 a Jury Verdict 5 12 11 8 4 11 8 7 8 4 18 10 7 4 6 7 0 4 5 0 1 6 6 6 4 9 21 2 8 Settlement 0 a ·7 a 0 5 0 a 4 0 5 4' 0 0 1 2 0 2 a 0 1 a 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 Hearing - Settled 26 49 43 48 54 105 45 2 48 31 49 14 15 45 34 23 12 67 16 16 23 9 48 21 14 17 28 9 12 Stricken a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 3 1 1; 1 24 0 7 3 19 6 a 0 0 1 7 2 0 0 0 5 a Other "Dispositions" 2 6 2 34 a 2 6 ~O 4 a 27: a 1 0 4 1 0 a 4 1 a 0 0 3 4 1 4 2 1 Transfer to ARBITRATION 6 2 a 2 5 1 3 a 21 1 8 6 2 I a 11 8 1 1 3 1 4 0 7 2 1 0 1 2 a 1975 Inventory of Cases 49 19 49 111 75 31 71 19 60 112 46 23 ~:! 113 1 126 8 51 20 22 14 4 19 20 18 48 87 17 12 1974 Inventory of Cases 41 26 40 85 69 16 66 29 10 80 33 26 99 22 83 13 75 16 25 8 12 29 27 18 33 72 16 10 Inventory of Cases 8 -7 9 26 6 15 5 -10 -10 32 13 -3 I 9, 14 -15 43 -5 -24 4 -3 6 -8 -10 -7 0 15 15 1 2 Trial Days 33 57 37 38 49 90 18 33 56 15 90 58 20! 41 22 61 33 66 22 0 42 22 20 10 53 24 23 6 9 r---~~~------r---.~--~--r---r---+---+---+---+-~+-~+-~+-~4-~j . Visiting Judges-Trial Days 0 2 0 0 28 5 7 0 11 0 0 1 4 I 4 a 4 1 5 2 a 1 a 2 4 0 0 3 0 6 Note: Footnotes at the end of chapter. I 'I 70 I 71 ------'- -.--.------.. ' - e-.- e .. ~--~ - 1 . --- -. ARB!TRAT!ON, D~VORCE, JUVEN~LE, DOMESTI( ELATIONS, ORPHANS' COURT AND MISCELLANEOUS CASE VOLUME BrUDICIAL DISTRICTS :\ , ,1 , : ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f1; 'J ~ ~ f$ ~ /§ it t: ~" ~ ~ t; f1; ! ~ ~ ~ ;s ~ g ~ ~ ~ # § ~ ~ ?:t ~ ~ ~ ' .i' ARBITRATION, DIVORCE, JUVENILE, DOMESll~LATIONS, ORPHANS' COURT AND MISCELLANEOUS CASE VOLUME rlDICIAl DISTRICTS 'I ! ~------~~~--+--+--~--~-+--+-~--~~r--T--T--'-~'~---r--j---T-~~-T--~--+-~r--+--~--+---~-+ __~~ AUTHORIZE,D JUDGESHIPS 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -I' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 POPULATION 93,100 81,342 79,451 76,037 75,500 74,619 71,622 62,353 57,962 57,872 57,240 56,937 52,600' f 51,915 50,573 45,327 45,268 44,866 43,695 42,353 , i 39,691 39,108 38,414 37,721 36,090 34,344 29,581 25.043 16,395 ARBITRATION j ",j New Cases Added 46 56 52 45 36 20 39 19 50 25 64 13 16! 26 60 8 , 6 27 21 8 25 1 9 22 8 o 3 q 9 ~~D~i~SP~0~S;it;io;n~s~~~~ __4-~2~6~~4~24-~6~2~~49~~3~6~~2~3-r~50~~1~8t-~4~9i-~2~4~~6~8~.~1~0~~16~! 29 43 11 1 28 14 10 23 11 11 17 6 o o 10 14 191'5 Inventory ot (Jases 33 36 20 23 19 5 23 19 13 19 9 3 10 1 4 20 8 48 17 17 5 2 4 1 5 2 o 11 3 r---:j'i;itii'lni;entory of Cases 13 22 30 '27 19 8 34 18 12 18 13 0 10 j t o 3 11 43 18 10 7 o 14 3 o o o 8 4 . 5 Inve NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY FOOTNOTES TO PRECEDING CHARTS Includes multiple defendants. ··f (a) : ~ ADAMS COUNTY PHILADELPHIA COUNTY (a) Includes two cases dismissed under Pa. R.J.A. 1901. (a) Defendants scheduled for C.P. hearing and placed in A.A.D. program-See also Municipal Court. (b) Defendant records reinstated and deferred. (c) Includes defendants held for indictment. ALLEGHENY COUNTY (d) Change in reporting procedure to include delinquents, deprived adults, enforcement cases and reinstated bench (a) Includes defendants transferred fro.m inactive to active status; multiple defendants and 1974 dispositions. warrants. (e) Change in reporting procedure for open Cdses and excludes outgoing reciprocal and procedural petitions not heard by (b) Includes 535 statutory appead/~ dun~.9 ye~~~reased by 57% over same reporting period in 1974. (c) The input of new cases and ISPOSI Ions I Family Division. ARMSTRONG COUNTY PHILADELPHIA MUNICIPAL COURT-PHILADELPHIA COUNTY (a) Cases filed and disposed tripled over previous year. Act No. 45 approved July 14, 1971 extended the jurisdiction of the law-trained judges of the Municipal Court to include all criminal offenses which are punishable by imprisonment of not more than five years, including indictable offenses under the BERKS COUNTY motor-vehicle laws. . . . J A 1901 ands to Juvenile Court and Justices of the (a) Of the 22 authorized judgeships for the Philadelphia MunicipalCourt, sixteen judges are presently members of the Bar of (a) Includes multiple defendants, cases removed under Pa. R. .. , rem the Supreme Court. Only these "Iawiudges" may exercise iuri~diction in the criminal cases listed above. the Trial Peace. Division of the Court of Common Pleas fJlso has concurrent jurisdiction over such matters until thefllEJ,(e sufficient BLAIR COUNTY number of judges who are members of the Municipal Court to handle such matters. (b) These criminal cases are all trial cases and do not include preliminary'hearings or summary proceedings, (a) Includes fugitives and cases remanded to Justices of the Peace. (c) Under the Municipal Court Jurisdiction Act, there is no right of trial by jury bu.t the defendant has the right of appeal for trial de novo, including the right of trial by jury to .t/;le Trial Division of the Court of Common Pleas. BUTLER COUNTY (d) Includes fugitives, mental health transfers to inactive, adjustments, deferred indictments activated and transfers of active (a) Cases removed under Pa. Fl.J.A. 1901. indictments to inactive. (e) Common Pleas Judges assigned to Municipal Court. CENTRE COUNTY WASHIi'IIGTON COUNTY (a) Includes 105 multiple transcripts. .:. (a) Adjustments were made for defendants "not apprehended" which were deducted and not included in inventory and later CHESTER COUNTY nolle prossed. . a R J A 1901' 473 multiple indictments; and 146 bench warrants. (a) Includes 91 cases remove d u nder P ., ., , WESTMORELAND COUNTY DELAWARE COUNTY (a) Includes multiple transcripts, fugitives and inactive cases removed. (a) Includes 1.094 fugitives. YORK COUNTY ERIE COUNTY (a) Multiple defendants. (b) There were 89 dispositions made to correct inventory. (a) These 352 defendant duplicated and 315 bench warrants issued. ~ranscriPts (c) New procedures implemented to correct arbitration and divorce in~entories. FRANKLIN-FULTON COUNTIES SOMERSET COUNTY (a) There were 40 cases added from inactive files. (a) Includes multiple defendants. LACKAWANNA COUNTY VENANGO COUNTY (a) Increased arbitration limits to $5,000 effective 6/1 /75. (a) There were 30 cases removed under Pa. R.J.A. 1901. LANCASTER COUNTY (a) Includes fugitives and multiple records. LEHIGH COUNTY (a) Includes fugitives and multiple defendants. LUZERNE COUNTY (a) Includes multiple transcripts,. fugiti~eS and inactive cases removed under Pa. R.J.A. 1901. (b) Includes cases which were discontinued. LYCOMING COUNTY (a) Includes multiple defendants, corrected records, etc. MONTGOMERY COUNTY (a) Reflects quarterly purge of inactive cases under Pa. R.J.A. 1901. NORTHAMPTON COUNTY (a) Includes corrections to past reporting practices. i' " 77 76 ,,;';J • JUDGES AND OFFICERS DISTRICT COURTS 1 st District-Philadelphia County COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Edward J. Bradley-President Judge Trial Division Ethan Allen Doty-Administrative Judge Juanita Kidd Stout Samuel Smith Stanley M. Greenberg d .' Lisa A. Richette James T. McDerm.ott David N. Savitt Edward J. Bradley, p.... ]. Charles A. Lord Theodore R Smith; Jr. Norman A. Jenkin's Jay ·R. Eiseman Paul Ribner James R. Cavanaugh Edward Rosenwald G. Fred DiBona Edward J. Blake Ned L. Hirsh Angelo A. Gnarino John A. Geisz Albert F. Sabo Paul M. Chalfin Stanley L. Kubacki Thomas N. Shiomos Calvin T. Wilson Matthew W. Bullock, Jr. Armand Della Porta .. Jacob Kalish Julian F. King Robert W. Williams, J1'. William Porter Charles P. Mirarchi, J 1'. Harry A. Takiff Levy Anderson Joseph P. Braig George J. Ivins Bernard J. Goodheart Merna B. Marshall Lawrence Prattis Alex Bonavitacola Richard Klein Edwin S. MaImed Evelyn M. Trommer Robert A. Latrone Charles L. Durham Lois G. F orer Bernard Snyder Marvin R. Halbert Alfred J. DiBona, Jr. Curtis C. Carson, Jr. Murray C. Goldman Eugene Gelfand William M. M aru tani Francis A. Biunno Berel Caesar Orphans' Court Division Edmund S. Pavvelec-Administrative Judge Theodore S. Gutowicz Judith J. Jamison Joseph C. Bruno Alexander F. Barbieri Paul Silverstein Family Court Division Frank J. Montemuro, Jr.-Administrative Judge James L. Stern Vito F. Canuso Jerome A. Zaleski Jerome A. O'Neill William A. Dwyer, fro William J. Lederer Gregory G. Lagakos Herbert R. Cain, Jr. Harvey N. Schmidt Charles ·Wright Nicholas A. Cipriani Paul A. Dandridge John R. Meade Joseph T. Murphy Doris M. Harris Samuel H. Rosenberg Paul A. Tranchitella Vito N. Pisciottal Edward B. Rosenberg I On Leave of Absence. iJ 79 6th District-Erie County Municipal Court Edward H. Carney, P. J. ' Freel P. Anthony Joseph R. Glancey<>-President Judge Alexander J.Macones(l Lindley n. McClelland William E. Pfadt Michael J. ConroyO Francis P. Cosgrove<> 'Samuel M. Lehrero Ralph M. Dennis Orphans' Court Division Charles J. Margiotti, Jr. (I Thomas Marotta Levan Gordon (I James B. Dwyer J. Earl Simmons, Jr. \) Harry Melton Maxwell L. Orninskyo Lynne M. Abraham(l Kenneth S. Harriso Matthew Zagorski Joseph Patrick McCabe, Jr. <> John J. Poserina 7th District-Bucks County Lynwood F. Blount<> Meyer Charles Hose(l '·······'.1; Alan K. SilbersteinO \Villiam D. Markert La\vrence A. Monroe, P. J. Edmund \'. Luclwig Edward G. Mekel (I I Ie Paul H. Beckert Robert .1\1. .1\lount('nav 2d District-Lancaster County J ohl1 Justus Bodley A:·.tl~ur B. v\TaIsh, Jr.. Wilson Bucher Isaac S. Garb \'\i Ilham I [art Huf(' III W. Hensel Brown, P. J. Paul A. Mueller, Jr. Orphans' Court Division Harriet M. Mims Orphans' Court Division Anthony R. Appel 8th District-Northumberland County Peter Krehel, P. J. Samuel C. Ranck 3d District-Northampton County Hichard D. Gdfo 9th District-Cumberland County Clinton Budd Palmer, P. J. IVIichae1 V. Franciosa Alfred T. Williams, Jr. Dale F. Shughart, P. J. Clinton H. \V dd9ci: 4th District-:-Tioga County 10th District-Westmoreland County Hobert M. Kemp, P. J. David H. Weiss, P. J. Richard E. McCormick Hob(\rt n. Hial L. Alexander Sculco Gilfert M. J\l lihalich 5th District-Allegheny County Orphans' Court Division Henry Ellenbogen-President Judge Earl S. Keim Civil Division John P. Hester-Administrative Judge 11th District-Luzerne County H.olf R. Larsen Henry Ellenbogen Hobert A. Doyle B~rnard C. B,rominski, P. J. Peter Paul Olszewski Marion K. Finkelhor Francis A. Barry RIchard L. BIgelow Bernard J. Poclcasy Halph U. Smith, Jr. 1. Martin Wekselman Michael J. O'Malley Hobert J. Hourigan Arthur D. Dalessandro Frederic G. Weir S. Louis Farino John P. Hester Maurice Louik Orphans' Court Division John P. Flaherty, Jr. J. Warren Watson Edward W. Lopatto Silvestri Silvestri Donald E. Zieglel' Criminal Division 12th District-Dauphin County Samuel Strauss-Administrative Judge Lee F. Swope, P. J. WatT('J1 G. Morgan Thomas A. Harper Bernard J. McGowan William W. Lipsitt J(~11l1 C. Dowling Joseph H. Ridge Nicholas P. Papadakos William W. Caldwell Samuel Strauss James F. Clarke Hlchard B. \Vick('rshalll Zoran Popovich James H.. McGregor Orphans' Court Division Henry H. Smith, Jr. George II. Ross John W. O'Brien Nathan Schwartz Lee F. Swope Robert E. Dauer Orphans' Court Division 13th District-Greene County J. Frank McKenna, Jr.-Administrative Judge Glenn Toothman, P. J. Paul R. ~avarella Family Division 14th District-Fayette County James A. Reilly, P. Hicharcl D. Cicchetti John G. BTOsky-Administrative Judge J. John r. Munson Fred C. Adams Eunice Ross Livingstone M. J olmso\1 Maurice B. Cohill, Jr. Richard G. Zeleznik Patrick R. Tamilia Orphans' Court Division James A. Heilly °Judges Learned In the Law 80 81 ,.. ,~ 25th District-Clinton County 15th District-Chester County John E. Stively Cars~n \'. Brown,' P. J. John M. Kurtz, Jr., P. J. John M. Wajert Dominic T. Marrone Leonard Sugerman 26th District-Columbia and Montour Counties Thomas A. Pitt, Jr. Jt1y Walter iVlyers, P. J. Orphans' Court Division John M. Kurtz, Jr. 27th District-Washington County Charles G. Sweet, P. J. Thomas D. Clac1dt'l1 16th District-Somerset County Richard DiSalle . John F. Bdl Ch;wlcs n. Coffroth, P. J. Norman A. Shaulis Orphans' Court Division Paul A. Simmons 17th District-Un.ion and Snyder Counties A. Th0111as Wilson, P. J. 28th District-Venango County William E. Breene, P . .T. 18th District-Clarion County Hobert B. Filson, P. J. 29th District-Lycoming County Charles F. Greevy, P. J. Thomas C. Haup . 19th District~York County Albert G. Blakey, III . ." ,. Hobert 1. Shadle, P. J. Joseph E. Erb JamesE. Buckingham 30th District-Crawford County" P. Hichard Thomas, P . .T. F. Joseph Thomas Orphans' Court Division Richard E. Kohler 31st District-Lehigh County Martin J. Coyne, P . .T. Jolm E. Backenstoe Max\vcll Ii:. Davison 20th District-Huntingdon County Donald E. Wieand David E. ~'lell('nberg Morris M. Terrizzi, p., J.. Orphans' Court Division 21st District-Schuylkill County Martin J. Coyne John W. Waleskyo John E. Lavelle James J. Curran, P. J. Deceased 5-29-75 Joseph F. McCloskey C<:'orgl' W. Heffner 32d District-Delaware County Fran?is .T. Catania, P. J. Robert A. Wright Hobert Ii'. Kdly Orphans' Court Division Edwm K Lippincott, II Domenic D. Jerome Hita E. Prescott Guy A. Bowe, J1'. Joseph W. deFuria Cl~ment J. McGovern, Jr. Joseph T. Labrum, Jr. Howard F. Reed, Jr. WIlliam n. Toal, Jr. 22nd District-Wayne County Orphans' Court Division James Rut1lerford, P. J. Francis J. Catania 33d District-Armstrong County 23d District-Berks County Frederick Edenharter Roy A. I-Ionse, Jr., P. J. W. Hichard Eshelman, P. J. Grant E. \Vesner James W. Bertolet 34th District-Susquehanna County Orphans' Court Division Donald O'Malley, P. J. Dawson H, Muth 35th District-Mercer County 24th District-Blair county John Q. Stranahan, P. J. Albert E. Acker Hobert B. Campbell Hobert C. Haberstroh, P. J. 83 : I 82 . . . 47th District-Cambria County 36th District-Beaver County H. Beryl Klein H. ClIfton McWIllIams, P. J. . Joseph F. O'Kkki John ~. Sawyer, p, J. Robert C, H('l'd Caram J. Abood J, Quint Salmon Orphans' Court Division Orphans' Court Division Arnold D. Smorto James E, Rowley . 48th District-McKean County 31th District-Warren and Forest Counties William F. Potter, P. J. Hobert L. Wolfe, p, J. 49th District-Centre County 38th District-Montgomery County Joseph U. S tanziani R. Paul Campbell, P. J. A. Benjamin Scil'ica, P. J. Louis D. Stefan Hobert W. Tredinnick ivlilton O. Moss Hohcrt W. Honeyman Horace A. Davenport William W. Vogel Vincent A. Cirillo 50th District-Butler County Hichard S. L 0\\1 (' George P. Kiester, P. J. John C. Dillon Orphans' Court Division 51 st District-Ada'ms County Alfred L. Taxis, Jr. John A. MacPhail, P. J. 39th District-Franklin and Fulton Counties 52nd District-Lebanon County' George C. Eppinger, P. J. . John \V. Keller G. Thomas Gates, P. J. JOh11 A. \\' al tel' 40th District-Indiana County 53d District-Lawrence County . Robert C. Earley John F. Henderson, P. J. Howard \V. Lyon Earl H. Handler, P. J. 54th District-Jefferson County 41st District-Juniata and Perry Counties Edwin L. Snyder, P. J. Keith B. Quigley, P. J. 55th District-Potter County 42nd District-Bradford County Perry S. Patterson, P. ]. Evan S. Willlari1s, P. J. - 56th District-Carbon County 43d District-Monroe and Pike Counties Albert II. lIeimbach, P. J. Arlington W. Williams, P. J. James R. Marsh 57th District-Bedford County 44th District-Wyoming and Sullivan Counties Ellis William Van Horn, Jr., P. J. H.oy A. Gardner, P. J. 58th District-Mifflin County 45th District-Lackawanna County H. Lee Ziegler, P. J. Edwin M. Kosik Otto P. 1\obinson, P. J. James J. 'NaIsh Hichard P. Conaboy 59th District-Cameron and Elk Counties Paul B. Greiner, P. Orphans' COUlrt Division J. Daniel L. Penetal' 46th District·-Cle,ufield County John K. He:illy, Jr., P. J. 85 84 r / - -' "'" ~* •••• ~." - ~~""""""'-""""""""';-~""';""""""'''"'''~''''t.ll.\o~~''''''''~'''''''.>..l>,.''P~~~~~~~:l, " RETIRED JUDGES 58th District-Mifflin County (Active as of March 1, 1976) Paul S. Lehman Lewistown 5th District-Allegheny County 43rd District-Monroe/Pike Counties Hugh C. Boyle Pittsburgh Fred W. Davis Stroudsburg Loran L. Lewis Pittsburgh Charles D. McCarthy Pittsburgh 38th District-Montgomery County Pittsburgh lIarry M. l\tIontgomery Frederick B. Smillie N orristo\vn William S. Hahauser Pittsburgh 3rd District-Northampton County 33rd District-Armstrong County Carleton T. Woodring Easton J. Frank Graff Kittanning 48th District-Cambria County 1 st District-Philadelphia County George \Y. Griffith Ebensburg Robert V. Bolger Philadelphia Alton A. McDonald Ebensburg Victor J. DiNubile Philadelphia Gerald A. Gleeson Philadelphia t 36th District-Beaver Coul1iy Charles Klein Philadelphia John McDevitt, Frank E. Heed Beaver J. III Philadelphia Benjamin "V. Schwartz Philadelphia 57th District-Bedford County Kendall H. Shoyer Philadelphia Maurice W. Sporkin Bedford Philadelphia lUcharcl C. Snyder Leo Weinrott Philadelphia 7th District-Bucks County 55th District-Potter County Doylestown, Edwin H. Satterthwaite Walter Pierre Wells Coudersport 23rd District-Berks County 4th District-Tioga County Wyomissing Warren K. Hess Charles G. Webb Wellsboro 46th District-Clearfield County 44th District-Wyoming/Sullivan Counties Clem'field John A. Cherry Robert "V. Trembath Tunkhannock 25th District-Clinton County Abraham H. Upez Lock Haven 12th District-Dauphin County Homer L. Kreider Harrisburg 54th District-Jefferson County Hobert M. Morris Brookville 32nd District-Delaware County John V. Diggins Media Louis A. Bloom Media 2nd District-Lancaster County William C. J ohnstone, Jr. LancasteI' 31 st District-Lehigh County Kenneth H. Koch Allentown Henry V. Scheirer Allentown 86 87 _~ __ ,.... ", ...,,,~.-~,,, ...... :u.n:t~~--~"""' , MAP Ot PENNSYLVANIA SHOWING THE JUDICIAl DISTRICTS AS APPORTIONED BY 1~51 II 6 I L-,------,------I -_.. ------r------r------r~ ERIE, , i" • ERIE! , I \ \ \ I-______. ______~ J 48 I 4 \ 42 \ 34 \ i WARREN I Me KEAN I 55 TIOGA \ BRADFORD i SUSQUEHANNA \ 30 I WARREN I SMETHPORT i POTTER '\ WELLSBORO \ TOWANDA i MONTROSE 1\ 22 I ' ' COUDERSPORI \ ' CRAWFORD, I I I \ \ WAYNE MEADVILLE I -1-' . J \ r--l------T------~ 0 -----J---r---'--- 37 ______, -----" I , 1 H NESDALE ;. ------:----1.-1 ii' /~------I I \ I. , FOREST I ) '\, _.------_-r' \ --_-J WYOMING' \ • / ______(/ I TIONESTA I 59 '\, .'TUNKHANNOCK ~ 45 \ / -----, 28 I -J ' CAMERON '--r---- \ 44 ;' , r I L, r----i r ELK I EMPORIUM I SULLIVAN f 'LACKAWANNAI ~ i VENANGO ~.J I I RIDGWAY L---1 ) \ 29 ',- LAPORTE ~ ______._---1.--. SCRANTON! _.1 35 ,FRANKLIN ..r.J ~,J---- /'...... , 1 / \.., LYCOMING "-{' ,..:... \ ~ PIf(E MERCER! r- i ...... '1 / " WILLIAMSPORT '...... r-- t I' MILFORD MERCER I ,r' 18 i ''L. .------____ 1 I /1 L~ "'" ---/ i 11 "rLJ-----~ ,) , _J..') ---, J'l I", / \ I I~ 43 )------.4\ CLARION! 54 r \ J L'l \ '-'--r.' j/ \ Wk~~::ANRERE ~' -- ______I I" CLARION I JEFFERSON ( ,";-< ~ , r-{ I aI- \.-, ./'---{ '\ :l ."'- ' ,t " \ \ ~. )l:> 26 I I' MONROE \ yl ! <. I BROOKVILLE ! 46 "1--- " .... /' ~ l~ COLUMBIA I \' \\ STROUDSBURG 53 I I 'J /1 I ' ..... -,1 { ~ ({~\BLOOMSBURG t ,\ I LAWRENCE ( 50 i ~ I, ! CLEARFIELD r 49l·.----/ /1 UNION ( ! i!:!5'JilJ~'U~'f \ .//-' 56 f'> I I NEW CASTLE BUTLER' , I CLEARFIELD JoII..r CENT, /' LEWISBURG, ~ 8 ~7 I~~""'-"" ,,/; CAR '\ r..r: J BUTLER i 33 1------, ! BELLE../ 17 ~1;<9 u" ( -~. JIM T.:'c?.~E \ .J : ------I i ARMSTRONG J! I (r /·/t·-·--·_·.I ~-9{4 NO L-\ J "-,'-. __L--'''/ 3 ~ ' ' KITTANNING i ' SNYDER ( V' 21 -, /.-(" 36! I ;' 40' (------7~,'\ I MIDDLEBURG. SUNBURY ./"" -y" \.NORTHAMPTON I I ; /'.------') \' --...... -..// L.-;.-__ } .,.....""..... SCHUYLKILL ,,/" 3'.1\1 • EASTON I: BEAVER ,------h / INOIANA,I / ",,/ -~_,y/ _--<,a POTTSVILLE .....<., \.., BEAVER ,J ./ 1" ; INDIANA! < I I ('/ -.~~ "" ( ". LEHIGH ') ,// 5 ( ~ / / 47 ~ 24 1 t! ( ~I ~,~.:'\.~~~ .-,41 (' "...... -_rJ '.,.ALLENTOWN <..... // / \.....\ ''i ! '1, \Vi~ _\'(,0 ""...... /A., --,' ,)' I: / I BLAIR Irl ~ l.\'\\- • \. 12 " ---../ '/' -----<' ALLEGHENY i - i CAMBRIA • I ! ¢~' // I (/."" 23 "" '. PITTSI:IURGH' ...... Q;..,- , EBENSBURG, HOLLIDAYSBURG/, ,/ ./ \ 52 " 'r. ,I 7 '. ,J. '1..-...... ' ! 1 ,20 (' PERRY ; DAUPHIN \ "- BERKS / "<', ' r: ", ,r' 10 '0-/ '! f) / HUNTINGDON'" NEW BLOOMFIELD ,__ H)ARRISBURG \ LEBANON ',...... READING /. -'. BUCKS .,. I , \ LEBANON '. I' DOYLESTOWN _...... _...... ? WESTMORELAND f'._.--..., ...... ~'__ __ }./ HUNTINGDON /'/;/ ,!...-r A .... _ ____.-.----.... , ,\ ,...-.>-, , I I 38 "., I 27 -"'::>. GREENSBURG , \. ______j . "--.l \ ' \.. \ ..---...... ". ,L, ...... I, \... ,> / 7 I.. 9 J'''' \...... / ','/ "-'\, MONTGOMERY'. '-< / I ", I ';> ~ -- " ./ '-\ NORR ' WASHINGTON ('"" j' i .~ I CUMBERLAND .r-'-:" "I"..' -'. ,/ "? ISTOWN ", WASHINGTON '''\__ ~ .r\ I I -...... I ' CARLlSL.E / '~ 2 ,Y '7 ,~ I: ~. ~""".~ ...... ,/ 16 J 57 !FULTON'-./ ,./ ',- \' 15 '''''''\. '/"""'j.~$''i'' ,..) \...... I r ("/ \ --j ...... ,,- -'\ LANCASTER ; >.~, \,1 ~ ",~.-"~"'/1..£' 14 / SOMERSET i BEDFORD J •.,<>'" f V'- \ 19 '\ LANCASTER I CHESTER 532 \! ~ _ • / SOMERSET I BEDFORD / f<-V" ( I, I 51 \ ...... ) WEST CHESTER // , ~V LI 13 ), FAYETTE / ' i O~~ ~9 ell' I \. YORK '\ ' DELAWARE!~ GREENE ( UNIONTOWN j ! j' ~vCj I \ ADAMS ,YORK... t' MEDIA I WAYNESBURG ~ ), /! GETTYSBURG ( \. /_.;J.---.. L____ ~ __ ~.~ .. _ .. _.. _._-._-.-.. L-._.. _L:~-.----t!..-.. -~ .. __._ .. L ___ .. __ .__ .~_-iL_-_--.J l' PART VI Case Volume for District Justice Courts PART VI CASE VOLUME FOR DISTRICT JUSTICES OF THE PEACE INCLUDES PHILADELPHIA TRAFFIC COURT In April, 1974, the Administrative Office of cal information on traffic violations, and is Pennsylvania Courts began the collection of included in this report for comparison purposes. case volume statistics from district justice of the Stati$tics of the Philadelphia Municipal Court peace courts and, in 1975, the first full year of are included in the Common Pleas Courts sec data was available. This was the first time in the tion of this report. history of the Pennsylvania minor judiciary that Pennsylvania's district justices of the peace comprehensive, statewide, uniform annual sta process the largest number of cases in the tistical information concerning the activities of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, excluding the these important courts was compiled. The Philadelphia courts. Their jurisdiction covers Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts summary offenses punishable by not more than does not collect statistical data from Pittsburgh a $500 fine, or with a jail sentence not exceeding Police Magistrates, nor from the Philadelphia 90 days; and civil complaints involving amounts Traffic Court. up to $1,000. District justices also determine As noted in PartI of the Report, itis estimated whether a prima facie case of a defendant's guilt that about 50 percent of all the cases processed is established in misdemeanor or felony com in the City of Pittsburgh are handled by the plaints. While these courts do not have authority Pittsburgh Police Magistrates. There is no evi to try cases by jury, they may determine guilt or dence that the Pittsburgh Police Magistrates innocence in cases involving summary offenses prepare statistical reports on case volume. The and summary appeals, and may make and enter Philadelphia Traffic Court does submit statisti- judgments in civil matters. TOTAL CASES FILED -1975 There were 1,677,426 cases filed in the district filed. These case volume statistics clearly illus justice courts in 1975. Of this total, 1,092,775 trate the enormous workload managed by dis cases, or 65.1 percent, were traffic citations; trict justices. 196,247 non-traffic citations, or 11.7 percent; 'In 1975, there were 1,909,193 traffic violations 132,566 summary complaints, or 7.9 percent; issued in the City of Philadelphia, which 112,196 misdemeanor/felony complaints, or6.7 amounts to 816,418 or 74.7 percent more traffic percent; and 143,642 civil complaints, or 8.6 citations than were filed in all district justice of percent of the cases. the peace courts throughout the state. When the Summary cases comprised 84.7 percent of number of traffic violations filed in the City of total cases filed in these courts in 1975, amount Philadelphia are added to those filed in district ing to 1,421,588 cases; with civil cases next in justice courts in the state, the total "traffic" volume, at 143,642, or 8.6 percent of total cases filings amount to 3,001,968 cases. FILINGS Percent to Cases Filed Total. Traffic Citations 1,092,775 65.1% Non-Traffic Citations 196,247 11.7 Summary Complaints 132,566 7.9 . Misdemeanor/Felony Complaints 112,196 6.7 Civil Complaints 143,642 ·8,6 Total 1,677,426 100.0% 93 DISPOSITION OF CASES -1975 filings; 10,881 civil actions, or7.6 percent; 99,346 There were 1,500,810 cases disposed during traffic citations, or 9.1 percent; and 12,822 misdemeanor/felony complaints, or 11.4 per C") <:D OHD "" C") If) ~ 1975. Of this total, 993,429 were traffic citations, ~o-i~c-; ... cent of dispositions to Hlings. g or 66.2 percent of the total; 164,616 were non r-i traffic citations, or 11.0 percent; 110,630 sum The Philadelphia Traffic Court disposed of mary complaints, or 7.4 percent; 99,374 misde 6,212,217 traffic violation records in 1975. The meanor/felony complaints, or 6.6 percent; and large number of traffic dispositions over filings 132,761 civil cases, or 8.8 percent of all cases was the result of a considerable effort by the Traffic Court to review and dispose of pending disposed. Dispositions in each category did not keep cases which were not processed because of pace with the number ot cases filed during the partial payments, police errors, cancellations, year. Obviously, there will always be undis and deaths. Additionally, the court initiated a program to process scofflaws. If added to posed cases pending, simply because of inevit ~ traffic 6\ispositions in district justice courts, the Z able time constraints required for the orderly ....J combined total of traffic dispositions amounts -<>....J processing of cases. The biggest gap between -0. to 7,205,646 cases. 0:E filings and dispositions in 1975 occurred in the o summary complaints category. There was a The following table illustrates the manner in o difference of 21,936 cases, or 16.5 percent of which citations or complaints were disposed in summary dispositions to filings;· 31,631 non the distric:. justice courts during 1975, and the traffic citations, or 16.1 percent dispositions to volume of these dispositions in each category. DISPOSITIONS Percent to . Cases Disposed Total 66.2% Traffic Citations 993,429 164,£>16 11.0 N on-Traffic Citations 7,4 Summary Complaints . . 110,630 ~9,314 6.6 . Misdemeanor/Felony Complaints 8;8· Civil Complaints 132,761 ·150'0'810' 10'0'.0% ot 'Total '" '..,', . t ...::j From the above, it can be seen thatl,043,647, COMPARATIVE FILINGS/DISPO.SITIONS or 69.5 percent of all cases were disposed of by Since the program to collect statistics on the guilty pleas in 1975. Although most cases case volume processed through the district demand judicial time, it is noted that approxi justice courts was not commenced until April in mately 15 percent of all cases were disposed by the year 1974, it is not feasible to compare the less time-consuming actions, such as with full year 1975 statistics with the incomplete 1974 drawtl, dismissed, discharged, declared fugi data, nor can we draw valid conclusions con tive or closed. It should also be noted that 35,182 cerning trends in case volume by such compari misdemeanor/felony complaints, or 35.4 per son. However, by projecting available data cent, ·were withdrawn by the prosecution or collected from July to December in 1974, esti dismissed by district justices, while waivers of mates can be formulated as to the number of preliminary hearings were filed in 19,392 cases, cases filed and disposed during that year. The or 19.5 percent. The handling of misdemeanor/ projected totals for 1974 can then have some felony complaints is of great importance, since value for comparison with the actual data col the manner of such dispositions may have a lected in 1975, in order to show estimated significant impact on the case volumes of com percentages of change in case volume over the mon pleas courts. The information received and two-year period. The following tables illustrate reported here clearly indicates that district these estimates. justices are conscientiously accepting and meet ing their judicial responsibilities in the handling • of these more serious cases. 94 95 It must be noted that the Monthly Statistical from justice cases; non-support cases; civil cases DISTRICT JUSTICE COURTS Heport is designed to reflect' the caseloads dismissed without prejudice; misdemeanor/fel actually processed through the offices of the 563 ony cases reduced to summary offenses; cases FILINGS district justices of the peace. The report is not settled at/ or before trial/hearing. intended to reflect total office workload, but The report does not record pre-trial and post Projected Actual Filings Estimated only to provide a record of cases filed in the trial/hearing activity, such as the payment of Filings Change 1974 1975 district justices offices, and dispositions there fines and costs, imposition of bail, continuances, 997,920 1,092,775 9.5% of. and appeals; nor does it request defendants' Traffic Citations 178,992 196,247 10.1 The report is designed to cover five catego names and specific charges. N on-Traffic Citations 125,136 132,566 5.9 ries of actions within the jurisdiction of District The reporting procedures require that a case Summary Complaints 112,196 11.5 Justices of the Peace: (1) Traffic Citations; (2) be counted as filed during the month in which it Misdemeanor /F eiony Complaints 100,584 129,096 143,642 11.3 Non-Traffic Citations; (3) Summary Com is presented to the district justice on a citation or Civil Complaints plaints; (4) Misdemeanor/Felony Complaints; complaint. Cases which are filed with a district 1,531,728 1,677,426 9.5% TOTAL and (5) Civil Complaints. Each category con justice while on 24-hour assignment are counted tains two sections, namely, number of citations as filed in the office of the district justice who /complaints filed and disposed. A case is will ultimately hear the matter. - reported as filed when it is officially presented At the conclusion of each case, the disposition DISPOSITIONS to the district justice on a citation or complaint. of the case is recorded on the proper disposition An"adjustments" line is used to correlate line on the report. It is reg uired that dispositions Projected Actual Dispositions Estimated filings and manners of dispositions as follows: to be reported in the month in which prosecution Dispositions Change 1974 1975 remove, for statistical purposes, multiple ci of the charge ceases, and not when fines and costs have been satisfied. 897,336 993,429 10.7% tations or complaints which have been disposed Traffic Citations at one trial; to remove (for statistical purposes Identical disposition nomenclature is uoSed in 141,768 164,616 16.1 Non-Traffic Citations only) cases over six months old; and to remove categories where the. district justice has sum 93,456 110,630 18.4 Summary Complaints summary cases within a Misdemeanor/Felony mary jurisdiction. Thus, recordings for Traffic 90,288 99,374 10.1 Misdemeanor/F elony Complaints case when filed with common pleas court. If the Citations, N 113,256 132,761 17.2 on-Traffic Citations, and Summary Civil Complaints case is reactivated at a later time, itis added as a Complaints are in categories as follows: guilty 1,336,104 1,500,810 12.3% TOTAL new case filed and shown disposed on the plea; not guilty by trial; guilty by trial; with proper line at time of adjudication. drawal of prosecution; substantive defect on ci A case is reported as disposed at the conclu tation; unable to locate by warrant (fugitive); sion of the case, or when adjudication has and other. METHODOLOGY FOR REPORTING of the peace, no program existed ~or the system-, occurred. The dispositions listed under each The following kinds of dispositions appear in STATISTICS FOR DISTRICT JUSTICE atic collection of statistics regardmg'defendan~s category vary with each type of offense. All the category Misdemeanor/Felony Com processed in such courts. Programs been 111 COURTS ha~ categories contain the disposition "other" which plaints: dismissed at preliminary hearing; effect for some years for the collectIOns and records dispositions not otherwise listed on the bound to court at preliminary hearing; with In April, 1974, the ~dministratiye Of~ice of analysis of statistics of the other co~npon~nt~ of report. The following are examples of cases drawal of prosecution; declared fugitive waiver Pennsylvania Courts, m cooperatIO~ 'Ylth the the criminal justice system (correctIOnal mstltu-, reported as "other": cases where the defendant of preliminary hearing; and othe-. Department of Justice, Office of CrIl;l11?al J us tions, probation and paro~e, .co~n~on pleas or affiant dies; cases where the statute oflimita The following Dispositions appear in the tice Statistics, initiated a judicial statistics pro courts), \'\Ihile statistics for dlstnct JustIce courts tions has expired; cases dismissed on affidavit; category Civil Complaints: trial; settled before gram to collect aggregate data from ea?h .of the which process the largest number of defend cases sent directly to juvenile court; misde trial; judgment by default; closed-no service; 5631 district justices of the peace. 'Ylthm the ants' records outside of Philadelphia had not meanor/felony complaints involving fugitive withdrawal of complaint; and other. Commonwealth. Statistics wer~ ong!nally col been given attention by any state agenc~. . lected on the Report of Proceedmgs forms (200- Since its inception, the Mont?ly StatIstical 74 201-74,202-74 CIJ forms), which have been Report has become a major base m. the Pennsyl ex~anded and revised into the present Monthly vania State Judicial InformatIOn ~y~tem Statistical Report2 (Form 200/75). T~e ~ep?rts (PSJIS). Through these reports the.Admll11stra are prepared in the offices of the chstnc.t jl~S tive Office of Pennsylvania Courts IS tiees by either the district justice or the chstnct be~t;r .abl~ to study the functioning of Pennsylvam?- ~ J~dli justi~e's staff, and are submitted mon~hly to the cial systems. Thus,. the Monthly StatlstlCa Administrative Office of Pennsylva~ll~ Courts. Report serves as a vital managemen,t tool, pro The Administrative 0 Wce is appr~cl~tlv~ of. the viding a basis for better understandmg of case fine efforts and cooperation by distrIct Justices loads and administrative problems encountered and their staffs in submission of the monthly by district justices throughout the .Com~on reports. Prior to the or~gination of ~he.H~p?\t,of wealth. It is hoped that, through. thIS basIs for Proceedings in the offices of the clIstnct JustIces analysis a more eHective allocatIon of r~sourci '~There were 562 district illstices seroing, as of J'e/)mary 15, 1976. ces and' improved efficiency I~ay .be achieved ~This report does not illelrule deilJrldclIIls processed llY the, p~'.ila. with an improved commumcatIOns to an delphia MUllicipal Cot/I't, Phi/adelpltia TraffiC COllrt allc ItlS among these district justice courts. /)urgh Police Me/gis/rates. 97 96 ~r::~,v:-'. TRAFFIC CITATIONS BY COUNTY* Citations Citations Guilty Not Guilty Guilty Withdrawal Substantive Unable NON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS BY COUNTY* County ~ Disposed Pica By Trial By Trial 9f Prosecution Defect _ To Locate Other ~Justmen!3 Citations Citations Guilty N t G I County Flied Disposed Plea ~ T ~ l:y Guilty Withdrawal Substantive Unable Lancaster 41668 37784 34696 556 1096 1100 135 168 33 326 Lancaster 6686 -- ~ By Trial 01 Prosecution Defect To Locate ~':!:. North~mpton 16560 15662 13923 613 500 322 55 229 20 13 Northampton 8883 ~~~~ :6~~ 148 231 249 10 --:w- 15 74 Tioga 5109 4946 4438 93 149 203 18 40 5 96 Tioga 610 541 444 291 265 271 20 193 27 14 Allegheny* 90141 80550 59976 7718 5511 3256 1116 2881 92 171 Allegheny' 24373 20128 30 45 16 2 2 2 31 Erie 37775 34183 31025 988 930 887 17 317 19 33 Erie 6072 4863 1;~:~ 2816 2077 1102 476 900 117 73 Bucks 58773 50826 41268 2894 2052 1537 136 2565 374 1680 Bucks 12060 9844 7449 328 496 145 11 98 29 73 Northumberland 7655 7303 6742 176 231 118 4 30 2 23 Northumberland 2337 2043 1687 849 714 324 44 398 66 423 Cumberland 24476 24374 21783 208 565 1053 18 732 15 46 Cumberland 2930 2797 2409 89 117 138 2 7 3 4 Westmoreland 38116 37045 32223 929 1682 1479 34 579 119 45 Westmoreland 3785 3349 2523 61 88 231 6 2 0 5 Luzerne 30990 28606 26463 967 615 411 40 94 16 69 Luzerne 4335 3643 . 2941 217 214 234 8 38 115 9 Dauphin 23696 21662 18866 550 677 688 140 485 256 42 Dauphin 7677 6536 262 177 173 20 20 50 19 Greene 4694 4331 4043 32 148 39 3 61 5 o Greene 375 276 4~1~ 309 418 1614 35 126 19 6 Fayette 9696 7488 6599 313 189 144 81 84 78 36 Fayette 1800 1218 982 5 24 3 0 0 0 o Chester 31887 29848 25771 828 1091 1033 81 1027 17 92 Chester 8912 7359 5756 73 72 39 11 36 5 9 Somerset 13254 12304 10750 160 321 1028 28 14 3 64 Somerset 952 815 693 316 291 467 55 369 105 5 Snyder/Union 8592 8386 7765 73 171 184 29 162 2 32 Snyder/Union 1070 967 29 35 43 12 3 0 34 Clarion 6416 5952 5659 35 121 114 12 5 6 o Clarion 614 618 ~1; 12 34 239 28 8 1 '7 York 35876 31074 28802 447 889 706 95 118 17 26 York 5014 4138 3754 16 25 57 6 0 2 o Huntingdon 3745 3755 3469 47 98 91 19 24 7 o Huntingdon 825 772 623 121 162 76 10 10 5 5 Schuylkill 11381 11184 9644 388 299 442 101 300 10 98 Schuylkill 1574 1548 1209 33 31 62 0 23 0 o Wayne 2384 2159 1981 32 21 55 30 36 4 o Wayne 318 259 224 90 72 133 17 12 15 18 Berks 17947 17592 15399 313 635 904 28 307 6 o Berks 4244 3665 2983 5 10 17 a 2 1 o Blair 10203 9166 8266 185 253 168 68 215 11 19 Blair 1949 1606 102 274 255 5 43 3 o Clinton 655 1258 27 59 156 15 81 10 Clinton 7284 7040 6473 128 255 179 2 o 3 9 6 Columbia/Montour 11710 10897 10059 96 216 373 28 112 13 19 Columbia/Montour 977 ~~~ i~~ 43 117 52 0 0 1 1 Washington 32860 29413 26867 516 788 1088 17 126 11 425 Washington 4678 3877 2977 45 41 15 1 0 4 12 Venango 13616 13176 12206 130 266 552 11 2 9 163 Venango 1661 1540 1311 127 349 258 8 151 7 155 Lycoming 16125 13075 10774 555 419 1309 6 3 9 133 Lycoming 962 780 595 49 47 125 4 a 4 70 Crawford 15498 15063 14075 135 523 155 1 ':6E. 6 189 Crawford 2591 2330 1877 47 73 62 1 1 1 73 Lehigh 20845 18976 16997 500 657 311 24 ,kHl 41 109 Lehigh 3229 2566 2060 17 57 354 0 21 4 14 Delaware 69585 52384 36749 3214 1526 1788 1682 7200 225 20 Delaware 14052 11351 7578 93 181 66 19 112 35 52 Armstrong 4964 4808 4270 142 279 92 16 3 6 11 Armstrong 1672 1541 1278 1261 990 512 193 724 93 11 Susquehanna 5429 5059 4739 29 84 39 6 162 o o Susquehanna 253 263 198 95 73 70 7 6 12 5 Mercer 16624 15727 14238 209 352 406 9 497 16 233 Mercer 2024 1987 1644 12 19 15 7 11 1 4 a Beaver 18015 18095 14290 756 672 745 171 1455 6 26 Beaver 5019 3967 2703 50 7 184 1 28 6 10 Forest/Warren 7598 7379 6822 69 186 224 2 61 15 35 Forest/Warren 1117 970 841 231 258 350 65 352 8 7 Montgomery 108896 97847 78214 4053 4344 5056 1718 4292 170 166 Montgomery 15625 13578 10297 43 59 21 0 3 3 18 Franklin/Fulton 17542 17022 15761 90 290 642 15 213 11 39 Franklin/Fulton 2399 2108 1860 950 1098 620 31 527 55 62 Indiana 6580 5782 5301 67 185 46 74 89 20 158 Indiana 671 58 59 77 8 22 24 10 Juniata/Perry 4476 4287 3960 49 121 122 3 3 29 79 Juniata/Perry 413 ~~~ 432 42 90 11 1 18 14 2 Bradford 4558 Bradford 332 7 14 19 0 1 2 4073 3783 49 79 92 6 13 51 101 557 477 406 9 33 15 Monroe/Pike 16606 15892 15009 87 390 252 12 138 4 16 Monroe/Pike 1756 1408 1072 13 0 3 13 12 Sullivan/Wyoming 3416 3202 2962 63 132 24 8 3 10 7 Sullivan/Wyoming 551 470 351 55 109 131 9 26 6 41 Lackawanna 19254 15947 11936 228 199 1532 45 1598 409 22 Lackawanna 1275 1108 40 60 18 0 1 a 5 Clearfield 9135 8514 7988 82 273 54 8 109 o o Clearfield 1318 1053 ~~~ 73 246 104 5 7 0 1 Cambria 12624 11553 9476 624 366 310 231 494 52 56 Cambria 3897 18 88 10 5 3 0 a McKean 3805 3718 3401 56 81 86 63 28 3 1 McKean 1134 ~;1~ 2:~~ 239 152 187 47 75 57 22 Centre 25502 22898 20440 257 652 1538 6 3 2 76 Centre 8490 64 51 76 16 45 1 1 Butler 2862 6934 4915 106 222 1676 10 3 2 Butler 15175 14209 12875 277 614 301 32 109 1 1 o Adams 5035 4913 4554 46 136 133 5 38 1 79 Adams 1271 ;~;: 2~~~ 111 124 124 -11 17 2 o Lebanon 14241 13488 12414 122 290 485 32 142 3 23 Lebanon 3083 31 24 62 4 82 8 38 Lawrence 7640 7289 6603 166 209 195 22 84 10 3 Lawrence 959 2~~~ 2;;~ 83 138 157 10 32 7 10 Jefferson 6895 6615 6136 46 111 64 25 230 3 213 Jefferson 651 480 352 22 46 60 0 0 11 3 Potter 1160 1152 1057 16 40 32 2 1 4 o Potter 449 377 294 10 76 36 1 5 0 68 Carbon 11076 10420 9840 83 311 173 4 o 9 40 Carbon 891 32 42 5 1 0 3 o Bedford 20453 20026 17973 60 320 1664 2 6 1 15 Bedford 453 695 579 21 47 38 3 2 5 11 Mifflin 2577 2410 2220 43 12 22 4 109 o 60 Mifflin 551 :6~ 359 28 35 20 0 a 0 2 Cameron/Elk 4942 4900 4529 ~ 115 95 33 28 4 1 Cameron/Elk 706 627 ~~~ 18 5 19 0 7 0 21 State Totals 1092775 993429 854542 31684 33737 36141 6613 28438 2274 5439 State Totals 196 ------iQ. ~ ~ 1 2 6 •. '. 247 164616 124539 10399 11094 11630 1262 470f 985 o 'Philadelrhla Traffic Court and Pittsburgh Police Magistrates' statistics nol mcluded. See page 93. Philadelphia Traffic Court and Pittsburgh Police Magistrates' statistics not included, See page 93, 1568 98 99 l'· ,<,,:w.~:l SUMMARY C0l\f!t~u~AIG~t!~lIh~a~1Y S2t~~!r* Cllallons Cltallons Guilty BTl I By Trial Of Prosecullon Defect To Locate CIVIL COMPLAINTS BY COUNl'Y* County Flied Disposed ~ ~ __ ~ Adjustments County Complaints Complaints Setlled Judgement Closed-No Withdrawal Lancaster 4527 3560 2678 110 145 366 3 244 14 33 Lancaster Flied Dlspos~.. -.!!!!!!. Before Trial By Default Service Of Complaint 5639 ~ AdJU~~ Northampton 2290 1805 1107 97 272 272 7 40 10 o 5157 1129 1038 '2412 Northampton 2875 277 293 8 Tioga 820 537 456 12 19 38 2 9 1 49 2508 857 636 902 8 Tioga 1609 42 71 o Allegheny' 15332 13557 4904 2850 3020 1693 94 955 41 46 1423 84 882 227 o Allegheny' 16776 14 215 1 Erie 2621 2180 1113 202 416 237 9 184 19 34 16040 5845 2098 7259 3 Erie 3934 547 258 33 Bucks 4787 4125 1424 752 724 768 11 423 23 240 3460 1224 1040 1043 1 Bucks 12066 77 67 9 Northumberland 628 590 353 61 66 77 2 8 23 2 11392 2536 2197 5404 5 Northumberland 1002 931 291 33 Cumberland 1415 1138 759 48 130 162 1 38 o 5 894 406 142 326 4 Cumberland 2039 12 8 o Westmoreland 5550 4554 2569 405 336 911 2 256 75 103 1763 787 388 496 o Westmoreland 3814 25 61 6 Luzerne 3119 2640 1162 313 499 604 6 20 36 10 3765 1255 738 1350 o Luzerne 3187 216 178 28 1 Dauphin 17267 13526 10651 277 524 1707 34 325 8 38 2714 1064 624 833 Dauphin 4735 65 126 2 12 Greene . 260 160 126 5 16 13 o o o 1 3991 970 615 2119 Greene 162 144 136 7 Fayette 1603 1311 560 126 281 282 3 44 15 20 110 70 14 19 o Fayette 614 5 2 o Chester 4158 3841 2040 347 399 668 20 81 286 5 469 144 94 193 o Chester 7019 29 7 2 Somerset 646 577 431 19 46 64 o 12 5 21 6825 1556 1167 3345 o Somerset 872 381 155 221 2 Snyder/Union 842 763 572 23 73 88 2 4 1 17 877 410 210 210 Snyder/Union 938 30 17 o Clarion 572 451 347 9 30 58 3 o 4 3 795 253 270 206 1 Clarion 635 25 39 2 9 York 4956 389A 3157 205 200 275 4 53 4 2 507 74 212 163 York 3898 22 34 2 Huntingdon 258 212 186 6 6 11 o 3 o o 3187 1041 875 1045 o Huntingdon 234 141 85 o 20 Schuylkill 1119 1075 610 124 129 161 5 11 35 12 219 40 54 118 Schuylkill 752 3 4 o Wayne 231 164 110 17 19 12 o 1 5 o 667 212 123 299 o Wayne 575 10 22 1 o Berks 2714 2603 1433 198 362 480 14 106 10 3 607 11-1 206 159 Berks 3262 43 88 o 1 Blair 2197 1768 1327 66 77 179 21 77 21 3167 1121 767 1114 Blair 1715 91 58 16 2 Clinton 500 506 289 39 115 51 o 11 1 7 1499 321 288 629 Clinton 629 169 90 2 Columbia/Montour 875 651 504 40 37 64 o 2 4 3 634 230 203 192 o Columbia/Montour 1279 1220 9 o o o Washington 3626 2854 1498 235 473 402 6 232 8 100 218 356 625 1 Washington 2167 2131 19 1 3 Venango 444 424 315 9 10 54 1 1 34 101 742 401 840 93 Venango 1017 1003 51 4 o Lycoming 2173 1340 968 87 '109 176 o o o 144 128 233 565 54 Lycoming 2395 2173 21 2 9 Crawford 1524 ':'330 1013 30 65 190 1 14 17 52 517 490 979 105 Crawford 3069 3056 77 5 2 Lehigh 5059 3738 2089 163 285 427 16 631 127 69 385 568 1801 183 Lehigh 4652 4417 104 15 4 Delaware 4216 3205 610 673 981 704 13 157 67 8 1453 845 1772 194 Delaware 8931 8143 122 31 13 Armstrong' 652 515 350 68 44 52 o o 1 o 3976 1523 2288 202 Armstrong 454 386 129 25 7 Susqueha.nna 183 173 115 13 23 10 2 10 o o 75 102 198 5 Susquehanna 405 375 6 o o Mercer 2291 1975 1256 50 125 435 o 105 4 7 Mercer 103 81 152 30 1520 1463 362 9 o o Beaver 3157 3376 1606 238 330 540 3 653 6 6 Beaver 391 643 27 40 2397 2281 789 o 62 Forest/Warren 249 251 195 14 19 11 o 2 10 6 Forest/Warren 461 856 73 101 594 523 103 1 o Montgomery 5629 4649 2086 545 758 723 13 451 73 19 Montgomery 152 229 31 9544 8715 2865 6 2 1 Franklin/Fulton 1094 1033 688 39 50 164 3 86 3 25 Franklin/Fulton 1898 3247 470 180 1665 1380 252 55 11 Indiana 842 729 499 38 67 35 1 75 14 o Indiana 339 725 47 12 690 650 186 5 1 Juniata/Perry 843 663 489 13 19 134 2 5 1 42 Juniata/Perry 127 274 36 21 ... 866 832 205 6 11 Bradford 756 548 429 18 23 57 1 3 17 19 Bradford 273 310 33 11 1487 1321 235 o 10 Monroe/Pike 1054 846 .548 30 69 133 4· 59 3 5 Monroe/Pike 308 712 50- 15 1970 1966 745 1 o Sullivan/Wyoming 658 522 349 33 72 60 o 3 5 33 Sullivan/Wyoming 495 476 135 106 582 473 79 9 o Lackawanna 3022 2378 1179 280 347 446 8 114 4 33 Lackawanna 153 217 10 14 3271 2944 634 o o Clearfield 1199 840 641 22 135 36 o 6 o o Clearfield 572 1495 127 109 1302 1124 163 7 o Cambria 2967 2701 1598 429 173 232 78 141 50 54 Cambria 411 520 15 12 1662 1375 398 3 o McKean 557 586 373 23 51 102 5 32 o o McKean 356 523 59 20 1101 916 110 19 o Centre 4840 4129 2894 86 173 955 3 1 17 o Centre 331 398 56 21 2111 1571 473 o o Butler 1911 1756 1265 79 119 266 o 27 o 5 Butler 479 504 81 32 2903 3251 364 2 o Adams 797 773 554 27 18 108 4 62 o 12 Adams 1101 1343 225 217 898 971 152 1 o Lebanon 455 397 302 9 21 48 4 13 o o Lebanon 256 415 129 18 1585 1515 666 1 o Lawrence 681 672 476 29 57 93 5 10 2 o Lawrence 331 445 42 25 687 670 132 6 o Jefferson 541 381 185 31 111 44 6 4 o 119 Jefferson 139 356 13 23 600 558 198 7 2 Potter 133 130 99 3 20 6 o 1 1 o Potter 116 205 32 7 463 451 49 o o Carbon 328 281 123 40 69 49 o o o 26 Carbon 191 199 7 5 697 611 178 o o Bedford 561 543 364 24 32 123 o o o 1 Bedford 197 209 '9 18 611 572 51 o 5 Mifflin 618 458 369 33 4 36 2 14 o 42 Mifflin 315 184 2 20 577 544 37 o o Cameron/Elk 219 242 173 ~ 31 ~ o o 2 12 Cameron/Elk 121 337 29 20 509 510 103 o o State Totals 132566 110630 64566 9775 12824 16115 424 5819 1107 1595 State Totals 188 199 11 9 143642 132761 38866 29181 o o 'Phlladelphla Traffic Court and Pittsburgh Police Magistrates' statistics not included, See page 93. 54304 5924 3905 581 'Philadelphia-Traffic Court and Pittsburgh Police Magistrates' r.talistlcs not InclUded. See page 93. 210 100 101 ~~~r:1·-----'~~""--w-.."'-" ...." ..... '.~.r.-"';'- .," ->..... ""'~ -~. - O·_H,...,.,_._. __ -...... ,....,.,~ ...... ~~..,. ..,...... r ... ""'~,~~. ~'-.?;~-,t'~~.'4..1~'~~•. ,. . .;-'-:~.~.J;~\~ MISDEMEANOR AND FELONY COMPLAINTS BY COUNTY* Dismissal Bound Waiver 01 Complaints Complaints Preliminary Preliminary Withdrawal Declared Preliminary County Flied Disposed Hearing Hearing 01 Prosecution Fugitive Hearing Other AdjuDtments Lancaster 3703 3576 296 2097 431 43 677 32 71 Northampton 2360 1965 305 855 359 47 379 20 5 Tioga 528 465 31 97 106 4 221 6 99 Allegheny' 12598 11821 3908 5013 1782 219 751 148 40 Erie 4258 3801 846 1572 369 100 781 133 11 Bucks 7551 6357 936 2314 1207 220 1538 142 181 Northumberland 888 805 69 509 96 6 118 7 0 Cumberland 1572 1367 158 525 267 58 347 12 13 Westmoreland 4352 4170 918 1283 920 126 823 100 36 Luzerne 2936 2706 426 916 458 19 865 22 18 Dauphin ·3799 3172 589 1571 335 148 477 52 155 Greene 683 481 14 169 54 0 237 7 0 Fayette 1684 1446 259 496 206 29 437 19 14 CASE VOLUME BY Chester 3759 3449 634 1368 691 33 536 187 45 Somerset 778 641 69 193 144 20 210 5 12 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, 1975 Snyder/Union 311 321 24 158 45 7 86 1 1 Clarion 361 332 53 122 38 10 90 19 3 York 3389 3027 408 1420 249 33 879 38 0 FOLLOWS Huntingdon 328 319 49 99 46 1 124 0 0 Schuylkill 1304 1280 146 416 179 32 500 7 0 Wayne 260 221 41 57 41 4 72 6 0 Berks 2422 2395 482 1019 314 105 443 32 9 Blair 1812 1585 166 617 309 17 459 17 0 Clinton 443 405 111 181 42 1 62 8 1 Columbia/Montour 972 816 155 287 139 8 208 19 2 Washington 1931 H309 277 642 234 30 386 40 14 Venango 595 594 92 177 115 3 119 88 48 Lycoming 1699 1270 151 563 151 5 336 64 114 Crawford 1128 1077 87 399 211 1 365 14 15 Lehigh 4694 4426 612 2357 408 30 918 101 31 Delaware 9555 7770 2533 2512 1602 705 296 122 22 Armstrong 633 474 76 160 80 5 149 4 0 Susquehanna 338 310 38 95 69 9 95 4 0 Mercer 1388 1100 118 440 332 31 167 12 18 Beaver 2739 2293 357 807 623 176 314 16 82 Forest/Wam'l; 556 511 54 233 87 2 121 14 17 Montgomery 7551 6599 932 3199 921 62 1379 106 26 Franklin/Fulton 1031 915 91 322 178 42 267 15 1 Indiana 841 775 101 330 93 20 218 13 3 J un iata/Perry 295 264 35 129 53 1 41 5 10 Bradford 628 526 43 95 96 9 274 9 6 Monroe/Pike 868 802 175 302 210 8 87 20 11 Sullivan/Wyoming 306 300 42 158 53 3 41 3 4 Lackawanna 1774 1473 390 494 340 16 201 32 7 Clearfield 904 696 37 337 93 3 226 0 0 Cambria 2324 2179 415 517 498 33 569 147 28 McKean 516 507 84 204 141 4' 73 1 0 Centre 1080 831 121 512 98 2 83 15 0 Butler 1341 1046 133 287 142 11 424 49 36 Adams 659 649 43 270 180 3 144 9 27 Lebanon 919 821 102 400 111 24 181 3 0 l:.awrence 842 741 202 298 162 5 63 11 0 Jefferson 362 319 24 95 55 10 135 0 8 Potter 202 164 25 51 56 1 31 0 0 Carbon 337 279 73 112 53 1 37 3 4 Bedford 384 427 36 178 86 1 121 5 0 Mifflin 438 438 65 125 89 9 150 0 16 Cameron/Elk 287 266 32 109 46 5 61 13 0 State Totals 112196 99374 18689 40263 16493 2560 19392 1977 1264 'Phlladelphla Tralflc Court and Pittsburgh Police Magistrates' statistics not Included. See page 93, f, 102 , :. ,. -iJ ' .... ;::.- ...... ,;,=-- __" •• , ..•. •• __ _ ...... •.. _, .",.'.., '~'. "'~""--""~""''''<'\'''''~''C''''-<'':''''''''''='V£.N.'''''''''''f''''''''''''t.foI~",,_,:,,;:;:;_-,_; .:.::~-:_.:;:"~:~._:~. ~ ~ "~ ~._. ~'-~ -' :-- ~ TRAFFIC CITATIONSINON_TRAFFIC CiT.4TIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVil COMPlAINTS gy MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS -- --- i co!if ~ ..... in ~ ~ ..... ~ C) ~ 0 C) r!J ~ e>J e>J ;'4~ n; ()j e>J e>J e>J e>J ~ n; nJ ()j ($ & ~ ...... &h <"V ()j nj ~ ~ .'!? ~ n; n; n; :::-: ~ 135061 5320 10136 4525 5798 7652 0~ n; n; n; n; :!? If \C' 1975 POPULATION 27 41941 20439 188304613 2647 c/: ()j ~ !V nJ ~ nj ()j n; ()j ()j 62886 33752 29471 Traffic Citations Filed 1284 1109 970 342 304 1026 4343 2 468 1 453 2081 1032 40270 30066/ 23035 23368 32877 28969 27108 3104§ 40461 52452 Dispositions By: 1650 2785 1965 513 6075 1 2412 34791 27979 28297 !g5981 274 988 2337 1452 902 1756 823 330 2223 1077 2192 3194 GuJlt~fJ.~~s _ __ 1150 994 848 300 1 9 342 788 361 198 116 2347 5572 2274 3342 2011 2721 1342 1831 1268 8 16 8 4 13 24 150 130 52 193 33 274 3292 1033 193 1704 499 Guilty· Trial 44 140 69 80 101 456 1428 1734 1480 3673 1616 1527 Withdrawal 109 182 544 27 153 52 308 733 1655' 1914 73 38 72 51 5 361 602 324 :346 184 292 Substantive Defect Jll 0 17~ .2Q 28 73 118 148 3 0 2 13 0 13 229 7 111 ~3 L9. 2 1026 333 275 114 2_04 Unable to Locate a a 2 1RA A .1BI 90 86 S7 31 54 _9 13 a 12 a .0 18 a 1 a 2 ..a ..a E ~1 24 _3 ~8 .101 .22 Other 0 286 35 124 ~3 1)4 AJ --1.Q _5.3 1 0 0 0 0 1064 3664 2637 1346 2445 1018 1 1 100 0 9 218 J37 Ii ~s Total Dispositions a 5 15 0 19 a 269 0 30 a 120 Adjustments 1589 2608 2096 0 1 a 1 0 8 2Q 589 3468 1856 274 2093 890 a 0 a 8 a _4 9 0 1 0 0 1899 2985 2061 5395 2335 824 190 100 78 33 46 623 441 302 491 Jill2. 0 3 0 0 0 2431 2068 2491 Non-Traffic Citations Filed 243 349 165 248 400 440 831 0 0 0 32 31 a 478 264 388 276 631 476 a Dispositions By: 585 152 71 53 25 2~ 112 92 50 27 183 254 757 1328 1468 2110 842 Guilty Plea 19 4 2 3 0 59 68 14 59 53 356 737 216 711 509 258 89 303 154 181 24 42 10 273 27 238 722 479 86 13 85 95 10 49 942 439 296 106 495 46 41 200 49 17 52 295 325 154 201 92 24 1 16 217 29 146 14 45 36 82 55 23 9 30 2 143 26 194 93 35 92 0 88 3 6 38 53 31 35 22 35 0 22 2 6 6 a 32 6 9 Unable to Locate 2 1 4 a 1 48 532 590 258 447 703 14 "~3 a 37 a 111 0 2 19 0 40 33 Other 734 170 86 68 28 0 0 0 a 12 2 a 1 13 0 0 221 .1 3 2 7 a 1 4 _0 12 6 _U _0 1 4 466 704 a _3 0 Q 478 297 342 419 J5 ~- ~. 10 0 502 369 281 338 1320 1000 0 0 2 0 a 4 0 0 .1168 874 554 185 685 Summaryfomplalnts Filed 51 151 31 66 44 "' 1 0 9 0 0 ~~~~~::=r==~~~24~6t-~20~4~~t-~3~4J-~13:6J-~r---t-~t-~r-~r--;t=~ 392 298 48 193 443 a 8 0 a DISpositions By: 159 137 69 18 122 49 ~u bel .ll 256 307 437 165 599 649 190 354 496 492 265 627 Guilty Plea b 1 C 1 .;) 1 _0 28 ~~ 3~ J: 6 130 161 35 31 62 117 26 90 5 390 Not Guilty ~ 1 C 4!; l;.}U _~~ J:l 4 ~3 14 6 58 l.04 _27 188 52 144 119 93 88 88 3 18 143 28 31 28 102 113 271 I-_W~ith~d~ra:7w~al~~:r-Guilty Trial __~." t=i=lnll:1tt==~~'d=~;);j~=..:±rit==:!liF4=i~-1=i~Jut=Jut~ut=_~~ ..:l U U U 1 U l U 37 252 23 62 32 111 43 90 11_ 76 J51 ~ 30 58 177 93 30 Substantive Defect t>t: I Jl U 4 l";jJ l U 54 24 14 _38 60 79 232 123 18 132 0 2 a 67 ::s9 ~3 ..Q 0 0 3 a a 0 13 12 J).6 18 42 Unable to Locate u u ~ J:I U U 15lJ G~~ 11~ 1 zlIb_5 1~4 143 1 20 0 23 a 0 0 0 0 21 Jj U 2 30 1 13 0 a a L-T~o~ta~I~D~ls~pO~S~\ti~o~nS~Other ______I- ~~.+--.:...:ll1\ !;~_1-rrt Ub_~-n~UU ( ~6 f_bu - -L~o~~~o~l-..!-:...ruit--:..:::ncj--""212 5 2 0 _0 J,) 0 5 0 29 5 _412 325 95 _0 ]. 0 4 0 55 202 442 207 271 240 159 ~ 0 7 0 a Adjustments 72 300 477 169 225 176 3 0 1 a 0 647 410 203 339 406 Mlsde/Felony Complalnt.s Filed 219 175 83 61 49 55 3'''- 20 0 a 0 0 459 143 576 412 a 0 0 0 12 0 391 240 420 402 198 536 0 Dispositions B y: 13 11 3 2 6 8 10798 336209 5749 62 88lQ. 183 299 251 458 209 262 417 504 158 232 51 104 57 Dismissed =====~=~C1~0~5t=~6~0~~2~8~j2~0tE3122fr==135~=±~t=~=:j~~~0f==~110_ 191 76 59 255 10 65 Witi1drawal-=--Bound Over 2 0 a 1 0 0 3 9 24.9 183 81 118 162 75 70 151 85 19 .:l64 "L59 =====j=~=J6~0~j4~0~j2~2~J2~.1~=~15~~22~==J=~71~50==~b~~3~b~~0~~1 ..8.0 _5C 2"[5 77 102 82 142 45 84 .27 .18 _63 4~ Ag 89 144 153 ..245 ...BJ 88 Fugitive 59 9 40 16 10 10 2g 46 ~ 0 0 5 0 1.f 32 JO ~8 _68 . fiB .L 2 3 7 6 0 14 48 18 ~1 18 42 3C 41 2 7 0 a .3 Waiver 1 2 2 OL=::!1L~3~_-l--"7j3~15~t:5;a9~311~5i)10--:1~2~0r-1~4iill3 10 35 10 53 11 1 3 0 18 11 ( Other ----JI--t-2i),41ioil-'---'-1'12:~2~~99[5rt~]6~0!=_l5~4!_J7~8}_--+_~or40r~oDt~Qlo=:])0 a 3 0 0 5 27 11 1. 3 18 12 ~T~o~ta~I~D~iSP~CO~s~iti~on~s~ ______-' __ -r ___ 0_27::·~_]~::U~::~O==~O===t~~=:~~~~~~~ 413 356 240 1 a 0 0 -.32 11 460 339 200 639 108 a • 0 0 0 0 .Q __ __ 0 0 0 0 268 230 421 192 235 334 ~A~d.JU~s~tm~e~n~!s======f===t=~30~3~t=~2~40~_=.J~1~3~5~J6~6~J6~4~J9~0~ +-£29~9t-~3~011-~1~89l-~1~4j7 1~8J5 0 a a 0 a 0 488 177 202 Civil Cort:'e.lalnts Flied 97 72 62 57 98 407 401 a a a 0 a 0 196 317 408 169 721 0 DISpositions By: 36 226 207 419 599 406 L_JJTrlliia!J-l 52t-.~14iL-+15a---J1W542 17 17 ~~2~0t---t--~3~1t-:3~2r--3§!5312:233t=:J]J19 29 79 56 60 359 222 328 151 391 -;------~-1-66:2~8989 101 78 41 144 119 Settled 34 ~u 11_3 178 ll. 77 79 191 29 64 85 r--6:~e~fa~ul~t--·------r--~-'I~tlllm-;)~~d: ~~ ~; U 1 l ~ ~ ~o ~ 24 21 21 43 13 114 174 286 182 201 48 216 229 111 91 17 6 51 166 116 166 J- <'<0 Senllce ,_. U ," 4 J< " 0 0 156 244 93 379 66 27 11 43 21 61 ..il ~8 1 88 173 188 110 111 3. 9 11 20 7 1 59 76 67 200 Withdrawa .~ l U U 1 ?R13_0£ 188 136 181 -1 10 9 5 0 0 8 a 34 a 20 ~~O~t~he~r~~~~ ______-t---r~L~_~~~ ~~ ~10 OU 68 82 ~- U 0 0 2 12 8 4 7 4 1 21 Total Dispositions U l U U U U L lJ U 1 2 1 0 1 1 5 2 12 5 '3 Adjustments 436 400 196 a 0 a 0 0 a 1 O· 331 415 199 693 127 163 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 316 480 401 464 254 352 Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables. a 0 0 0 0 0 142 451 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~--__Zl_-- - 105 TRAFFIC CITATIONS,NON .. TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVil COMPlAINTS'BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS ~ - ~ §J~ ~~ f!8.;s ..... ~ .....,~ c;:; C)j ~ 'V nJ <"V 'V ~~ cV cV cV cV r{ cV cV :tt 0hhhh 44223 23767 26923 47301 38041 30266 35998 23535 24915 31570 20132 ~6477 14 1975 POPULATION 21 63 89 131 14 45 921 2898 756 6026 7 Traffic Citations Filed 26 79 55 14 9 5 Dispositions By: 2207 331 4677 6 13 1 -S- 625 ·0 1 ·0 1 5 U ~l4 12 11 1 ~ ~L!Il!y.Plea_L~~-~· 70 -::3 4 ~~ u Not Guilty ~U 4~ \J 1 '0 5 -zff 74 ·0 U u 0 0 Guilty: Trial 43 ·0 0 -0' -0 0 0 -ZO 135 0 0 U 0 0 Withdrawal 73 51 8 0 0 a a 0 0 Substantive Defect 0 1 0 a a -0 0 162 153 31 a -0 1 0 0 0 -0 0 ~1I 460 Unable to Locate 1 4 0 lJ -85 92 14 11 Other 4730 6 16 28 -0 0 984 2841 025 \'j 0 0 0 a Total DisDositions 0 0 -0 a 0 a 1 1 25 484 128 206 0 241 293 299 Adjustm~nts 26 1 5 100 231 507 1682 193 a 2 Non-Traffic Citations Filed 0 a 239 78 110 0 155 0 3 a 2 15 231 38 16 19 0 25 Dispositions By: 267 1145 86 0 2 -0 1 l 1) 0 1 1) 1 ·0 1 7 2 0 91 Guiltv Plea 68 ,90 2~ 1 0 U 0 Not Guilty 0 -0 2 0 \) 1 52 0 10 0 18 -51 10 10 -0 U \j 1) U Guilty- Trial ·0 0 U 2 0 0 7 0 0 ~ 71 10 -0 -0 0 U 1) 0 lY Withdrawal 0 -0 U 6 0 0 5 0 5 91 ·0· ·0 U U ·0 U 0 Substantive Defect lJ -0 U -0 0 4 1 1 0 ~8 114 ·0 0 1 l a Unable to Locate -:) -0 0 lJ 0 1 130 334 102 174 0 5 0 4 21 231 1 1 0 13 0 0 Other 1690 135 0 0 6 1) 0 0 453 -0 0 0 0 0 Total DisDositions 4 0 0 0 427 228 226 116 328 249 58 101 82 68 395 94 96 182 Adjustments 152 456 111 145 49 141 101 528 30 114 203 348 Summary Complaints Filed 6 0 34 92 45 28 21 212 28 17 44 0 26 25 137 2 61 49 24 18 17 11 39 23 19 86 DIspOSItIons By: 9 319 4 0 fb 00 tl 04 ~1 79 1U 4U 230 90 3 13 14 111 13 33 41 Guilty Plea -2~ 40 -Z9 0 -24 156 60 43 12 27 5 69 2 11 2 19 15 9 16 Not Guilty 49 l7 ·3 0 95 11 1b -8 • -OU 3U lU~ 13 2U Guilty, Trial 5U 8 45 -0 Q. 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 a -Z2 -0 0 1 I 1) 0 0 7 9 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 Withdrawal -S- -U 0 0 '0 2 -1 ~4 T3 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 substantive Defect 0 29 7_ -U 5 .~1~ 0 0 3 -u 0 :2 -U U 382 215 112 77 66 57 381 7 80 187 Unable to Locate '1 I U -U -32 9/t. -U -Z45 141 143 0 0 0 0 1 Q 0 0 0 0 Other 112 456 47 45 132 4-t?~ 9~ 0 -0 -0 -0 0 0 ;, Total Dispositions 0 -U lJ U U 113 141 219 124 318 224 234 160 131 101 86 209 100 189 197 Adjustments 56 211 168 22 60 113 219 240 141 145 143 131 Mlsde/Felony Complaints Filed 23 22 76 68 79 170 53 45- 31 18 25 33 13 45 108 6 6 D!spositions By: 50 52 62 39 74 42 22 27 24 56 55 71 84 93 55 42 123 44 19 40 16 15 14 2 24 67 46 24 58 25 37 5 43 11 Dismissed 98 98 36 43 35 25 13 8 Bound Over 24 22 90 17 1 0 0 2 2 2 9 0 9 2 0 0 4 ~--. -::...-'-- .. 3-..Q 13 28 1 0 - 44 0 9 0 0 1 \ 4 5 32 9 5 15 20 17 6 2 17 14 Withdrawal 6 0 2 0 0 5 0 2 Fugitive 3 4 4 4 a 2 0 2 4 tJ 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 8 23 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 Waiver . 1 0 0 0 0 0 55 57 129 228 195 272 223 183 155 73 193 105 169 1 0 58 188 145 22 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other 116 110 99 0 7 0 207 215 116 0 0 0 0 0 Total Dispositions 03 3 0 0 0 0 385 393 534 251 276 254 255 105 83 139 87 85 81 Adjustments 404 384 287 , 281 205 676 273 656 195 258 288 128 101 Civil Complaints Filed 72 96. 133 79 I-OTsposltlons By: 16 241 1~::l 25~ 71 11~ 22 27 52 7 9 8 75 f)7 89 111 12 8e 18 14 Trial 11 47 15 65 23 75 82 213 93 125 96 15 40 22 32 51 239 95 20 101 0 25 1 2 1 15 Settled 119 157 17 173 120 303 101 8 1 4 Default 40 16 49 0 2 0 3 3 1 4 0 0 ~ 30 0 0 7 L 2 4 --1 -No service 1, 6 1 32 1 a a 0 0 ·0 0 '\ 4 2 1 0 0 3 Withdrawal 0 0 0 0 0 200 399 251 260 251 103 80 130 . Other 0 7 648 179 40~ 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 306 119 332 159 655 274 0 0 Total Olspos\\:;:;ns 230 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Adjustments 107 Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables. 106 .- -. -.~ --- -- .. TRAFFI C CIT A"rloNs,I"ON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVil COMPLAINTS' Y MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS 1 {1; ~ ,..., ~ "- "- 'l> rQ 0 & C) C) ~ "- oj Qj ~ & ~ & &> C) ~ ~ ~ §j & & ~ IJ nI nI oJ oJ oJ oJ Qj oJ oJ oJ oj 1975 POPULATION 8174 2508 024547~636 9 t2818 812858 4 t2541 3h623 923800 1:>0231 0960 1937 9832 Traffic Citations Filed _61:;1 _L07 4Fi11A h0191 J28D 2078 ~454 -E.3a 1579 I~R158 Dispositions By: 115]2 2844 2255 307 h5047 64B G':li.llY. PI~._~_--.~-.I---l-"~+--=.t-+-~L1--~~~~~I:J+~~~~--t-~~-'-"-;~~~ 654 1047 1066 3859 2077 728 Not Guilt _8 45 1488 2047 1324 2644 2014 26 27 142 162 61 18 23 203 3 ~3052 Guilt -Trial . ~4 48 41 31 136 75 4 25 .10 21' q 106 17 59 139 95 bb Withdrawal ~8 55 48 2B2 _62 45 1 9 _211 1 ill fiR flfi 47 Substantive Defect _1 0 8 ..4.7 4 120, _3_ .1537 ~ 0 'J 8.1 -1a 0 Unable to Locate f--.2 14 30 700 401 9 0 0 0 2 Other 0 1 0 0 9 292 1 4 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 Total Dis ositions 702 801 1200 1995 4902 0 1 0 0 0 2337 827 1627 2555 1851 2709 Ad'ustments 0 0 0 12 4 2208! 386 N4823 ! 7 1 2 0 0 0 ...127 0 5 10 .8.33 1073 1535 365 690 383 170 620 350 51 203 75 124 !=lR 550 443 272 217 446 201 112 321 141 2 75 2 48 11 27 181 42 109 4 32 13 6 34 10 2 86 16 33 14 34 27 17 6 3 _0 34 53 5 32 11 0 12 8 15 13 61 73 43 12 46 15 0 0 0 23 0 4 2 9 6 3 0 44 _66 6 0 20 12 0 0 195 3 2J ...fl 0 _0 0 OJ 1) 0 _0. 28 0 0 01 11 0 2 ..l 0 n 0 -104 ]89 ~Q _589 ..fl 0 0 0 ...fll 306 J312 291 1~11 453 .212 _0 0 0 2 0 5 31 219 _62 130 0 0 0 a 0 0 113 1 1 496 439 335 470 437 305 133 177 365 76 108 178 199 .M ...382 -3.Qa 54 244 193 _l3.J 79 34 iA1 ..12 A,'1 ..3.. 7:-1 20 2Q 55 110 101 98 10 2 9 37 22. 0 9 .'7lJ 27 4!i 27 30 24 11 4 fi 29 A 49 52 0 21 6 5 ~o.. 84 _117 JJ 22 14 4Fi .11 0 _0 0 RR 0 31 69 23 0 ...... lL ~ n _1L 0 _13 401 112 _0 0 0 a 0 a 13 10 () 2 J02 0 1) 0 2 0 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 4 0 -0 ...lR ..5~ ROA ~I'iR 0 0 0 .1111 :-I:iB. 192 1nR 171 .1.11; 511 0 0 0 0 0 1 171 187 130 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 79 Jl24 ~69 ,AZIl 520 _164 418 1A::l Uti 2A.'i .. 197 80 10.'i 7Q 12~ ..3_ 3 W.9 ..17_ ion ..42. --21 4A 46 _1.3 60 _214 -:f1R ~} fi1 27 _5 4 96 _67 77 R1'\ 2R -1~- 5 ..3B 92 1m £11'\ t3.9.. 1.7 1R 73 t--'1ii r-:I~ .M.. a 2 3 JJ 14 15 125 BO 7 25 12 _42 4 0 _0_ a 12 6 13 78 39 19 31 147 10 7 57 0 1 _0 Jl 0 26 14 13 9 22 37 0 0 4 D ..a 7 0 ..5. 1 n 27 ~5 67 198 170 39 182 488 0 0 0 0 a 5 461 171 339 J32 156 214 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 0 55 183 66 .123_ 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 59 223 0 0 15 261 119 264 322 .291 496 207 128 392 74 76 159 188 188 13..1 95 63 5=10 109 i13 22 fl 20 249 33 1£1 9 23 63 42 41'\ 152 50 1:-1 fl 9 16 8 7 170 38 _35 58 1.40 57 60 126 106 150 120 21 132 24 1 2 2 1 24 16 11 12 22 44 J_06 2 1 2 5 11 1 4 14. 4 8 6 _-.1Q 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 r---...A.. 5.1 4 .- -.fi' 11. 65 0 1 0 0 0 a --- ~l ~- ~ f-- 69 141 301 290 282 437 192 56 0 a 0 I' 0 475 J07 88 174 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 186 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Note:Footnotes at the end of Tab/es. 108 109 TRAFFIC CITATIONS,i~ON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS IJ , CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTSliBY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS .1 lJ<, II t' - ro- ..... ~ C) & ~ §j ,2 c>j c>j c>j & <1/ <1/ <1/ <1/ OJ c>j c>j c>j c>j ~ ....!. ....!. ...! ~ c>j c>j c>j c>j ~ c:5 ..... "- ....!. "- "- "- &~hhA &h ;;'Ij ~/~hh ~'/ JI{tJ l~ IjhJ 7526 ,: 20223 11923 13371 2007712 17762 16711 95111 98791 674S 1543120419 202511 18535 h1370 14070 9412 13001 7452 16058 16084 19848 18614 20314 18580 16227 1975 POPULATION I" R1Fi 1~?R 730 70a ~494 !'i!'i? 71? 1478 1392 1849 8~0 !'i~::\ . 15RO 366 627 527 13?4 2238 2168 1373 = 10!=} 27 RO 4R ~5 11RO 1~ Traffic Citations Filed 2R~? !, Dispositions By: 6 31 38 77 1082 781 1139 725 631 2243 564 615 1155 1246 1610 836 513 1274 270 544 470 1163 1384 1901 1260 2050 57 I -.-."-.~ ...... ~ . 24 5 3 16 65 36 --'-~" ~ - 4 7 8 ~~iLty pl§1_1!~. -- -_." 8 1 8 1 3 11 13 19 1 60 4 16 24 16 26 27 12" Not Guilty 80 1 9 114 i;: 7 20 19 46 110 10 27 12 170 0 1 5 2 5 38 29 22 9 0 14 34 97 51 36 Guilty· Trial 7 f() 6 9 104 55 8 90 1: 6 50 63 16 26 38 33 2 2 3R 1 45 22 3~ 1~ 37R 2 2 1 J Withdrawal n '0 1 0 1 n 0 0 ::\ 0 1 ]. 0 0 1 1 .:1. 0 9 1'7 10 n n 0 1 AO. 0 Substantive Defect 11 60 7 3 84 43 2 8 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 87 0 a 207 2 a 0 4 0 0 2 Unable to Locate ,.., 0 0 0 1 !i a 0 a 2 0 a a 4 a a 0 5 2 t!:.. 1 0 0 0 0 d a a Other 0 782 684 2520 587 689 1257 1460 1829 893 598 1576 2678 69 12 45 51 95 1137 832 1374 297 598 509 1267 1530 2060 1329 Total Dlspositions - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 2 0 a 14 0 3 a Adjustments 0 0 0 50 R.:1. 72 1RO ?R1 ::\?O 166 155 520. 164 10? 249 170 111 67 199 106 110 567 100 164 442 286 174 Non-Traffic Citations Filed 1389 0 25 Dispositions By: 123 390 138 97 174 144 68 69 149 82 715 0 4 37 43 59 170 211 267 125 68 347 75 107 251 188 140 Guilty Plea 1 1 0 5 1 2 13 4 10 5 4 a 4 8 8 1 9 3 1 0 0 6 13 2 2 Not Guilty 26 0 2 18 2 0 2 8 33 11 0 10 139 a 2 4 4 10 8 9 21 1 a a a 11 26 7 5 Guilty· Trial 1 6 6 a 9 23 3 2 51 6 8 17 2 0 a :~9 1 1 92 a 7 12 41 2 Withdrawal 92 0 a 1 a a 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 I a a a 1 a a 1 a 10 0 a a 1 4 a Substantive Defect 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 4 7 \ 2 0 0 13 0 0 1 3 7 71 0 0 0 0 0 Unable to Locate 0 0 .D.. 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a l Other 7 43 54 80 179 231 341 133 141 472 I 153 105 198 176 109 70 201 90 9R 510 75 138 304 242 149 Total Disoositions 972 0 0 0 1, 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! a a a 0 a 0 6 0 0 a Adjustments 0 0 0 142 225 454 57 329 213 103 126 1 88 84 85 42 94 28 73 517 112 201 299 222 415 211 220 Summary Complaints Filed 0 252 140 179 Dispositions By: 67 62 I 67 34 40 21 65 12 41 434 36 137 0 73 25 71 105 19 323 26 193 189 225 135 93 119 148 Guilty Plea 21 16 4 16 4 3 22 a 5 2 7 10 1 5 5 1 5 7 6 0 10 11 20 7 5 Not Guilty a 71 3 1 16 15 7 0 6 22 0 2 5 10 0 2 14 38 1 7 20 9 178 15 4 7 I Guilty· Trial a 40 17 43 12 3 a 26 25 63 27 24 9 10 104 70 1 9 42 6 0 6 24 16 1 7 44 35 32 20 Withdrawal 0 8 0 a a 0 6 a a 0 a 0 a 0 0 a 0 17 2 0 0 a 1 1 0 ~Substantive Defect a 0 13 a 1 1 a 3 0 3 3 60 0 14 0 0 0 9 12 a 5 a 56 a a a 3 a a Unable to Locate 2 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 a 0 ·13 5 a 0 a 1 1 1 Other a 01 2 123 99 53 ----rf, -138 a 210 90 189 157 237 356 43 388 262 87 99 42 92 22 54 560 244 207 188 161 195 Total Dispositions 0 1 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 1 0 0 0 Adjustments 0 0 2 121 129 72 133 44 127 137 96 73 45 57 217 86 264 175 221 248 418 183 231 139 196 168 66 , Misde/Felon~ Com~laints Filed a 311 277 . Dispositions By: 16 28 24 5 27 67 12 34 12 30 26 23 19 3 6 16 8 39 5 26 1- 23 27 22 Dismissed a 52 65 33 -, 58 64 114 84 26 32 25 32 60 36 61 42 44 44 20 26 151 29 100 49 60 83 85 60 Bound Over 0 147 104 22 10 a 20 14 13 18 29 4 10 41 25 11 27 31 19 a 13 7 41 7 21 2 46 12 135 45 Withdrawal 6 7 16 2 6 21 a 7 1 5 0 0 14 0 2 0 11 a 0 a 2 3 0 1 Fugitive 0 15 3 32 1 16 65 49 50 41 55 17 6 20 11 10 28 21 8 1 12 1 26 9 108 85 44 137 49 Waiver a 1) ~ 3 a 1 1 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 12 3 1 a 16 2 0 1 a a 1 0 a a Other 160 147 242 \31 53 142 128 75 152 64 147 116 122 71 39 54 221 70 169 164 231 165 387 178 - Total Dispositions a 315 237 ·0 2 U 0 a 0 u 0 ~ u 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a a a a a a . Adjustments U a--a 241 142 79 248 146 173 221 160 126 210 168 220 107 102 263 80 200 218 213 276 178 287 Civil Complaints Filed 0 190 159 450 120 DISPOSitions By: 61 75 43 20 29 21 47 48 20 9 31 38 59 142 14 28 0 132 50 107 25 163 58 24 164 34 a Trial 40 9 47 124 19 4A. 65 23 93 52 51 20 17 17 14 56 22 32 35 34 78 Settled 0 g~ 18 57 32 28 150' 208 44 58 87 17 11 0 70 108 64 40 48 86 115 14 54 11 12 119 167 100 4~ 22 Default 0 43 47 2 3 8 0 4 12 11 a 3 150 0 0 0 2 0 '15 2 '7 a 17 2 5 1 0 16 0 No :service a 4 5 3 2 12 8 a 6 6 a 1_ 1--.1 ., a 1 a 2 6 ~ _oaf Withdrawal 0 1 0 6 1 1 1 -~ ~,·-t --- 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jl a 0 0 1 a a 0 a a a 0 1 utner 0 2 1 0 242 188 83 180 178 224 83 95 187 58 175 229 200 234 155 261 213 116 395 116 255 187 54 243 161 154 ,- Total. DIspositions 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AdjUstments a 0 a a 0 0 0 0 Note:Foo/notes at the end of Tables. no 111 t, TRAFFIC CITATIONSjNON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND C~Vll COMPLAINTS BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS - ~ 2g c§' ~ "- fi <:::l &' K K;jjjj;' K <"\I <"\I 0:5 r» r» r» 0:5 ~ K K K "- ,.!, :;, r» <"\I 0:5 (lj 0:5 c>.5 ~ "- &hhh} ~ ~"h[;M: 27308 26211 26064 15928 34558 1918 21804 83884 1 22096 3654 32519 63457 21435 72019 02073016561 9299 12598 M3449 0681 h2454 33038 1975 POPULATION 2:iR9 21:i8 2058 2141 58fi8 44?.1 ~74R ?ClR1 ')7:i7 ?~n8 :i:i?1 17605 1590 131 Cl1 11295 11142 11n1~ 817 5490 5501 Traffic Citations Filed 7R1 R25 Dispositions By: 3825 2310 1720 1600 1443 1526 4689 2628 2847 2074 1825 1676 2577 5190 1257 2890 1191 664 696 922 761 740 289 478 187 .•... 104 79 155 150 262 155 138 155 72 55 101 58 §uiltYEte_a~ _ __ 19 14 9 3 321 135 Not Guilty 4 -14 377 27 35 60 48 132 192 107 211 102 77 109 182 91 57 191 54 " 1 18 15 25 75 98 ?1 2 :i. 19 ion R7 ~?CI R -0 B ~lt -Trial 1R .1 123 567 71 28 20 ')1 ?1 -:6.0 R 14 ~5 CI 1 0 0 7 1 R n 14 .1'\ 1 0 0 Withdrawal .1 "1 1 0 37 Substantive Defect n . 0 571 65 365 223 190 142 7 14 0 284·, 0 0 57 506 1 0 140 1 7 3 2 19 10 2 0 2 1 5 0 39 272 0 0 0 Unable to Locate 1 40 4 20 0 0 4 4- ? 2309 2029 1884 2036 -5277 3248 3256 2727 2087 2023 3091 6465 1377 3182 1451 Other 7R7 -QP'~ Rfifi 7R7 5274 3110 Total Dis osltlons 701 0 0 6 18 125 502 371 461 58 78 32 3 12 0 0 0 36 fi7 ri 2 6 14 Ad ustments 726 R56 finR .1?7 611 Cl7? 1450 8fifi i 41:i 1139 647 809 292 :i48 501 102 inn 7fi iRO i?O 912 796 559 358 400 377 303 312 485 398 RnR ROR 225 831 43f) 534 226 205 383 83 7R fl7 108 82 25 50 48 35 182 42 34 51 87 60 23 11 8 31 0 fi ? 48 53 61 1 1 41 17 6 30 26 42 33 6:f 152 90 29 58 29 39 7 18 34 -2 14 0 5 12 25 4 9 10 0 15 22 6 60 21 11 10 -4 3 :i 3 2 42 39 43 -0 3 ? 0 16 7 2 0 0 0 6 4 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 -13 -0 0 .g 47 26 84 56 37 20 8" R 0 0 3' i1 '57 0 0 3 0 0 n -0 15 g -3 n 1 B 8 r) 6 -,q 2 -ri 0 0 -7 R 2 0 4 -31-9 0 n 493 610 524 437 -440 574 649 1024 837 1039 £)74 642 256 2~5 451 CI~ Rn i?R 104 740 92 0 0 1 1 23 97 67 164 3 1 8 0 8 4 0 39 7 0 0 0 5 7 337 220 451 208 185 317 569 732 161 235 91 112 73 128 284 213 49 200 155 146 206 471 117 84 47 48 150 419 61 79 26 35 13 54 81 114 7'4 174 15 28 53 26 86 69 50 37 30 84 24 38 36 187 7? 29 70 14 8 10 13 18 32 0 1~ n 5 0 29 48 25 117 93 12 23 10 4 14 21 20 68 10 3 52 7 70 111 4 R 0 36 9 33 65 22 39 68 46 41 30 14 4 46 13 -, .~ ?A 222 40 40 r- 5 5 14 0 0 1 .Jl 0 0 3 0 0 0 Q 0 -6 0 -0 0 1 0 1 - 0 6 0 12 0 10 40 5 3 103 153 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 2 1 0 2 0 8 1 0 1 0 J 0 2 0 2 4 0 .~ 0 9 3 2 0 0 .. 0 112 209 q90 151 178 278 629 1124 ?in ?Hl Cl1 ]9. 51 94 169 2F!7 /--124_ ~J_9.4.. t------f-~~54 35... 119 7~_ 3 -() 0 0 0 5 21 22 169 17 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 19 0 0 0 945 497 587 394 210 395 333 740 780 461 351 195 581 229 132 399 g22 .(..., Flied 106 1 ()F; AR 204 117 1 68 67 34 40 38 124 77 ,58 59 46 47 8 13 57 92 18 8 5 9 3 69 39 -120 214 160 .1-~fi 110 AO 91 234 290 157 86 71 160 94 45 113 194 9 13 "6 32 36 112 13 121 53 15 44 68 101 37 83 52 29 87 25 -26 20 10 29 17 241 50 76 39 11 1 17 4 9 28 6 24 12 6 8 15 7 0 5 28 1 2 6 0 0 99 47 164 176 127 73 20 164 64 36 118 1 91 77 188 108 68 74 11 34 42 30 0 0 0 2 1 7 29 1 6 1 23 11 7 44 0 1 0 0 4 4 5 5 258 550 640 423 331 183 492 236 130 424 340 137 756 373 348 380 102 391 , 83 85 56 165 I, 31 70 0 0 0 -'- ...... 0 0 0 7 21 19 8 0 0 0 ---~o- ----6" .. 0 0 0 25 0 1 348 624 740 ! 452 694 829 963 588 488 1322 438 450 726 395 524 1439 898 672 t 343 234 182 204 ! ! 202 1 136 206 122 116 121 77 197 108 116 201 94 18 23 244 152 249 124 71 97 ~4 RF! 1~Q Pot:; ')0.1 338 129 38 61 61 1(:;1 ~A RA Rt1 1Rfi An 1AA 7() ?fiFi 48 45 24 24 167 -~? 696 467 261 136 315 275 185 97 4811 5R1 1?R 713 18? 176 ?ClA 117 184 165 55 134 174 -~? 1:;1 85 1 343 11 8R 62 40 12 ?R 14 4R 8F! 31 R 6 25 1 9 9 -9- ~~ .~ -14 2 25 90 4 13 28_ ?? R 1 1 11 0 0 1 3 Q 12- n n n ~-~- ? 1 0 1 6 0 0 1 5 '-% 1 0 0 0 0 441 406 7fi7 888 fifin ~9fi 1212 411 ~Clt:; 770 473 181 377 1371 774 981 337 503 728 346 269 148 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 " 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tables. 113 Nole:Footnoles at the end of 112 i TRAFFIC CITATIONS,\NON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS l CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTSISY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS , .;s ~ ~ & ~ ~ ts oJ oJ c:5 ~ ! ! ! -Q 'l7 -Q t; ..... £\t ~ t ~ ...... C) & <5' & & ~ C) & & ~ !!] c !ti c» c» c» e>;) c»~7/J c::t e>;)~>~, e>;) c» c» c» c::t$~;;, oJ c» (>;5 c» c» ~ nJ nJ c» &'j;; c:.) nJ J I [/,I, e>;) e>;) ~ :;; t2 nJ c» c» >~;;;;ll l kIM 3949i 3220e 27100 29900 30795 !g3160 20940 22679 8941 6240 8384 7455 8265 6767 13847 13611 20313 8194 3780e 536391 86551 28441 2293 5340 299311 '. 1975 POPULATION 1944 4326 6334 2R07 1271 3617 2382 4043 2355 3008 1417 633 3117 971 278 258 581 1826 5665 8..Q.Q.. 15171 6458 2024 5B6 1044 219 Traffic Citations Filed ! 2311 1087 , 2563 1962 3387 2117 2624 1246 516 2938 Dispositions By: 485 928 194 1553 33"10 4857 713 246 258 505 1665 4884 686 11667 5433 1733 105 213 157 70 31 77 41 61 31 42 4 3 13 7 8 3 17 ,8 35 19 Guil!Y Pleas ___ ~- .".-" -- .. -"-- 4 4 1 186 49 13 6E 57 123 93 93 ~5 18 51 -Not Guilty 17 3 93 289 98 85 92 16 10 18 24 16 :187 18 512 59 49 12 81 349 8E 22 41 90 54 41 167 45 10 10 47 2 2 11 .-6 9 ?R Guiltv" Trial 5 0 :i 102 } 1351 127 52 Ii 1~ ? Q 10 0 2 7 0 1 4 0 0 7 1 Withdrawal () () 0 12 ! 5 4 3 0 fi 0 0 16~ 19 1 Substantive Defect 0 0 242 I 51 29 446 65 11 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 2 101 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 • Unable to Locate 0 0 0 0 S 0 1 4 1 1 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2735 1217 2865 2221 4045 2342 2944 1320 551 3023 786 272 Other 506 950 201 1858 3905 5716 271 563 1697 5233 750 13722 5668 1851 5 43 0 11 0 t, 12 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Dispositions 0 0 76 0 0 0 Adjustments 410 1316 ::I?6E 40Q i 42.4 514 431 389' 495 342 84 86 48 54 60 135 123 807 193 192 348 48 30 32 1267 t· Non-Traffic Citations Filed 7840 1';1';1= ~Oq 711l ')t:\I;.' nq ! ?R8 251 ::l61 - ?70 ~Hq ?R::l 59 71 47 I;? 38 55 88 638 110 Dispositions By: ?4? ?3 ?q 1q ~ 4Mi6 14R 1';0 -?O 4P Sf 17 j -f7 29 15 32 1-5 6 8 0 0 ? 2 4 0 10 2 Guiltv Plea 1-1 10 f) () S 7f) -I=;~ :i8 1P 49 1H . iF! 13 29 36 ?H 13 9 1 1 1 9 0 7 66 6 Not Guilty 0 ?O 1 2 7 192 7r:. 1q Q7 11;.1 1q f1- 4 .41 8 14 36 50 3 ~ 0 1 0 4 6 0 0 Guilty" Trial 7 0 ~ i 1 f)R1 1~ 72 'l 4~ 1 }. 0 !'\ 3 0 0 2 0 Withdrawal -1 0 0 4 1 -4 , 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 9 0 0 71 ?q -?::> 6 2 3 0 n () II () 0 0 0 0 ::\ 0 Substantive Defect -n -::\ 0 n n Il 8 ~ -0 n I';r n II ') () ') Unable to Locate n -,iA ? 0 r ~ n n 0 0 n 0 0 0 n II ? 0 n ~ 0 7q!,\ ~QR Ol1R ?QAI= t:\~R q?!=i ~4~ 41R ~S7 1177 ~~? 7!=I 7S r:.:.'=l 1;0 52 63 101 -719 11R Other t:\1;0 ~R ~1 q.1 1~ R~1~ 170 F- Q 0 0 Total Dispositions -6 () 0 0 0 a ! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I- Adjustments 0 336 431 58~ 201. i 188 441 279 432 269 279 26 66 155 46 68 167 134 696 134 43 61 106 5 991 ~ Summary Complaints Filed 4104 521 nr:, 152 ::\7fi 11J) I An ?S!=I 1S4 277 179 210 15 31 51 40 26 53 97 411 54 DispOSItIons By: ~o 75 1 179 ?446 330 12 110 44 1R 4(' 11 ?R ?R ?A 17 ?I; . 4 0 0 5 0 0 3 2 10 7 Guilty Plea 4 1 n t; 7q n 2 -R9 4"' 1R , ::\1 33 f)f) 4? ~q 10 ? 14 1 5 0 9 119 2 Not Guilty f) 6 ? ? 4R 17 3 11;7 1 -fin 111~ d~ ~, l1~ 108 41 47 "il; , 32 _3 9 4 0 15 11 3 7 Guiltv Trial -1clR 10 ::\ ? B8 R" ,. 10 R?1 11 0 0 r: 1~ ..0 ? 0 1 0 0 ? 0 0 1 II 0 0 0 0 0 Withdrawal -0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~c () () Substantive Defect 0 -C ~ iI 10 ,~ 7 2 9 1? 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 n 0 1 f ~ () -n- 0 () - ,)Ai t; r t . 1 7 n n 4 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 I---iJnable to Locate . () . 1 :1 f 0 13 R')'= 1Q!'\ 1011 ~QI; 4~ 41; 70 Other f) 1-~35 ?7R ., 431. .28R ?OA 26? ?1 An 31 71 125 543 ~t;O~ tlQ 43 !'l4 AFi -- J.-.JillA c Total Dispositions 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1t Adiustments 0 ?RF ::l83 RO~ ROF 147 ~ 21;9 326 384 31)8 ?O? 1~R 51 50 57 R7 26 149 154 440 135 ?RR 94 RR ?R 18 1; Misde/Felonv Complaints Filed ROR fig 7Fi 64 11~ 23 , ~? -38 83 99 28 31 2 6 9 5 1 3 8 22 3 Dispositions By: 14 9 ::l 0 -?j!= -38 , Dismissed 40 55 1nF 170 ??:: 11!=l 116 171 132 7R 45 21 14 1Fl 24 3 28 33 234 39 17q 27 35 9 13 -16. .. ~ 249 -')7 45 1~7 1 ?~ ! ~ 82 " 40 RR 12 5 11 0' 10 0 26 26 8 33 Bound Over -21 5 8 ? 7'J. f " " ~S C A n 4 1 15 3 0 0 1 0 9 0 0 0 0 3 0 Withd~awal -- 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 53 ?S~ 32 9 55 24 65 6 43 11 13 8 15 16 21 48 130 11 Fugitive 28 4 2 R 25 13 I 2 .. 43 0 1R .~ 1? 0 0 0 0 '0 Waiver 5 2 C 40 n 97 t 16 6 3 7 1 2 1 0 0 B 0 476 820 125 t 248 294 339 370 170 132 42 45 47 66 20 78 115 397 86 Other 106 53 27 23 262 345 t 367 255 C 1 J1 ~ 6 0 8 0 . 30 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 I--Total Dispositions 0 0 0 0 0 0 t , Adjustments 0 0 106~ 1302 369 188 100 151 147 49 58 228 304 578 134 59 64 5 546 781 889 748 463 483 371 Civil Complaints Filed 1564 "323 96 _87 I DispOSitIOns By: ? 14.1 41:? 1~f 1RFi 147 139 1~q R4 1?4 14 28 16 9 7 6 27 4 114 12 ~7~ ~R ?7 is 1R '•. 58 i !=Ie; 148 17~ 11~ 110 175 114 87 88 45 32 54 71 in 9 74 144 131 53 Trial 138 36 20 10 3 Settled 272 251 252 565 640 157 i 416 492 176 259 137 35 36 59 7 26 18 32 120 275 75 433 5 32 11 23 0 14 1 Default 0 0 12 10E ~ .J1 39 83 22 91 2 12 0 10 0 0 U~ 0 0 42 34 0 0 5 38 13 ! 19 19 4 9 9 28 1 4 , 4 No service 3 2 1 0 7 36 1 "~~ -~ ---§ -~ Withdrawal 13 13 A C (' 21(' a ? 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 ---f 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 332 34 140 287 520 143 otner 58 5 505 860 980 1181 733 909 455 510 360 134 97 144 88 44 1133 228 99 48 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 " 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 U 0 0 Totill Dispositions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Aojustments 0 0 Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables. 117 116 TRAFFIC CITATIONS ON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVil COr\J1PLAINT , Y MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS Note;Footnotes at the end of Tables. llS 119 ,i ,.. "":~>~ ~,~ " '."-.~.-" -."-~'~ .... ,-..'"'"""'--:' ~""::..;:'::::'7.",";="-""'-._"~;;..":-;:o..-.,_~,-, .~"':'-:: " 7'7f-";"·,_---;.~_i:::" ."::'- ---;- TRAFFIC CITATIONSON ... TRAFFIC CITATIONS ! CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTS Y MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS . ~ ttl I ~ r§ ~ & r§> c§> /2 ....."- ::y ! ~ c::5 ...: ;;;, ~ ;:: /:! " " ...: >!. ...: >!. I ::t ~ ~ ~ '14 ...: "- ...: >!. ...: ...: ...: 1975 POPULATION I 1221 334 8 1983 2241 266 4 412 8 159 Tra1fie Citations Filed 4 183 2 2855 65 2 109 3 339 1 h8064 1421 Dispositions By: 2119 1124 I 648 1653 287 1405 1782 1775 1198 ql;!il!X Plea~ ____ ~ ___ ~ 930 15 111 51 66 1600 370 474 223 2 7477 636 989 Not Guilt 67 158 89 96 235 51 905 0 57 7 84 56 39 99 660 168 66 109 28 Guilt -Trial 137 1ut5 bCS bl:J 1~ 13 (0 I 132 11 41 178 277 17 4IT ~o 56 38 Withdrawal 0 4::: 490 44 91 100 2 68 3 104 38 '22 Substantive Defect 3C 0 19 1 28 13 45 533 0 79 97 1 0 23 613 60 160 28 Unable to Locate 2 0 13 1 98 67 338 12 0 0 9 10 0 6 o 4956 130 65 46 Other 847 2528 846 0 0 1 0 0 135 4 Total Dis ositions 1728 2220 2249 1448 1197 2120 41 2 0 0 0 5 0 504 992 310 8 M3493 954 1442 1060 Ad'ustments 0 12 0 1 2 0 0 293 716 771! 0 0 0 0 275 571 316 578 640 263 844 679 931 1541 273 314 442 78 314 68 255 369 183 468 259 221 41 106 26 385 118 525 336 708 550 128 5 9 18 29 50 30 29 35 122 86 298 48 198 5 32 37 95 130 119 24 41 12 11 17 5 55 :;6 13 ~:; -54 23 34 81 9 62 15 10 15 44 -54 10 15 45 0 7 21 47 11 1 9 11 22 0 0 9 3 3 0 1 1 4 8 3 23 0 1 0 26 16 0 2 8 44 19 9 40 0 0 ( 0 4 1 1 C ( ( 43 146 30 379 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 190 660 189 343 516 2 0 6 7A 1 1 1" 0 253 579 499 182 716 598 908 0 0 0 1 0 1 1246 231 194 426 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1023 84 145 8 0 311 9107 422 270 288 78 797 209 107 67 31 147 146 209 95 122 173 252 175 151 253 56 6 8 27 26 4 2 76 224 228 29 381 192 165 23 27 15 36 11 6 1 47 7 18 14 9 3 12 62 5 4 6 5 18 46 21 23 41 14 215 48 4 31 25 44 70 27 21 22 9 19 66 26 16 4 9 7 17 6 44 57 10 18 58 223 18 12 22 27 3 25 57 46 24 17 3 28 27 23 18 57 34 0 0 28 25 32 10 8 21 54 1 a 0 0 a 1 26 41 34 0 0 5 24 0 0 1 0 1 a 0 a 0 0 0 () 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 a 0 1 0 12 0 0 3 0 55 0 4 0 0 16 0 10 101 6 0 3 2 0, 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 714 0 1 0 0 7 0 0 96 3~ 84 77 18 131 143 0 0 0 0 153 3075 36 194 321 _278 54 460 296 0 0 99 A7 11R 127 ?RR 125 1?R 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2~1 1 0 0 0 2 a 0 3643 333 217 94 153 136 139 Mlsde/Felon Com laints Flied 318 527 831 619 390 316 142 129 128 32 245 122 381 300 217 224 267. 534 167 Dispositions By: 188 267 1123 170 9 11 31 25 Dismissed 30 92 118 93 37 27 28 22 4 13 27 446 20 101 83 58 121 85 132 101 17 37 49 41 59 113 44 32 32 Bound Over 101 218 289 249 178 72 54 62 21 80 67 354 105 6 70 42 51 144 152 86 Withdrawal 26 49 54 36 123 103 65 ·111 16 32 49 17 14 12 28 17 4 17 33 284 1 19 5 37 56 35 90 40 50 38 Fu itive 9 72 28 4 21 2 1 0 0 5 2 1 3 9 10 14 20 12 54 0 1 7 16 6 11 7 155 3 11 11 Waiver 65 34 87 40 27 16 24 16 5 77 72 5 1 16 13 4 2 16 21 12 12 4 ( 0 0 I:) 4 2 Other 2 0 9 1 27 5 0 1 0 0 3 2266 378 64 u 28 0 1 20 0 Total Dispositions 223 448 580 34 192 204 90 146 129 135 369 283 189 1 3 404 304 134 135 118 0 0 0 U 242 288 570 185 163 Justments 73 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U ( U 1 1:; 197 0 0 a 0 0 1 0 1458 343 193 223 146 141 Civil Complaints Filed 389 344 349 650 395 103 137 291 302 389 311 237 463 420 437 461 278 453 Isposltlons By: 254 385 345 984 Fi98 20 80 37 Trial L 23 71 143 103 315 161 116 98 8 44 29 34 J32 1~1 Ai') 90 11Q Settled L 376 49 106 95 99 128 18 De ault 0 6 78 47 61 111 44 32 69 74 .l 26 0 160 127 0 159 25 114 104 6 7 11 2 4 9 14 172 69 L 17 17 1 1 25 4 0 ---11 13 1 1 .~ 5 ~ ----.2 5 8 1 7 4 0 0 5 1 0 2 2 3 3 2 4 1523 713 0 0 2 a 4 1 ::l ~ 41 215 130 122 242 423 347 0 0 ~ 0 0 ,,0 442 459 181 324 237 0 0 0 3 0 2 337 267 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 Note:footnotes at the end of Tab/es, r <~; J ,( ~ 120 121 TRAFFIC CITATIONS,),~ON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTSiBY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS Ib- ,-0 "- cS' ~ & cS' &' &> ~ & C) ~ <5' & &> ~ ':/. l.i; c::) ..:. ..:. ..:. ..:. ..:. n5 n5&J, n5 nJ 0) 0) oJ 0) 4450 1440014981130781355014516159261108116275, 69001005512900,13500 7907 M6225 h6105 15645 ~0625 36016 14335 ~6946 9057 7744 12038 8311 8152 8122 1975 POPULATION 1894 1361 704 1888 "~O 12~1 1~7g 2 ~~ 2043 987 8682 0 0 0 0 0 0 14774 111R 634 3588 44R8 1846 RR8 2047, 1090 1245 414 , 1 Traffic Citations Flied i 1 753 1881 1785 735 7241 0 0 0 0 0 3497 779 489 3155 3705 1884 623 1005' 517 521 1121 648 955 o Dispositions By: 8691 831 , 612 155 59 43 293 64 66 26 479 0 0 0 0 0 0 116 27 16 66 46 24- 8 G.uJltY. .flea~_. __ ~.-.-.. ----' 111 157 35 16; 83 ,~ I 54 24 L!.'4 25' 1719 76 66 25 242 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 36 26 96 '73 56 29 Not Guilty , ,37 55 i 34 ---=t43 f.::l of d I df 44 6 4 4 0 0 0 n n 0 ~1 {Q 32 R4 ? iRR ?!:; I 89' 33 31 0 Guilty-Trial - 27_22 0 105 11~ 0 0 0 ? 1 n 0 0 n n 0 0 5 D "1 ? 145 I ~'1 .'\, n 0 3 Withdrawal 1 ') II) _ , ,~ ?~ 0 2 34 4- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 284 8 0 351 ! 0 25 substantive Defect i 159 0 1 I 0~36~ o 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 0 12 0 I, Unable to Locate 1 0 0 0 0 797 7967 0 0 0 641-610 1834~ 1073 1055 2067 1957 0 0 0 0 o 3723 867 565 3401 4117 2162 688 Other ~, 982 784 360 1481 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 16 0 4 0 0 Total Dis oosltions 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 o I 0 l Adjustments --,Q3 187 332 n~ 515 253 3~7 0 479 285 198 505 334 274 1196 94 136 75 379 158 258 i 355, 450 363 263 365'1 335, 234 I Non-Traffic Citations Filed 228 133 392 , 191 251 0 189 159 9'7 331 90 143 915 57 105 37 219 124 121 Dispositions By: 181 202 143 101 170 i 282 177 90 168, 22 15 6 10 8 0 78 36 5 13 16 64 30 2 4 5 10 7 5 Guilt:! Plea 15 9 73 8 , 31 9~,~~1 38 34 33 7 6 ,: 6 12 0 110 12 3 36 35 77 35 2 6 8 28 47 8 Not Guilty '-45, 17 13 69 27 31 13 6 1 17 0 0 0 4 20 1 2 7 2 4 2 5 1 25 5' 11 12 12 7 6 - Guilty-Trial 10 6 1 91 0 III 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 i29 7 1 1 21 3 5 ., Withdrawal 0 0 1 0 ' 4 0 3 0 0 I 1 1 0 18 0 0 73 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 substantive Defect 1e---:-O-~3 0-'-' 0 8 1 , 0 0 1 0 O. 0 0 0 R 1 0 4 n 0 0 0 n n 1? 0 !:; Unable to Locate 0' 0 0 0 0 3 R!:; !:;? ?7R 0 Oi 271 176 297 166 410 209 289 0 401 209 109 48R 14? ?88 QR7 119 179 184 Other 321 220 236 268 239 244 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 275 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Total Dispositions 01 0 01 01 0 I Ad'iustments I 49 10 61 180 25 4 0 235 99 215 670 11 209 137 37 92 126 100 195 46 73 50 'I 40 48[ 169 119 76 132 Summary Complaints Filed 55 0 0 41 23 100 336 3 79 28 14 47 64 58 6 32 2 31 3 6 6 45 0 ! DIspositions By: 11 10. 53 16 24 1 8 5 4 1 0 38 16 3 41 0 53 6 6 0 6 4 13 1 Guilty Plea 25 9 10 18 4 2 6~ 46 14 1 2 4 I 4 4 0 76 17 21 38 2 84 15 3 12 3 10 82 8 Not Guilt r 33 9 1 8 11 I, I 19 11 39 5 14 10 0 0 15 5 12 52 0 3 2 10 11 14 16 16 8 Trial 5 2 12 10 4 GuilW 6 18 9 19 6 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 Withdrawal 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 19 0 0 145 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 Substantive Defect I 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 8 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Unable to Locate 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 1Q 8 0 200 63 136 823 5 219 51 33 73 87 92 11"'7 50 0' 20 51 44 34 12 62 I Other 28 46 126 114 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 Total Dis oositions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 287 593 133 105 96 189 63 108 Adjustments 46 383 87 128 170 212 195 49 280 366 319 563 382 189 107 176 167 224 162 ! Misde/Felon}' Comolaints Filed 0 89 58 11 10 17 31 11 16 14 73 17 16 37 11 52 10 62 92 67 144 186 Dispositions By: 24 13 39 65 78 7 53 -47 103 36 0 151 110 111 139 146 220 211 30 41 52 16 41 35 Dismissed 87 41 14 195 18 79 101 64 39 51 32 30 21 43 33 8 0 7 19 22 62 2 3 18 26 11 3 15 4 18 Bound Over 55 28 30 12 12 35 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 35 26 2 59 0 10 4 7 0 21 8 0 67 0 Withdrawal 4 10 0 1 15 0 17 9 14 4 0 17 66 75 128 72 25 64 59 33 0 57 13 18 Fugitive 2 1 12 0 8 5 21 2 13 3 7 7 0 0 1 0 1 6 1 6 0 0 0 4 0 0 49 2 12 Waiver 0 0 0 0 23 3 0 0 0 397 70 150 139 117 230 59 0 259 301 276 546 406 337 351 130 95 72 169 71 101 Other 135 158 213 62 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 169 134 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Total Dispositions 0 0 --0 0 0 0 Adjustments 295 57 70 413 257 104 137 0 582 302 288 375 342 141 429 47 124 55 128 82 221 58 222 289 229 268 191 Civil Complaints Flied 104 32 19 152 78 36 31 0 138 51 190 131 155 99 103 40 27 38 32 47 17 lJlspositlons By: 166 80 58 74 27 73 7 0 11 60 12 32 35 7 40 0 21 7 33 43 15 50 53 5 12 110 12 48 429 68 Trial 26 9 36 36 51 15 60 56 45 45 0 15 126 76 146 184 10 112 8 36 0 47 17 42 Settled 74 1 54 119 3 24 40 22 24 112 , 1 0 , 1 2 0 0 6 2 24 U U , 1 7 0 10 3 0 Default 4 "'5 3 19 9 -cr () 0- 1 , 0 0 0 2 0 19 0 3 0 3 4 10 0 0 0 1 ~3 No ~ervlce ·0 11 0 2 1 i -~ 3 5 }l 0 0 0 .Q 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 a ---8- Withdrawal U 0 2 U 0 92 0 0 254 41 58 322 171 95 129 a 582 25_4 283 371 351 141 251 58 118 38 123 77 -Q.ther 231 243 190 95 151 U ,.0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 a 113 47 -0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 Total Dispositions 2 U 0 0 0 Adjustments - 123 Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables, 122 TRAFFIC CITATIONS,)NON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS t CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTSiBY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS 't7 ;:;~ <§' ~. Q) $f$ cS' "- ~~~ "- & ~ & &'j <5- c9-' ';;& ~ J.:::, "- <:) ,1p ,1p .,;. l~t'c:?~ ~~! c:::i'" ....., !>....., ....., c>J c>J c>J c>J 'jj~~c>J c>Jc:5 ~ ~ '" >:(>;5<:) (>;5 c>J .,;. .,;. ~~ ~c:::i oJ ....., ~ c>J c>J c>J c>J ; 6282,17773 !16017! 14427 14272'1536 ',15053 12420 11924 h0282 9620 10164 5198 2998 12807 5170 7839 3795 2994 2221 18200 20575 9239 10855 j 6121 i 9032 --~;.. 111~ R~!'i ~1R!=l 2690 704 926' 1 7 f i '1'1') '1::)") Q, 17 30S 11m 557 SS7 1678 1032 7fi 1!=lR 539 8R7 1017 1857 i ??q~ '.C:n7 '1::)'1. q? ' 825 1053 271 157 681 158 367 117 440 464 546 2830 1520 956 62 1S7 495 802 885 1665 833 i i 1211 309 . 1794 4117 i 2908 181 16 10' 0 20 1 21 3 8 14 14 21 13 13 2 4 7 9 t5 22 1"36: 69 74 27 183 5 0 14 3 89 11!=l ? 1R 14 '~ 8 __0, 16 28 7--~0-~11~~ 9 8 57 32 7 21 18 51 137· 74, 31 9 0 14 !=l 3 11 ? 1RA 13 21 n 1 11 _17 , 7 100 ~ 17 2, 27 3 f..---->LIc--'-"-l1 -1 1?L-.JQ6....-2.S? f?i ') ')~")~_~n __~ 4fi ri 0 R <1 1 1 n n n n n fi ~' ')~ 1 ? 1 12 0 7~~0_~31±-1 0 4 0 1 11 6 13 24 14 a 2 6 2 11 0 1 ° 3 0' 12' 8 12! 0 ---es 0 o 1 800 0 1 a a 1 2 0 10 0 0 0 2 3 1 3 01 0 12 0' 1510 i331 , 873 1125 ---;3=3~1f--:: 1;-;:;6*l6 ---=7-;;::5~6 159 466 132 541 516 582 3082 1638 1036 66 f71 532 854 934 1813 u.aa' -.4A.31 '33'12. 944 0 6 a 11 5 0 a 31 0 0 0 3 1 a 26 0, 0 2 ' 0 o 0 0' 13 ~~1==0=\==0 9 114 _64 i-J1!.Q3.Q.j81--..l.lb.JR?--1 1..>o1.'-fS? 61 172 3 fin 148 69 ~R1 1RR 127 11 A? 173 185 675 530 : 2,)') 7<1'1 'J<15 465 'I 282 Non-Traffic Citations Filed m'_ 17 135 5 6 82 54 ?41 138 106 R ~R 14fi 14fi 499 431 Dispositions By: 335 231 i 284, 66 i 63 f-.---.::!.4~4i----!1.:=.07~--=-24*1_-=9571 ~ 437 4 17 a 6 4 2 26 5 4 1 4 3 13 11 Guilt f Plea 18 I 5 I 30 0 0 ~~4l--~2f--~0r------':i-14 a 8 22 i Not Guilty 11 1" __~2~~3f--~3r-~0 ___4~ 4 7 a 23 10 4 19 9 12 0 4 11 4 6 17 14 39 14 22, ~ 2 5 7 3 0 2 7 5 3 5 5 n n 4 11 17 24 Guilt I-Trial 30 i I) 4 1 ~--J:?O~~3 t--~O1---*l---7"1 81 29 i Withdrawal 0 5 0 0 1 1 0 0 a 0 0 a 0 1 a a o o 0 1 0~~0~~00~~21~~00r-n2,~~1 n a 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 n n n n 17 0 Substantive Defect o ---rLi_~O~~O~~~~~ __~-~~O~ ~n ,), o n n () 1 n n 'J n n () n n 1 13 Unable to Locate ')_ 1 --r---::-7? ~~O~_YJ(n ~-::.\.!+-0-;-;-~1--;::;:(~n--:;-;:;-0::-1 ~'i~ 1 32 167 fi ~R 106 6R 2~1 159 1?R q hh iRO 1!17 496 Other ")?7 '1Q7. 2::)7' W3~40~~68~-26~5r-_'J.54~-l1..L16~_~26.--J.1~3l!i~ 4 Total Dis ~ositions a 0 a 2 a 0 a 17 a 0 a a 2 a o i 2- 0 b=~0~~0~~0~~7+=~0t=~0F=~0 Adjustments 104 75 9 303 191 46 132 39 23 17 5 20 13 231 ' 136 88 225 149 82 74 58 150 137 Summary Complaints Flied 771 219~' ' 13 20 6 17 27 36 113 29 16 10 3 17 7 171 69 J IspOSltions By: 0_ Guilty Plea 1 11 n A8 9 11 11 a 2 0 a 1 9 7 Not Guilty 1 23 0 178 18 1 5 1 4 1 0 1 7 10 2 Guilty-Trial 1 12 0 9 180 3 7 1 0 0 ? 1 0 12 17 Withdrawal a 2 a a a a n a -D_ n n 0 0 0 ._?f0 a 0 0 a 25 1 0 2 0 0 a 44 substantive Defect -~ t- J -~ Unable to Locate a 1 a 3 2 a A a b 0 n a 1 , fig fi~ ]lz Other - 16 R ?75 261 45 lA5: 33 22 11 '20 1~ --.. ---. ?4R 0 0 a 5 a a a 3 0 a a 0 3 0 20 Total Dis ~osltjons - ,=~A~dl.:::ju~st~m~en.:.:.;ts~ _____i 75 85 17 134 240 50 225 87 115 16 ~11 -Asi si -2.04 120 1 4 2 38 52 7 25 6 12 1 --.~ _, __Q" ... _.l 14 14 22 3 48 62 29 103 27 49 5 25 16 8 ------~~ 47 a 16 2 8 42 6 27 12 20 2 6 11 9 34 30 0 0 0 0 7 0 2 a 0 a a -- 0 0 17 a 13 22 3 36 73 9 33 26 35 2 1 12 12 45 19 0 3 0 a 0 a 4 4 2 a 1 2 1 a 1 28 67 10 130 236 51 194 75 118 10 .~ ~ 31 187 111 0 a a 4 a a a 14 0 0 a .. 4b- 3 0 1 54 41 6 56 82 13 197 86 122 6 77 51 55 525 322 2 3 1 22 43 4 37 15 17 1 23 6 4 81 41 5 5 a 15 16 2 26 21 46 1 14 11 33 88 88 1 16 0 1 23 4 72 47 40 a 33 23 14 194 163 a 0 0 0 6 0 4 3 6 a 7 2 9 15 24 a a 1 a 2_ 1 a 1 a a 5 0 a 2 a 0 a a 1 0 1 1 0 0 a 0 a "8~ 1 8 24 2 38 91 11 140 88 109 2 82 42 60 384 319 t::~o~tttn~er~~::~======~===t=-7~~~02i7~~11Q94~~107*5~--~1~2~7r-l1~7t=J2~71==7~9tt==2g3tt=~3~~190 i. 0 Total D1sposltlons a 0 a a a a 0 a a ~ a 0 a o ,. 0 0 0 1 a 0 a 0 0 a ~AdJustments 0 124 ~------cc '-'---"-----'-'-'."7--,-,'--,'-'-'-'~-----' -'.~:.~. '\ ;: TRAFFIC CITATIONS,tr'lON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS 1 CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTSiBY MAGISTERIA~ DISTRICTS , ~ ," §f & ~ ~ ~ ~ !ti ~ ~ "- ;$ "- "- "- Ij~ & & 24 486 113 183 72 48 129 7? 1?1 1ii9 :i0 4Q 1~R 1 27 5 2 1 21 18 5 4 1 2 -4 1 2 23 6 3 3 60 24 -56 20 0 1 ii <1 a 48 14 4 a 2 5 -~ 1 :i? 0 i 10 a a a a 1 a a 1 n n n -n n a 23 a a 2 15 1 n n Fi n n n 0 a 0 0 ~ 0 11 n n n n n ') 27 607 138 192 82 146 188 1:i7 14R 197 :i:i FiCl 1Fi::i a a a 1 1 0 a 68 a a 1 0 14 0 188 72 14 145 99 343 155 176 168 345 69 127 186 24 264 74 216 111 10 35 Summary Complaints Filed 43 185 27 88 38 4 115 67 280 90 42 87 72 :iFi 78 161 18 1iii Isposltlons By: 181 22 8 ') 100 2 1 4 a 4 2 2 4 23 9 ?7 ~ 1 ? 4 Guilt Plea 10 4 1 0 2 3 1 3 6 43 15 S- Not Guilt 2 5 11 5 107 4 0 7 5 9 5 6 O 5 6 3 2 13 17 Q 8 -4 m~ Guilt -Trial 2 1 4 9 27 8 37 20 7 O' 0 a 0 0 0 1 -:i n :i 0 0 n Withdrawal 0 0 0 a - 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 18 4 46 7 0 0 4 1 0 -~ substantive Defect 4 0 1 2 2 0 0 n Unable to Locate 0 0 a 6 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 104 56 6 130 76 _312 113 ,1.67 137 236 ~i:;1 94 179 ~-o ?FiR Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 0 7 a 35 Total Dis ositions 0 l' Adjustments t :iii 11':: 181 ?OR ??Q 180 ??4 181 !=I? 89 Fin :iii 7n r t 2 37 17 12 2 1Q 3 9 ? 1 W-5 r-~ ~q- f R 1~ 47 flO 1;~ 121 56 28 11 ?2 1n I, ? 14 30 12 23 14 44 8 ~6 21 13 7 17 I); 0 1 0 1 6 12 1 0 a 10 0 1 1 I a 1 r 17 51 56 101 70 16 31 87 23 25 1I 9 7 14 17 0 0 9 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 1 n aiver 0 f a Other 0 27 122 170 200 231 178 166 163 79 77 57 42 66 43 56 l! a 0 a 0 3 0 0 8 0 a 0 0 10 Total Dispositions -0 0 ! Adjustments !' 11 183 40 291 171 138 152 105 220 55 l- 171 233 128 158 198 81 112 166 23 17 I: H 4 ~'J 4 :i:i ~R 55 R? 128 Rn 10 ?R 19 12? 4 t 3 34 17 22 57 27 21 35 39 42 34 33 80 4 t 48 19 Ii 1 101 16 81 116 21 56 120 50 35 99 43 23 149 6 5 t a 3 0 14 6 16 a 1 0 31 11 0 14 0 fj ~ 1 5 2 5 2 t- 0 3 10 1 9 1---1 0 r------f- r- -g 0 0 O Ii -0- 0 0 1 5 a 0 0 a 0 -0 -~ 0 1 8 173 38 161 221 128 140 289 149 120 172 95 243 22 63 ~ 220 0 I: 0 0 o l 11 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables. 127 126 I 4.~ , T- L TRAFFIC CITATIONS,IJNON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS ,I CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPlAINTS!~Y MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS " 10987 5917 20772 182322521221627 20969 21254 18917 1833~ 11830 1975 POPULATION =~==Jl~~~~==l~~E~F~p:~F,~F.;"~~·;';;;~AI'"'~"Ar~r\I"\r-t=';= 114~6 l~~~~~;';;;;===-=- 803 156 7971 0215 772 177 235 3u7 Lion I £::uo Traffic Citations Filed Dispositions By: 701 156 704 4433 627 103 156 243 299 168 114 ...... J--l-~1g1~~o-l---l--~1~2~~5~~0rl-~1~2t-~1~5r92r11199t-995r-11]J32 ~~ci!IK~~'~Y~ ~... ,-' " 4 ;;s 1 ~ 19 1 0 7 2 27 f---(3uilty' Trial T~ 0 0 1266 19 37 29 8 10 4 15 .. " Withdrawal 2 0 0 24 0 0 2 1 1 4 1 substantive Defect o 0 0 1559 0 22 14 1 1 0 0 Unable to Locate 4 0 0 398 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other 160 719 7697 665 184 223 257 357 190 145 Total Dispositions 7 4~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Adjustments 113 7 14 233 15 55 97 62 166 127 35 Non-Traffic Citations Filed 35 37 75 58 30 Dispositions By: 110 7 5 70 10 24 Guilty Plea 2 16 o 1 6 0 13 1 0 o 0 46 3 23 5 1 Not Guilty 4 0 o 107 o 12 Guiltv- Trial 29 1 2 5 3 9 16 1 8 0 o 00130 Withdrawal o 0 o 0 o 0 Substantive Defect 0 o 7 o 0 000 o 1 o o 0 0 ( .n. Unable to Locate o 0 o 0 o 0 Other 11 46 92 43 121 R3 32 i 7 222 122 8 0 000 Total Dispositions 0 o 0 o 0 o Adjustments o 387 373 139 268 192 254 293 358 55 I 294 631 315 summary Complaints Filed 295 74 97 152 27 149 16 127 77 355 125 167 357 38 10 1 28 2 22 4 5 9 18 2 55 5 14 10 3 53 3 4 1 4 9 21 41 3 41 10 47 6 27 15 35 49 1 5 2' o o o o o 0 o 0 1 5 7 8 o 1 o 1 0 o 0 o 0 0 o o 1 o o 1 1 0 213 218 54 236 31 251 90 392 151 225 417 Other' _-1._J..1 ~14U--~72~_+.....:1~7*5t-...:3~37i0t-1..:....;1'f;9i!~268+-, 14.:1 ~?O l---.!T.~o~ta~1D~I~sP~,o~si'.!.!.:tio~n!.:!.s_. ----1"-- 0 0 10 0 0 . 0 0 o 0 6 o 17 o o o 1 3 0 Adjustments 131 96' 21 124 60 177 89 344 270 242 292 165 346 165 102 194 267 130~-'-"""=-I 7 8 ;3 5 11 I 11 I 65 134 113 113 72 -ttl 16 29 26 28 15 20 7 o 1 7 2 1 34 o 41 109 10 46 4 o 4 032 133 171 198 262 113 134 1--...:·-T~o~ta~1~D~ls~po~S~itl~o::::ns:.- __._---t- ___3g __~~_~I_~~ u~~o~~oJ.-~urt-~o1t-~0%-~m-u--=:ITOr~2 11 o 36 0 3 21 Adjustments 110 798 160 323 240 293 223 145 172 370 172 280 175 193 264 Civil Complaints Flied 166 223 DispoSItions By: 17 21 24 118 47 100 47 42 57 16 21 41 trial 48 78 11 95 20 48 42 68 43 33 38 96 155 o 305 1 Notl1:Footnotes at the end of Tables. 128 129 T- II TRAFFIC CITATIONS,11NON-TRAFFIC CITA,TIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPlAINTSllBY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS Ii II,, I I Q::. ) 1 ! ~'j:;. 1 ! I ~~ ~ I I ~ ~.~ ...... £\t II ~ ..... Sf ~ &' (;:) r!!J .:::f ...!.(;:) 0;)(;:) 0;)(;:) I ~ (fj & & ~G> 0;)' ~ 0;) ~ ~ 0;) 0;) ~ , ~ ~ ~ '" I 9 9 Cj c:5 <::i c§' $§ (;:)"- ~ c>j~ c>j~ ~ ~ Ij TRAFFIC CITATIONS,irON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVil COMPLAINTSIBY MAG~STERIAL DISTRICTS nJ! U cS' 6'-' ..... ~ &> ~ & 6" ~ &' C) ~ ~ ~ 6" ~ ~ ~ ~ e»~;;;; e» e» e» e» 1975 POPULATION 23140~0621 121965 6774 4791 1335 5503 1998 8499 2469 ::>1029 '":k e» 32391 32863 &'tl 3205E 26243 23351 18325 20563 20 '" 902 21467'" 20510 19396 8704 10918 9392 13756 Traffic Citations Filed 131 Fi 1905 24.Q5 7Jlli. 909 1340 374 796 2224 1174 3283 384 976 548 10473 7242 411 1261 890 1159 317 1571 3190 Dispositions By: 1827 932 1421 5145 1633 5453 1074 G.L!iltx Pleas. 695 2053 1030 2797 273 657 484 311 1330 725 985 206 !----Not Guilty 8 22 30 59 35 11 7 1158 2499 1682 880 1302 4510 52 50 10 22 19 313 115 1429 4638 881 Guil!y: Trial 51 32 115 39 14 24 9 35 60 ~ 113 5 2'/ 1Q 53 26 17 38 33 19 1 ..i!:! 1 ~ JJL ] 33 0L 38 Withdrawal 4017 48 26 14 14 8 50 10 7 2 20 4 J ~ 28 04 fl 40 28 63 3 ( ~ J~,9 i:!f Substantive Defect ? ,0 10 :i 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 8 56 16 2 33 : 0 8 1 0 6 t5 2 . 3 10 Unable to Locate o 0 315 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 93 0 "I 0 0 0 0 '13 1 4 ; 0 8 0 1 67 1 0 4 J2 Other 6100005 0 3 0 3 u 0 j.J 0 2 1 3 4 0 , 1 0 0 J> 0 0 0 0 5 Total Dispositions 1222 1574 2680 729 711 1090 367 746 2196 1131 3072 315 714 535 430 1410 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 Adiustments 1 i 819 1127 2313 1512 2704 1801 0 12 4 0 3 3 0 3 0 5 1 0 0 0 0L, 0 952 1391 4650 1484 4813 961 8 1 5 0 3 0 0 1 Non-Traffic Citations Filed 224 47 599 198 201 587 20 117 129 80 171 107 r 0 0 0 22 255 137 334 153' 484 408 251 Dispositions By: 432 228 295 87 87 70 144 \ 104 93 Guilty Plea 149 66 451 150 70 259 12 103 88 53 87 61 136 81 205 93 Not Guilty 7 4 11 10 6 5 0 0 0 4 20 375 357 144 233 127 229 7 0 1 36 22 8 5; 63 51 118 65 65 Guilty· Trial 12 7 14 17 37 14 0 6 5 1'1 14 i 4 1 24 81 19 11 6 0 i 6 4 36 13 22 1 1 3 1 Withdrawal 6 0 1 25 6 10 0 2 2 1 4 ..1 _9 2 1;; ~0 Jj 0 7 1 28 14 21 6 7 1 0 1 Substantive Defect 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 i 14 1 1 22 10 1 o 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 4 10 0 3 3 Unable to Locate ( 0 94 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 9 0 2 0 2 0 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 Other 8 .0. 0 3 0 1 0 0 3 0 5 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _Q 3 0 2 1 0 0 2 Total DlsDositions 182 77 58,6 205 120 289 12 111 101 69 130 72 167 87 312 142 430 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..0. Adiustments 900 1 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 I 389 179 317 183 274 73 O' 0 0 10 0 2 0 73 71 120 71 '10 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Summary Complaints Filed 330 628 473 179 179 339 255 49 99 97 231 300 189 0 0 -4" I 198 124 159 187 141 186 131 255 84 73 54 54 457 51 22 UISposltlons By: 193 313 185 72 60 74 129 34 66 42 142 Guilty Plea 20 ~ 5 4 ti 2 0 2 60 94 86 15 23 22 61 8 3 15 43 0 '--2 75 6 71 20 14 38 20 233 2 30 b3 20 ,28 10 12 1 '16 19 10 I 22 7 JJ:I. !:l 15 1u \) I 13 56 ~ 8 Guil!y' Trial 33 26 5 41 27 103 27 12 26 32 6 53 84 46 35 2 Withdrawal 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 11 12 38 _36 25 bU 52 11 15 2 42 5 4 .-8 .0. .1? ,4:U 32 {{ Substantive Defect 0 0 3 0 0 0 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J2. .Q. 43 15 37 /j 9 1 0 8 0 1 1 0 0 3 0 Unable to Locate . I 0 0 0 0 1 0 U 7 1 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 1 2 10 1 2 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 jl- G 1 0 0 3 0 0 Other 273 385 220 140 137 185 192 55 102 76 220 J 161 ~ 1 8 1 0 0 ..Q 0 126 129 151 154 149 121 208 0 0 0 1 3 Adjustments 0 1 4 j 0 0 0 137 215 69 50 106 40 323 26 ! 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 19 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-I ~~~~~~~~~~+-Mlsde/Felony, Complaints Filed +-~5~7T-=26~7~~32~7i-~33~0t-~35~11_~80~1t-~11~3~_4~~9,'r- _~~~~~159 102 216 __~ 184 335 202 0 __ 1 146 163 265 95 96 243 179 141 Dispositions By: 95 44 4 16 27 122 11 i 2 60 89 93 142 125 60 21 28 33 I 23 22 Dismissed 197 144 179 183 127 546 52 19 23 44 39 35 2 20 79 71 39 53 62 127 57 17 25 14 6 5 2 7 7 Bound Over 46 28 2 72 16 92 22 10 17 8 31 I 47 63 81 6 56 61 89 43 Withdrawal 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 t 21 23 5 40 25 37 18 31 16 35 11 15 1 1 0 35 11 28 76 6 12 11 30 1 1 0 0 0 7 3 1 7 12 5 21 7 57 66 118 70 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 16 2 83 55 18 32 57 39 0 Other 6 ..9,U 0 U 0 ~ 44- i:!1 1 20 0 0 0 2 0 9 39 26 88 23 20 152 84 194 5 2 0 0 4 ..Q I 173 291 155 149 129 248 .Q 0 0 0 0 5 0 .Q 11 103 106 201 246 114 54 87 77 0 0 0 13 U 4 U 132 53 52 0 .Q 0 1 .Q u U Civil Complaints Filed 507 344 618 163 205 580 166 113 255 124 217 I 209 U 0 0 172 428 227 196 258 73 172 252 Ulsposltlons By: I 193 163 66 141 62 135 96 56 Trial 166 289 230 53 55 189 9 23 44 31 17 I 85 21 148 78 61 73 Settlod 81 19 92 34 23 46 101 19 72 39 55 20 41 133 32 115 40 20 16 12 54 24 59 48 21 24 64 34 56 5 D~ault 227 33 163 54 64 278 79 63 124 25 108 45 72 134 45 44 16 11 50 11 15 22 28 I 62 38 98 14 77 53 30 1 0 1 33 5 2 11 24 4 6 1 12 _2 1U 6 9 21 b~ lU 1~ U ~ _U 2 3 8 0 WiUldrawal 7 7 26 16 10 2 10 1 12 2 2 ,5 25 U L J!. 2 ,U ,U ,0 I--~utrjer ~ .!:1 ;j2 2 , 1 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 .. -~ ..i J! ! <::4 .0, _0 ,U 0 0 0 0 0 0 U ,:J Tob!'~poSltj()n5 509 349 544 162 154 526 223 110 260 98 195 149 182 307 231 150 0 U 2 U U u Adjllstments 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E6 63 194 ED 113 .135 -*.§7 1u5 4 0 I-==U U U U ,. U o~ 111 88 54 11 0 0 U U U u. 0 u u 0 Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables. f 1 132 1 133 1P TRAFFIC CITATIONS,!INON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS 11 CRIMINAL AND CIVil COMPlAINTSI.BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS • II ~ ~r~ ~ ~ C) ~ C) I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ....., ..!...... c '.J&' & & ...... q;: 5::::i ll:; ck ~ cS' & C) ..... ~ "Ai~"""h£V ~ oj oj & & §!; C) 4~~ ...... ~ ~kC'\/ C'\/ oj oj £V C) C) ~ ~ oj ojCj ~ &' &' 7114 12727 12573 2080621161 25151 24182 26045 12672 6605 C'\/ C'\/ oj oj 10064 11796 h-0797 31328 1975 POPULATION 769 698 1331 6981 899 3819 2470 1956 630 338 32682 20168 20491 25461 D6748 Traffic Citations Flied 18827 5451 7894 4830 709 932 1196 1355 2439 7525 Dispositions By: 803 6 2 7376 3310 2144 1577 580 1130 3194 706 3011 2227 1636 554 327 1000 757 548 4231 972 Guil.t.x Pleas .-- - 14 50 45 oJU;;I.,.'l~al1'7 ...011 .,. -a-Av.,. 2 656 818 51 1046 1139 1£163 6605 2612 19 13 16 1919 1296 924 Guilty 11:1 ti 25 11019986 . . 1 38 25 -s3 -45 _4cr 573 530 4106 785 ~otGuilty· 'Trial 'JJ.; 2"~ 21~~I v ~~;;IV ~~."tv ~~ ~6 1 7 27 19 24 23 29 49 157 54 12 .13 16 16 Withdrawal 240 "'v2 'v0 0 6 0 0 0 39 7 4 49 12 ..§S- I 5 112 69 48 95 _25 11 ffo 4~ t=:JSfuu~b~st~an~t~iv~e :QD~ef~ecQ!t===~---+-*--5i-ilL=t=~OQt='D 3 0 0 14 0 3 20 82 11 11 Unable to Locate 0 0 8 1 0 0 0 13 2 101 511 001 06300 00 0 7 0 0 0 4 0 6 3 -U- 466 0 31 93 2 0 TotalOther Dis osit ons U 122 4857 805 3226 2400 1787 655 340 0 3 0 0 13 16 3 0 4 0 ~Ol I 85 6~~ 0 33 0 0 100 0 0 686 917 1120 3 0- 1: 0 6 6 1326 2107 7342 ~8og --z143" 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 143C 980 Adiustments 86 436 144 215 268 6 246 227 297 68 a 5 2U9 19 0 634 559 4315 894 Non-Traffic Citations Filed 232 6C 0 0 -U- 1Y 169 243 357 372 592 0 275 222 563 338 Dispositions By: 67 305 115 106 141 15 202 131 2l 43 213 532 224 292 271 Guilty Plea U 35 5 13 9 1 15 9 20 1 138 192 254 408 435 Not Guilty 14 6 53 8 ··0--9 3 11 207 161 433 233 2 10 22 16 3 2 124 277 93 156 201 Guilty· Trial U 11 20 13 19 2 7 21 ;;u 9 10 18 11 11 7 1 10 11:1 4 17 9 12 -m 14 5 5 16 22 ~o -4 I Substantive Defect 1 1 U 0 0 0 0 I 13 5 110 29 1 8 30 -I) 57 7 12 14 17 lJ 0 11 1 0 0- 1-S- -~1 12 19 Unable to Locate 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 g 2~ 31~ o 2 13 Z 1) (J 0 6 0 0 0 iff 7 0 Other 70 395 148 195 179 18 233 165 0 69 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 12 0 Total DlsDosltions 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 43 163 230 6 0 0 0 0 o 333 555 471 251 196 0 1 0 --0 0 0 1 514 261 145 Adjustments 502 324 775 284 288 271 0 2 5 3 0 389 126 213 266 265 131 58 15 21 0 0 Summary Complaints Filed 125 150 62 59 0 0 0 144 1116 176 267 588 DISpositions By: 237 65 9 151 134 445 104 134 1U 12 372 246 249 182 160 164 24 Guilty Plea ;; ;;/ 17 26 24 22 1 T4 'J7 u 37 35 110 694 73 Not Guilty 1f 11' 5521 24 45 8 92 287 204 2 4 1 10 :5 4 165 167 88 60 13 5 4 7 22 11 U -5 3 45 4 54 5 =2417 8 1 1 3 o 10 13 23 168 2 2 7 4 13 Substantive Defect ~ l U U 0 -0 0 2U 0 13 24 207 27 .g- 0 g 0 1 0 0 0 3~ ~ 10 7 0 1 0 0 2 0 o 11 1 0 94 0 -10 1 0 0 0 0 0- -0- -0' 11 3 5 Total Dispositions 2tiU COO -50 00 -g4" 0 14 0 4 0 0 0 0 l) 1J3.2 50 64 189 871 0 0 0 2" 0- 0 242 128 54~ 268 0 Adjustments 0 89 59 823 255 228 334 163 0 0 0 0 5 190 220 I2U 84 23 54 2 0 42 0 Misde/Feiony Complaints Filed 76 153 27 !5 103 83 113 0 0 0 0 332 461 132 141 322 308 130 98 215 82 I _____ 24 176 L~D~iS~P~0;Si$tio~n~S~B~y:~ Dismissed ~_t-~1~0~~3~3~=1~3tt=J[~3!Ci1~Oi4t=j1i4t=ji~8t=~1~2t==+==oa~=~~[l26 43 29 24 368 n -65 --g5 00 v 14 14 25 18 57 14 17 16 42 63 2 07 l49 96 61 64 70- 22 50 1 31 11 _34 33" 03 128' 71 54 -27 41f 53 --zz 12 1;; 86 84 a u I' 1 0 30 3 33 53 20 36 _20 21 17 -39" 0 0 9 0- D- o- -4 7i -34 1;; 1U 0- U lJ U 111 5-g 17 21 Other 0 4 I U 0 1 5 0 -0 8 24 .~T~ot~al:....:D:.::is:.J:p:.:;o~slt::.:::io:.:.:n.::-s -----+---I---~nio ;og. =~!r=-L~4~~7~~/'~~U~14~3-2:T2=ot-8_7.3~2~_t-~1Ib-ot::r_0_iO.fj~ U 01:1 U U 46 U lJ i f- 112 1).) i22' 0 -2 247 319 165 110 259 0 6 _0 u lJ lJ 320- 118- gB" -~ -fff) f-- Adjustments 366 b12 472 __ I. U U ti 12 U 175 2?~1.1-~52::4+-_+- 28_7+-_1_6f-j~ 350 16 _0 0 0 0 _0 I~C~I~Vil~c~o~m~p~la~ln~ts~F~iI~ed~ ____-t __ -t_~10~0T-~12=81-_6~°li--II~J1~:I~:r~ 23 t 134 162 215 495 192 219 399 278 DispOSitions By: ?'~ .iR HI 92 192 85 93 50 33 5~) ~ 299 383 397 274 114 18 22 Trial '1 76 200 98 22 94 36.,! 14 192 56 27 18 Settled 27 32 17 42 280 260 82 315 154 49 I 183 27 69 29 8 128 32 31 167 81 32 246 95 23 58 72 65 80 85 36 83 104 t=~De~~fi~au~lt::~======r===+=J3~3r=J3~3H==1~9Ft===t==0[[~8~COt==]t6~~6t=~1~3===t~~29==j~~ ~ 51 159 81 95 257 86 18 f 2 9 7 11 -8 3- 139 198 109 15 72 t==~N,o~~e~~~lgce~======t===t=~1+==i2H==i2tF==1E==[5C=34~0t==]2t=Jl~7t==1~3~==+=~2U=~(l~Withdrawal 7 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 ~ 1 2 ~ 53 3 4 6 3 29 0 31 0 3 0 0- 1; 7 7 12 16 11 0 p 0 0 4 7 :m 11 0 TotaTDlsposttions 8 11~ 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 It 264 1'34 0 0 - 0 0 t~~O~1ttffi~er~~~~======t===+:J~0H-=rq0H==~07~=-~=2=15frt=7=9ft5t=4:5~3~2~2~51:4~815tt:::1:~2~54~:1~40AdjUstments I 124 288 401 199 154 8 0 1 _0 6 0 0 0 421 298 246 " 0 0 62 0 lJ 366 404 268 105 Note:Footnotes at tile end of Tables. 0 0 0 0 0 134 0 135 n Ii i I' TRAFFIC CITATIONS 11NON~TRAFFIC CITATIONS 'I! CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTSI:BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS 1,) ~ <§> ~ ~ ~ ~ ::? & ~ !t:> ~ g;, 9) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oJ oJc:5 oJc:::i oJc:5 oJc:5 oJc:::i oJ::2 cV::? ~'1- 32264 32264 2932927249 20270 16757 129 CV [15197 fHl517 ~35001 R78 941 n 2R:iR 2756 26515766 ~:365012035022458 1277017900179003116117200 1975 POPULATION 2227 4501 1306 4416 ! 1899 1445 2528 3808 1946 2902 3619 722 Traffic Citations Flied 999814325 1198 7823 1840 2164 1615 3332 1157 3204 1512 1244 1555 2950 1449 2350 2748 Dispositions By: 179 858 36 123 177 74 85 595 13 '\01 43 39 219 90 145 168 292 l--....,.G~UiJ!lf..!~ _____--I----+-"=~...::<=.=+-~~-='-7-I-~~-!:--'--i-I----f--'-~-=-'-==-~~I-'-""-'f-:'-+-=~ 970 416 65 558 77 58 46 126 55 165 82 ot! 241 20{ Jo~ 135 1""55 Not Guilt ( 212? 77 262 94 41 122 33 25 347 42 Guilt -Trial f56 n in 1 5 7 o 2 24 44 0 (3 9 Withdrawal o 1517 396 261 46 o 3 165 3 65 o o 0 6 111 11 308 Substantive Defect o 0 34 o 2 o o 3 o 2 3 o 000 8 0 Unable to Locate 11147120407 1862 9082 2266 2337 1881 4255 1258 3891 1682 1374 2121 3389 1883 2711 3540 Other o 0 o o 4 o o 2 o 17 2 o 0 1 0 18 0 Total Dis osltlons 798 745 431 860 493 388 251 1053 194 1107 402 319 468 529 404 879 1071 Ad'ustments 410 266 1041 41 17 80 197 28 74 562 620 314 608 300 264 171 632 170 706 288 314 328 345 311 644 713 305 148 448 172 246 22 9 45 178 26 65 81 79 19 11 39 19 8 127 o 40 6 6 27 37 14 33 108 8 35 24 83 46 224 121 23 46 12 15 12 82 6 62 19 (:) 28 46 8 19 48 1 o 3 1 1 5 63 51 2 2 17 47 47 o 2 9 12 8 7 40 3 22 89 17 8 73 23 3 17 5 1 3 4 7 23 7 67 94 12 2 o 3 17 o 1 o o 4 o o o o 1 1 1 o o 0 1 0 0 1 208 2 0 9 18 7 42 1 48 0"015 Q105 o o 3 0 o 0 11 3 o o o 8 64 7 3 o n 8 o o 5 7 o 0 06 3 0 o o o 0 200 2 5 o 0 o 0 ~67 831 387 677 374 306 231 887 200 951 337 334 456 453 341 725 980 o 421 244 597 427 9 3 0 0 0 2 0 26 17 58 203 29 81 2 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 000 o o o 41 o 173 72 79 294 121 201 194 256 200 280 241 374 10 255 59 176 106 315 75 67 231 260 48 94 44 69 36 148 28 46 15 120 42 83 92 80 80 162 82 187 1 124 6 47 27 9 97 61 24 13 45 47 5 1 5 8 17 8 17 53 7 5 21 7 1 14 1 52 . 4 24 37 24 29 8 15 136 3 3 2 4 72 8 126 41 13 4 10 35 31 50 64 1 8 26 1 12 0 37 7 1 4 71 5 2 45 60 6 3 5 4 14 13 21 16 20 37 5 31 26 21 20 115 35 35 0 9 6 39 20 11 17 27 25 19 26 24 o 0 o o o o 2 00001 0 15 10 4 2 000 o o 37~~0tt-~6M-~0~~9+--¥0~_5~~2~ o o 1 o 2 o 0 4 2 2 0 4 o o o 1 o 15 79 6 4 25 2 1 1 0 068 030 g 4 1 37 1 0 o 2 7 14 o o o o o o 0 o 1 2 2 185 106 56 169 78 157 166 204 174 320 152 269 3 172 13 180 +~; o o o 312 70 48 163 283 47 91 37 39 36 149 o o o 0 o o o o o 000 000 0 0 0 o 0 000 o o o 5 o 285 281 333 356 337 310 176 358 81 487 208 279 142 163 123 342 283 203 207 297 319 300 74 46 102 28 10 37 18 22 20 50 39 32 40 92 5 55 7 17 21 32 7 52 20 238 216 139 144 165 110 85 143 21 125 81 94 62 82 45 117 150 11 22 71 36 27 34 24 15 26 84 23 37 13 11 8 53 23 2 o 11 o o 1 o o 1 2 o 5 o 1 3 12 0 21 8 86 40 22 58 41 37 25 201 27 74 13 43 14 94 62 o o 2 4 1 4 1 1b o 3 0 4 2 290 268 328 270 255 239 191 291 80 488 1313 242 109 172 77 332 257 o o o o o u u u u o o -U U ·0 lJ 401 221 174 409 397 488 244 551 380 755 307 360 106 400 237 570 360 317 100 57 146 158 113 70 229 28 178 37 88 11 125 98 141 137 51 162 40 37 73 37 41 129 109 193 55 58 26 76 25 131 70 87 122 57 155 62 238 99 182 ~Z78 127 100 5 172 95 165 115 5 10 15 4 11 6 22 1 39 13 2 4 16 25 2 2 3 2 8 1 ( U 22 4 a o 3 o 2 "1 o 1 o o 3 a o 1) 462 396 175 344 314 406 233 549 38b 741 267 46 381 233 475 351 o o o 0" a o o u o o u o o u o 137 Note:Footnoles at the end of Tab/es, 136 Ar#;-' ,".", ~ .. 1 I' TRAFFIC CITATIONS,!:NON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS II CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTSIBY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS I' I l ~ lj ~ ~!S ]~~~ rig ~;§ :::: ~ ~ cS' & & &h, 0;) c» c» ~&,~ '" &~, ~ i hh '" oO!f 1193 98061 9841 167041 52991 63241 4307 18411'" 12843'" 12252'" 14902'" 13797'" 13186'" 14739 18358 12010 13613 17391 20230 19322 31334 32558 1975 POPULATION 18330 15667'" 15667 5667 j 4~4 .?AA? 1~R? 1048 54? 1Fi1R AAd 1605 72~ 747 1189 1910 1019 381 ,?O?? 1747 ?ROR 2898 1~OR 948 7?Fi I ! 450 1062 2253 1368 2287 Traffic Citations Flied I --oTspositions By: 786 446 1130' ,\ 2208 1552 624 670 RO~ 396 2R08 1307 , 776 1378 572 499 364 955 1027 1712 839 300 1832 1546 1970 1144 2082 Guilty Pleas 10 64 65 70 14 78 , 51 60 53 46 26 41 31 17 30 1 30 26 16 53 8j t--Not Guilty 31 25 58 42 20 I 5 31 44 39 I 45 33 54 14 3 30 62 42 31 '119 39 2 29 24 30 1? 149 i 44 61 10 25 Guilty, Trial 105 1 , ~ill RR ~7 A 49 8 7 1? 1? 1A 1 ?4 5 17 29 34 21 1 12 26 ?fi • fiFi Withdrawal 11 ?OO 20 0 ? Q Q? 1fi 4? 0 I'; 11 4 10 I 11 ? 0 0 0 10 2 a 0 (\ 14 3 a a 1 Substantive Defect 0 0 i ~~1 R8 0 ? 7 23 0 , 4 6 6 a 1 51 28 6 40 1 63 6 21 0 3 Unable to Locate 0 135 \ 0 23 4 0 0 16 0 2 0 0 10 0 3 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 Other 0 516 1250 I nR4 2202 904 9~6 RAO 4~4 I?A04 1412 906 i 909 1498 689 583 401 1118 1150 1831 991 313 2095 1635 2066 1341 2261 Total Dispositions 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 23 0 0 0 Adiustments 0 0 0 0 2 12 1AQ ?4? 4FiR ?48R fi~fi 1~O1 ?no RFi 1?1 1RO ?A? R7 2?fi 9Fi 447 4RO 14 ~?I'; 185 2R? 16n7 ?R~ Non-Traffic Citations Flied fi18 ~Fi~ 4?1 ?RO Dispositions By: 382 1252 138n I 7~ ~O~ 1550 ! Rfi 11R 1 RFi 32 162 90 2~9 ~79 7 174 148 272 1mO ?~7 Guilty Plea fi62 14Fi n1 87 17fi 185 8 39 175 9 0 45 i Fi 1? 1 7 4 4 R 6 58 20 Not Guilty ~ 8 1? 14 16 I 2 9 12 a 5 in 23 122 20 0 1~ I ~ 4 1? 26 13 15 ?? 1 ~ 72 14 Guilty, Trial 7 1 21 16 18 2 13 22 9 n 1Fi 9 8 17 14 1R 89 2 49 13 I, ? R ~ A 1 17 4 ?Fi 11 1 ~ 5 15 102 1R Withdrawal 10 1 0 2 \ 0 ~1 0 0 0 ? 1 0 O~ () ~~ 0 ? 0 0 Substantive Defect 0 3 0 5 0 0 2 10 0 1 0 108 1 a 43 t n 4 A n 0 ? 1 n 1A n A 0 4 ~ n Unable to Locate 0 0 182 0 0 0 1A 0 0 0 ~ n 0 0 1 1 n n 1 0 n ? ?? n n 1 ? n n Other ?OFi4 41fi 1301 1490 Q £:..72 172 47~ 140 ??R ?18 3RR I R4 11~ 14? ?07 ~8 ?OFi 11~ ?RFi 4R4 ?~~ 182 309 1?RFi ?R7 Total Dispositions 27 0 0 0 0 a 0 10 1 2 0 a 0 1 " 4 0 0 0 Adjustments 0 0 0 0 0 19 a a 137 113 281 199 95 275 291 40 106 41 242 271 78 79 329 76 57 111 124 214 117 173 Summary Complaints Flied 45 226 709 79 I1 DiSPOSitions By: 79 42 120 143 39 108 129 ?7 fi7 1? ~7 198 25 54 198 ?R ~O ?? 92 120 38 1m Guilty Plea 19 49 310 55 1 -:fFi 0 '7 40 3 15 2 13 12 4 19 ~ Fi i 12 R ~ 4 R 1 ? 6 6 11 ~8 Not Guilty 10 1-~ '89~ ~ 19 11 8 2 16 55 7 4 4 12 20 15 23 0 '9 18 1 19 28 Guilty Trial 1 64 3 4 1 9 29 R 46 15 40 6 7 36 1 11 11 4~ 58 9 5 37 17 ? ~ 17 15 34 11 Withdrawal 0 0 2 0 n n -n 0 0 0 1 0 n n ~ 2 n 0 Substantive Defect a 1 a 2 0 0 0 a 11 0 5 3 -0 -6 ? 0 10 0 1 -8 0 5 0 Unable to Locate 0 0 252 6 6 0 2 a n-0- 3 a 1 0, 3 1 (\ 1 8 0 3 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 6 2 15 0 Other - j~'?l 24 67 698 76 165 71 191 174 69 225 151 ~A 77 li? 1A7 28? fi? 84 ?FiR R? ~~ J42 ~151 117 180 Total Dispositions 0 0 0 0 2 0 Adjustments 0 0 a 0 0 4 15 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a 0 0 0 306 75 130 108 ?61 16? 140 ~1~ 1~4 ??R FiR ?4 1?4 370 196 Mlsde/Felony Complaints Flied n9 449 278 236 104 77 298 180 121 139 183 Dispositions By: 32 23 40 10 18 ?1 1~ ?1 45 18 39 11 12 1 1 12 4 35 18 Dismissed 9 63 45 38 14 12 36 111 146 95 149 52 19 88 149 38 58 37 ~~ ?R 77 11R ]0 21 53 107 2:'i 7 16 49 91 269 100 Bound Over 10 15 30 6 13 30 2fi R7 29 29 18 5 35 46 23 24 3 Withdrawal 1 61 59 16 28 22 31 23 24 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 3 1 4 0 7 ? n 23 1 3 2 1 a 0 0 2 0 4 a FUQitive 32 7 15 22 2 25 17 48 20 33 Waiver 23 5 49 23 21 7 117 22 58 8 55 49 9 18 51 6 1 0 2 4 0 1 0 0 1 2 1" 7 0 1 7 a 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 Other 9 0 3 75 154 275 252 227 115 62 279 226 85 147 114 141 124 291 188 76 148 199 55 19 77 133 166 352 154 Total Dispositions .. 0 0 . 5 0 0 0 Adjustments 0 0 0 a 0 6 17 ~ a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a a 60 164 284 133 198 Civil Complaints Flied 201 327 252 170 345 123 333 121 85 49 189 435 175 201 291 236 49 403 180 456 168 DispOSitions By: 16 72 62 37 47 ?? 1A QI'; 41 ~7 81 10 ~? 129 13 '183 81 Trial 70 84 86 R5 24 40 65 171 116 23 16 24 18 97 17 82 17 31 47 25 29 26 10 16 86 38 37 117 67 11 79 17 40 66 19 Settled 7 47 25 57 13 Default 21 66 99 44 160 57 142 27 25 13 42 185 58 52 89 70 15 190 31 221 61 0 8 12 18 2 4 32 u L ;:! 0 3 0 5 0 3 15 4 3 7 0 0 1 . 5 5 1 No Service 2 3 4 1 Withdrawal 2 1 10 13 0 2 3 3 1 0 10 8 10 8 7 6 0 8 6 0 1 0 u a 0 0 0 0' other 1 a 1 0 32 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a 117 175 232 158 315 121 324 41 152 139 123 109 74 46 163 453 162 217 253 231 36 309 161 95 475 163 Total DiSpositions u u 0 0 -Adjustments 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables. 138 139 TRAFFIC CITATIONS,; NON ... TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTS -BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS I :::::::: ~ IS s:: ...... OJ ~ ~ ~ ~ <::> a- [:; rV c>j c>j ~ c>j ~ lj,{!;u,~ J! v. ~ rV rV ;h/', 16168 13383 13334 9711 20218 ~0486 87 42 ~ 8259 3002 14979 11661 16069 12097 8368 4928 3887 2850 2064 1472 1940 12030 4653 3198 926 1037 9389 1170 323 409 1975 POPULATION 720 650 499 788 539 1191 1332 408 2174 1993 448 156 245 188 123 563 52~ Traffic Citations Flied 469 812 1254 418 1968 1709 729 836 7611 1006 211 357 Dispositions By: 452 440 323 617 432 750 383 150 234 158 132 9 5265 13 14 67 48 49 38 38 30 4 ~~iJ~tfle32--_~_~ __ •____ ~---- 82 4 5 11 18 5 6 2 2 1 15 21 7 27 -so- 6 54 77 49 0 <::14 ;;U 0 14 Not Guilty 11) -,T 4 2 17 8 29 30- 6 26 11 4 7 5 21 , 10 3 74 Guilty- Trial 4 3 0 25 9 226 4 8 11 16 0 1 0 24 1 1 0 11 1 2 1 1 12 a Withdrawal 0 2 0 0 38 22 --, o 239 5 2 26 0 3 9 1 0 1U substantive Defect 0 2 0 0 23 2 0 1 0 0 1 o U 6 o t! 0 U ;j U 0 U U Unable to Locate 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 i 849 ~4f 8689 11 fO <::b~ 3{4 0 1 1 664 504 804 540 1147 1389 4742Fl5 1868 Other 176 137 601 495 563 ;j b4 0 U U 0 423 162 254 0 a 2 10 6 46 2 102 o Total DisDositions 0 0 0 a 4 25 li 0 109 214 118 145 i 174 106 258 116 94 69 260 155 Adiustments 140 125 106 74 155 70 128 48 96 107 108 II Non-Traffic Citations Flied '1 93 160 93 147 137 37 207 70 78 39 178 121 Dispositions By: 8.5 90 74 108 49 136 45 85 40 62 62 6 II 9 16 0 3 10 25 5 6 -g- 53 -2- Guilty Plea 0 7 2 6 1 5 27 a 4 1 6 3 ~l 2 7 4 2 4 3U 49 Not Guilty 3 7 0 5 1 8 , 3 0 4 20 13 4 2 6 7 - 5 18 9 2 5 3 ~ t!~ i Guiltv Trial 1 1 0 10 2 67 ! 2 020 0 1 6 0 0 5 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 o Withdrawal 1 0 0 12 1 i, 0 005 0 2 1 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 6 0 o Substantive Defect 0 0 0 0 1 0 a 003019 000000 Unable to Locate 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 [ 107 185 104 174 170 105 221 90 102 59 215 128 148 119 72 148 i Other 79 105 56 68 69 115 101 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 Total DlsDosltions 3 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 t Adjustments 35 158 I t--.::...9 r1;,::2..:,.1 r':...::,l...:..l +-...:::6~0-f-!1.:::,.52,.4 -i-~6:::.5+-_+-..!.7~3k57 332 40 54 90 14 19 27 39 122 53 192 Summary Complaints Flied 66 7 6 19 62 32 112 27 ---t--t-,---==-.:-t--':~--1---l---l---1 105 4 lJ1spoSltlons By: 19 27 70 23 121 6 !\ o 49 9 14 20 49 31 224 14 25 88 58 6 4 12 2 4 Guilty Plea -0 3 0 0 4 2 0 16 o 20 27 5 11 1 0 ~ ~ 4 1 7 0 0 32 5 10 ! -,-t Not Guiltv 1 1 15 0 9 ~ 1 2 49 12 9 7 ~IODl_112rt __l~0t-~lTIt6~9~-76H- __~~1~18+-~1~U_~20~~12~ 7 3 Guilty- Trial 1 3 1 \) 18 13 Withdrawal 1 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 3 , Substantive Defect 1 0 0 0 2 1 -0 1 0 a 0 11 Unable to Locate 0 0 23 0 0 1 , 0 1 I 0 0 25 138 , Other 14 34 5~ -.JJZ 72 181 , 60 11 11 --~O 0 8 1 Total Dispositions 0 0 0 a 0 0 Adjustments 0 56 174 118 60 187 110 148 134 190 61 103 142 66 139 63 106 : 79 33 36 34 20 75 150 Mlsde/Felony Complaints Flied I 11 6 7 5 35 2 Dispositions By: 7 3 3 2 9 13 6 , 19 40 31 Dismissed 10 19 39 21 25 10 12 5 6 30 45 17 12 11 16 22 6;jb29 41 14 13 12 Bound Over T8 13 10 15 18 3 TO 9 8 19 20 1 1 4 1 7 1 3 1 15 1 u U Withdrawal 26 4 2 2 4 0 0 1 0 -0 0 5 17 78 67 29 65 0 G[ 48 '31 1 f 4fr 44 Fugitive -5 -4 57 41 60 -21 40 11 0 5 25 1) -U- 0 U U 1J U U 4 1 1--_ Waiver -0 1 2 _Q 2 1 0 0 1) 0 -124 . 66 94, 59 166 -no 64 171 111 1t!1 122 Hi( ot! 0;;:: 9f Other 22 20 84 -142 83 o U v U 1G U U U -U 0 U 0 o 0 1J 10tal Dispositions ~- r-- 28 -~6 U U 0 0 0 AaJustments ,. 34 60 12 60 83 25 124 29 121 92 358 81 49 171 75 64 41 192 50 26 57 Civil Complaints Flied 209 74 12 2 ~ 29 21 8 43 10 34 31 278 26 20 21 -olsposltlons By: 2 4 26 12 8 33 15 12 16 12 7 22 2 1 ~ 18 1 ~ 29 1 u t!8 15 b f t!1 i 064 Trial 33 23 19 33 6 7 6 U 27 40 12 41;j8 16 3U 1G 73 Settled 83 2- 6 1\} 10 22 131 t!o 3b 0 1 122 -3 Default U U U U U 0 -6 u 1 U 1 0 No Service U 3 0 1 8 1 3 ~ Withdrawal 1 -0 -0 0 0 U -,- U U U U 45 69 23 1t!43~ n~!:I9 ;jfO tll 40 101 otner U 23 57 33 -47 16 7ti t!-( 3!:1 l62 41 U U U U U U I U UI Ui U TotaTOli$positions 236 71 U 1J 0 -0 u 0 0 0 0 0 U Adjustments 141 Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables. 140 TRAFFIC CITATIONS, i NON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVil COMPLAINTS i BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS ~ ~ ~ §f S§ <::>-"- & ~ & ~ ~ ~ .,f, .,f,cs c-? nJ nJ nJ ~ ~ c-? c-? c-? ~ c-? c» nJ ~ nJ c-? nJ ~ c» c-? C':)' ~ 9 <::> ~ ;;,to) c» ,,~ ,- ~;';'jtth ;;'ltJ &;;;;'" c-? &k l'hl, ~ 18599 10004 10732 4398 4138 3952 2112 13258 12274 10494 12355 12113 15223 9011 26053 24437 1975 POPULATION - 16947 12322 5794 29910 28394 15779 13742 18984 Traffic Citations Filed 5431 690 1908 563 1866 199 745 544 62 483 2305 2641 861 1443 2805 932 2099 5698 4887 3209 797 748 801 1205 Dispositions By: ~_~.@Y_E!~~ ______.___ ._. __ - 4994 634 1662 475 1531 172 704 498 57 416 2036 2287 733 1326 2379 802 1918 4935 4551 1610 552 584 621 913 Not Guilty 8 7 44 14 45 3 4 9 2 15 13 1 21 16 56 11 39 53 27 49 32 70 27 69 42 20 Guilty-Trial 3::s 29 85 24 94 9 17 8 4 22 '27 25 87 ~O til::! \:Jo f? til 3\:J , 0 ~L_ t:l4 Withdrawal 86 9 78 11 14 2 3 4 1 7 21 11 34 43 126' 18 85 434 15 437 25 15 . 60 37 Substantive Defect 3 1 21 4 0 6 2 0 0 0 5 1 3 4 11 2 8 1 0 0 1 0 5 _5 Unable to Locate 158 1 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 155 7 7 2 31 2 0 0 0 18 25 11 1 0 0 Other 0 0 2 0 4 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 4 2 0 .~ Q 0 1 1 Total Dispositions 5282 681 1895 528 1688 193 _ 737 520 64 460 2272 2327 835 1421 2690 867 2123 5521 4665 ~~Ul 674 683 737 1119 Adjustments 0 0 0 32 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 48 18 30 0 29 134 0 0 0 1 0 139 1 Non-Traffic Citations Filed 485 J89 288 108 310 43 106 61 31 121 97 35 165 187 258 74 1000 519 68 1012 410 633 192 623 Dispositions By: Guilty Plea 242 159 185 59 182 37 86 26 20 100 68 30 118 137 189 46 775 438 52 586 235 342 114 482 Not Guilty 0 3 8 1 13 4 9 14 0 12 a 0 7 10 13 3 21 24 1 31 14 11 14 5 Guilty-Trial 1 6 19 8 52 0 2 3 3 9 10 0 12 18 15 4 ~;:s 1U 10 It:12 28 2 20 12 Withdrawal 170 27 31 11 6 4 4 3 1 11 4 0 7 2 7 2 90 28 5 96 b 36 18 12 Substantive Defect 18 2 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 Unable to Locate 1 3 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 U1 14 19 0 0 Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0\ 2 Total Dispositions 433. 200 253 81 253 45 102 46 24 133 100 30 145 167 229 55 916 501 68 1007 297 410 166 520 0 0 22 Adjustments 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 5 0 6 3 0 47 23 0 0 0 0 o 1~ Summary Complaints Filed 371 67 278 126 265 135 77 142 39 41 57 85 436 44 340 6 98 320 20 768 276 334 168: 553 i-UISposltlons By: Guilty Plea 314 32 187 39 125 61 59 81 23 28 23 64 191 23 242 8 88 195 24 329 62 184 72 364 Not Guilty 0 1 20 2 19 2 5 6 1 7 4 2 5 2 5 u 1 7 1 ol ::S1 21 6 45 Guilty-Trial 4 11 26 32 53 6 2 8 3 2 12 9 3 5 11 1 2 7 0 04 78 17 18 92 Withdrawal 16 9 39 24 28 12 1 16 3 2 7 1 10 2 26 4 23 16 11 108 48 ::su 31 16 Substantive Defect 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 5 Unable to Locate 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 0 0 2 4 4 0 0 9 1 0 --~o·-- 0 16 12 102 0 8 Other 0 0, 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 33 0 1 1 3 0 3 Total Dispositions 335 53 275 100 225 84 67 116 30 41 52 80 209 34 294 14 115 259 36 575 232 358 127 533 Adjustments 0 0 0 17 0 30 1 0 2 0 a 0 20 4 25 0 6 95 0 0 0 5 0 87 Misde/Felony Complaints Filed 15 63 148 85 155 27 56 53 15 88 136 114 131 168 229 82 215 263 35 370 147 196 123 144 Dispositions By: Dismissed 1 2 17 4 19 8 6 7 2 12 14 12 7 11 13 9 9 62 12 -- 28 23 22 15 45 Bound Over 40 37 53 28 83 13 29 27 6 15 44 36 13 25 59 -~ 40 ------eti 15 -'13"2 """77 .9S ~63 57 Withdrawal 5 2 25 13 29 1 11 10 2 33 14 L2 14 27 65 H 59 45 ~ 51 B 19 20 9 Fugitive 0 0 7 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 7 2 J U 3 U Q. 3- U 11 6 } 3 3 Waiver 0 19 32 35 18 4 11 4 4 14 51 ~O 45 9} 76 Lti bt:l 20 .6. !..b 10 ;:Sl 18 17 ~Jher 0 0 1 0 a 1 u L U 0 ~ ~ U u J:i ~U 37 ltl 1::J. 1 U ~2 0 3 Tot.31 Dispositions 46 60 135 80 14t:1 U ot:l 51 14 74 "Ji:!.2 194 B3 loU 222 9U 204 Lb~ 45 130 138 lll::! 134 --0 -1) -~~ Adjustments ------, _0 0 0 ~ 0 () 0 U U ~4 1~ oti U 1::S -;j~ 0 U U U U 11 Civil Complaints Flied 172 258 297 211 380 56 38 89 19 13~ 156 118 146 121 1342 35 457 416 109 324 216 359 119 334 DispositIOns By: Trial 20 143 52 38 34 14 4 17 10 20 73 10 25 10 49 1 49 57 21 107 80 99 46 111 - Settled 71 76 77 46 101 7 10 28 7 34 21 26 48 71 763 0 11~ 97 18 oU 35 59" 19 91 Default 4 4_ .128_ }O_ lOr 1B ~~ 16 4 68 4ti ::So o::l ~{ 147 ~0 L::l4 ~4u.. 08 150 tiL 1 ~1 btl tltl ;:s ( Itl 1 b I:) No ::service 1 u lP_ J:l L 4 U 1 ..t>. f ZD .~~ ;:$ 11 0 39~ u b I U ~Uts 1~ ---{ Withdrawal b 1B :3 12 1U U 1 3 U 3 - l~ ~ ~ .{ f-m other 2 0 0 0 u u u u u 0 U U U 1 Q + u ' u 1 1 U U U Total Dispositions 110 ~1 ~70_ 174 3{J4 4L 41 ti4 22 130 14t:1 t:l6 133 110 11 (4 ::S( ..i3::S_ 42Q n::s ;:S~1 ~UO 3(7 142 339 AdjUstments U 0 0 9 u. U U U U U u u 1 . U ~ u U l::I U u U U u a Note:Footnotes at the end of Tables. 142 143 ~'r -----... -- ..' -.-" ., : TRAFFIC CITATIONS,! NON-TRAFFIC CITATIONS CRIMINAL AND CIVIL COMPLAINTS: BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS ~ I ~ "';:::-. !if ~liJ ~ ~ {;:f~ 'tJ ~!!j ...... [$ <§'. ~.!$ [$ I:; & ..... <::> & & <::> &' ~ ~ FOOTNOTES TO PRECEDING CHARTS Magisterial Name and County District # Office Location ADAMS COUNTY BEDFORD COUNTY Donald G. Weaver 51-3-01 Gettysburg, Pa. (a) District Justice Am-Mialye Sutphen did not submit December, 1975 Report. Thomas C. Klunk 51-3-02 McSherrystown, Pa. John C. Zepp 51-3-03 New Oxford, Pa. BERKS COUNTY Harold R. Deardorff 51-3-04 Fairfield, Pa. (a) Reading District Court is composed of magisterial districts 1-01, 1-02, 1-03, 1-04, and 1-05.11 centrally hears certain traffic Eugene S. Long 51-3-06 Gettysburg. Pa. and non-traffic cases for the City of Reading. The district number was assigned by the statistical unit for administrative purposes. ALLEGHENY COUNTY BLAIR COUNTY Donald H. Presutti 05-2-01 Bellevue, Pa. (a) District Justice William Lower appointed to office June, 1975. Reports submitted June through December, 1975. Robert E. Meinert 05-2-02 Pittsburgh, Pa. James H. Bowen 05-2-03 CENTRE COUNTY Pittsburgh, Pa. Albert C. Pantone 05-2-04 Blawnox, Pa. (a) District Justice Garman A. Matter retired January, 1975. January, 1975 Report was submitted; however, the Office closed until July, 1975. Palmer K. Bierly was appointed July, 1975. Reports were submitted from July, 1975 through December, Anthony F. Clark 05-2-05 Natrona, Pa. Robert E. McCarthy 0.5-2-06 Pittsburgh, 1975. pa. (b) Magisterial District 4-01 was eliminated in May, 1975. The district was realigned with magisterial district 3-03 and reports John H. Salton 05-2-07 Monroeville, Pa. for 4-01 were submitted from January through April, 1975. Maurice Mysels 05-2-08 Pittsburgh, Pa. Martin McTiernan 05-2-09 COLUMBIA/MONTOUR COUNTIES Braddock, Pa. Eugene L. Raible 05-2-10 Pittsburgh, Pa. (a) Changed to District 3-03 in January, 1975. George Bobich 05-2-11 N. Versailles, Pa. CRAWFORD COUNTY Charles E. Johnston, Jr. 05-2-13 McKeesport, Pa. Albert V. Belan (a) No December, 197'5 Report submitted by District Justice Mary Jane Dennis. 05-2-14 West Mifflin, Pa. Richard J. Terrick 05-2-15 Homestead, Pa. DAUPHIN COUNTY Olive S. Stocker 05-2-16 Pittsburgh, Pa. (a) District Justice Riley R. Shoop left office in May, 1975. Reports filed through December, 1975. Jules C. Melograne 05-2-17 Pittsburgh, Pa. (b) District Justice John V. Juran left office in April, 1975. Reports filed through December, 1975. Edward T. Snee 05-2-18 Pittsburgh, Pa. William J. !vill, DELAWARE COUNTY III 05-2-19 Pittsburgh, Pa. John J. Kumer 05-2-20 (a) Delaware County Central Magistrates Court includes districts 1-01, 1-02, 1-03, and 1-18. Statistical Unit assigned this Bethel Park, Pa. William E. Downey 05-2-21 Bridgeville, Pa. number for administrative purposes. Ralph Biondi 05-2-22 Pittsburgh, Pa. ERIE COUNTY Robert E. Forsythe 05-2-23 Crafton (Pittsburgh), Pa. (a) Traffic citations for districts 1-01 through 2-01 are handled by central traffic court. Statistical unit assigned this number for John L. Mussman 05-2-24 McKees Rocks, Pa. administrative purposes. 05-2-25 Coraopolis, Pa. (b) No December, 1975 report submitted by District Justice John Ditrich. Nicholas A. Diulus 05-2-27 Pittsburgh, Pa. FAYETTE COUNTY Jacob H. Williams 05-2-28 Pittsburgh, Pa. 1 Kennedy Smith 05-2-29 Pittsburgh, Pa. (a) District Justice James Aspinwall retired April 1, 1975. No reports submitted since that date. 1 Eileen H. Ambrose 05-2-30 Pittsburgh, Pa. FOREST/WARREN COUNTIES Adam L. Schillinger Ofi-2.-31 Pittsburgh, Pa. 1 (a) District Justice A. D. Carlett appointed to office on August 28, 1975. Reports submitted from October, 1975 through I, Domenic Fransca 05-2-33 Pittsburgh, Pa. December, 1975. ! Walter Wilson 05-2-34 Pittsburgh, Pa. L Robert E. Tucker 05-2-35 Pittsburgh, Pa. HUNTINGDON COUNTY n James Hanley "jl J. 05-2-36 Pittsburgh, Pa. (a) Office closed from January, 1975 to June, 1975. Reports submitted from June, 1975 through December, 1975. il Joseph A. Biernacki \ ~ 05-2-37 Pittsburgh, Pa. LEBANON COUNTY f: Myles E. Gillingham 05-2-38, Pittsburgh, Pa. Regis C. Nairn 05-2-39 Pittsburgh, Pa. (a) Office closed in October, 1975. Reports submitted from January, 1975 through October, 1975. n H Donald E. Sparrow 05-2-40 Pittsburgh, Pa. NORTHAMPTON COUNTY fl Bernard J. Regan 05-2-42 Pittsburgh, Pa. (a) Reports submitted from October, 1975 through December, 1975, due to vacancy in the office. Richard P. Herman 05-2-43 Pittsburgh, Pa. I, Charles J. Franciscus 05-2-44 Pittsburgh, Pa. WESTMORELAND COUNTY r James McCann 05-2-45 Pittsburgh, Pa. (a) Magisterial district 1-04 was abolished and the area therein was divided into districts 2-05 and 2-07. The districts were L J' Regis C. Welsh, Jr. 05-2-46 Gibsonia, Pa. reclassified and renumbered as 1-04 and 1-05 because of the realignments. Raymond C. Thomas 05-3-01 Pittsburgh, Pa. James E. Russo 05-3-02 YORK COUNTY II Leetsdale, Pa. " Arthur Sabulsky 05-3-03 Pittsburgh, Pa. (a) District Justice Lois J. Clements left office on March 14, 1975. Reports submitted by staff through December, 1975. L Ii Angelo Toscolani 05-3-04 Russellton, Pa. I'p A. Paul Conn 05-3-05 McKeesport, Pa. Ji Andrew Kurta 05-3-07 Glassport, Pa. Paul Komaromy, Jr. 05-3-08 McKeesport, Pa. U Sarge Fiore 05-3-09 Clairton. Pa. I'.1 rl 148 ~ 149 Magisterial Magisterial Name and County District # Office Location Name and County Disfrict # Office Location ALLEGHENY COUNTY (cont.) BRADFORD COUNTY 05-4-01 Millvale (Pittsburgh), Pa. Andrew S. Skundrich Jack Huffman, Jr. 42-3-01 Troy, Pa. 05-4-04 Oakmont, Pa. William E. Garove Albert J. Frank 42-3-02 Sayre, Pa. 05-4-05 Pittsburgh, Pa. Lee J. Mazur James M. Cox 42-3-03 Towanda, Pa. William L. Crawshaw 05-4-06 Pittsburgh, Fa. Bemard F. Bride 42-3-04 05-4-07 Oakdale, Pa. Wysth Twsp. (Towanda), Pa. BUCKS COUNTY ARMSTRONG COUNTY 33-3-01 Ford City, Pa. Chris G. Ritter 07-1-01 Comwells Hgts., Pa. Eugene W. Shaeffer John P. Walker Robert J. Easley 33-3-02 Kittanning, Pa. 07-1-02 Bristol, Pa. 33-3-03 Leechburg, Pa. Frank J. Lepre 07-1-03 Levittown, Pa. Louis E. Milks, Jr. Anne V. Huhn Lisle E. James 33-3-04 Rural Valley, Pa. 07-1-04 Levittown, Pa. Joseph F. Basile 07-1-05 Tullytown, Pa. Dorothy A. Pollock BEAVER COUNTY 07-1-06 Feasterville, Pa. Richard L. Garber 07-1-07 Penndel, Pa.' Hugo R. Iorfido 36-1-01 Baden, Pa. Dominick C. Spadaccino Beaver Falls, Pa. 07-1-08 Levittown, Pa. Milton H. Richael 36-1-02 James M. Kelly 07-1-09 36-1-03 Aliquippa, Pa. Warminster, Pa. John J. Ayoob Gino J. Mattozzi 07-1-10 Fallsington, Pa. Lewis E. Kirchner 36-2-01 Conway, Pa. Anne E. Orazi Beaver, Pa. 07-1-11 Morrisville, Pa. George L. Shaffer 36-2-02 William Thomas 07-2-01 36-3-01 New Brighton, Pa. Newtown, Pa. Arthur L. Schlemmer Oliver A. Groman 07-2-02 Doylestown, Pa. Hoss M. Keefer, Jr. 36-3-02 Beaver Falls, Pa. J. Robert Hunsicker Monaca, Pa. 07-2-03 Perksasie, Pa. Joseph J. Liberati 36-3-03 Clyde C. Leaver, Jr. 07-3-01 36-3-04 Aliquippa, Pa. Doylestown, Pa. Stephen D. MihaHc Kathryn L. Stump 07-3-02 Quakertown, Pa. Elizabeth Nt Degen . 07-3-03 Kintnersville, Pa. BEDFORD COUNTY J. Robert Shaffer 57-3-01 Schellsburg, Pa. BUTLER COUNTY Kenneth G. Jewell 57-3-02 Bedford, Pa. \OVilliam R. O'Donnell Hopewell, Pa. 50-1-01 Butler, Pa. Charles O. Guyer 57-3-03 George A. Stevenson, Jr. 50-3-01 57-3-04 Breezewood, Pa. Slippery Hock, Pa. Marion L. Morgret Alberta M. Hindman 50-3-02 Chicora, Pa. James H. Galbreath 50-3-03 Saxonburg, Pa. BERKS COUNTY John E. Banyay 50-3-04 Evans City, Pa. Patsy F. Spadafora 23-1-01 Reading, Pa. Albert J. Gaspari 23-1-02 Reading, Pa. CAMBR~A COUNTY Ralph B. Breneiser 23-1-03 Reading, Pa. Joseph P. Piurkowsky Reading, Pa. 47-1-01 Johnstown, Pa. Barbara A. Clark 23-1-04 James E. Mayer 47-1-02 23-1-05 Reading, Pa. Johnstown, Pa. George F. Graeff Joseph Chokran ' 47-2-01 Johnstown, Pa. Doris M. Dorminy 23-1-06 Hyde Park (Heading), Pa. Julia A. Rozum Spring Twsp. (Reading), Pa. 47-2-02 J ohnstm,vn, Pa. Henry E. Shultz 23-2-01 Leo I. Finnegan 47-3-01 23-2-02 West Reading, Pa. Conemaugh, Pa. L Raymond M. Niebauer 47-3-02 Mount Penn (Reading), Pa. I Nicktown, Pa. Paul W. Hafer 23-2-03 Joseph P. McCabe 47-3-03 23-2-04 Shillington, Pa. I Portage, Pa. Charlotte F. Reber r Kenneth Hobine 47-3-04 Cresson, Pa. Birdsboro, Pa. j ~ George L. Wenger 23-3-01 Stephen F. Lobick 47-3-05 Boyertown, Pa. I" Hastings, Pa. Arthur W. Herb 23-3-02 1 William J. Shay Oley, }la. 47-3-06 Sidman, Pa. Wallace W. Wagonseller 23-3-03 ,i"l Francis P. Brosius 47-3-07 ~ J Ebensburg, Pa. Mabel E. Blank 23-3-04 Fleetwood, Pa. t> Alice M. Krug ~ 47-3-08 Ashville, Pa. 23-3-05 Leesport, Pa. ' Douglas N. Heydt t;t: Hamburg, Pa. I" Stephen C. Wanner 23-3-06 \- CAMERON COUNTY 23-3-07 Strausstown, Pa. I Laura A. Keener !, Alvin E. Brown B. Brevard Lord 23-3-08 Robesonia, Pa. I: 59-3-01 Emporium, Pa. ). I, BLAIR COUNTY ! CARBON COUNTY 24-1-01 Altoona, Pa. J) Harry E. Heydt Domenic A. Caminiti l' 56-3-01 Jim Thorpe, Pa. William B. Lower 24-1-02 Altoona, Pa. Willard A. Steigerwalt 56-3-02 Palmerton, Pa. \:I! Thomas P. Kilcoyne 24-1-03 Altoona, Pa. t: Joseph M. Sverchek 56-3-03 Lansford, Pa. 24-1-04 Altoona, Pa. l! Andrew Moisey William G. Camberg /' 56-3-04 Beaver Meadows, Pa. James YV. Morrisey 24-3-01 Tyrone, Pa. p Forrest L. Bartholomew 24-3-02 Atloona, Pa. i'Ii 24-3-03 Hollidaysburg, Pa. p Frederick L. Klepser ,I Denver K. Ake 24-3-04 Hoaring Spring, Pa. II [j 150 151 l ------.. ,;~';.'::"'''''~;:''''''''',-;..,~---.. ,,,, ...... ,,,,. Magisterial Magisterial District # Office Location Name and County , District # Office Location Name and County < CENTRE COUNTY DAUPHIN COUNTY State College, Pa. Clifford H. Yorks 49-2-01 Marlin E. Strohm 12-1-01 Harrisburg, Pa. Bellefonte, Pa. Louise O. Green 49-3-02 Paul H. Hardy 12-1-02 Harrisburg, Pa. Phillipsburg, Pa. Robert A. Shoff 49-3-03 William E. Woods 12-1-03 Harrisburg, Pa. Millheim, Pa. Palmer K. Bierly 49-3-04 Joseph S. Pinamontl, Jr. 12-1-04 Harrisburg, Pa. Robert G. Shue 12-1-05 Harrisburg, Pa. CHESTER COUNTY Mary E. Cross 12-2-01 Harrisburg, Pa. Phoenixville, Pa. John T. Jeffers 15-2-01 William J. Gardner, Jr. 12-2-02 Steelton, Pa. Armand A. Pomante 15-2-02 Paoli, Pa. Truman B. Peters 12-2-03 Middletown, Pa. Earl M. Heald 15-2-03 West Chester, Pa. Francis Reichenbach 12-3-01 Elizabethville, Pa. John F. Catanese 15-2-04 Coatesville, Pa. Lawrence E. Alvord 12-3-02 Dauphin, Pa. Robert G. Mull 15-3-01 Pottstown, Pa. Samuel J. Magaro 1~Z-3-03 Harrisburg, Pa. John R. Blackburn, Jr. 15-3-02 Malvern, Pa. 'William P. Rathfon 12-3-04 Hershey, Pa. C. Burtis Coxe 15-3-03 Downingtown, Pa. Eugene J. Difilippo, Jr. 15-3-04 Kennett Square, Pa. DELAWARE COUNTY Donald C. Brown 15-3-05 Oxford, Pa. Gerald A. Cox, Sr. Parkesburg, Pa. 32-1-01 Chester, Pa. Carl W. Henry 15-3-07 Garland W. Anderson 32-1-02 Chester, Pa. Joseph E. Pahna 32-1-03 Chester, Pa. CLARION COUNTY William J. Ditteri, Jr. 32-1-04 Clarion, Pa. Sharon Hill, Pa. Alta L. Hamilton 18-3-01 David A. Cinclair 32-1-05 Darby, Pa. Leeper, Pa. Norman E. Heasley 18-3-02 Robert W. Burton 32-1-06 Havertown, Pa. Virginia C, Briggs 18-3-03 Knox, Pa. Gerald C. Liberace New Bethle11em, Pa. 32-1-07 Havertown, Pa. Paul Matson 18-3-04 Robert H. Dewey 32-1-08 Lansdowne, Pa. Carl J. Melone 32-1-09 Broomall, Pa. CLEARFIELD COUNTY Joseph V. Gessler 32-1-10 Media, Pa. Wesley J. Read 46-3-01 DuBois, Pa. Nicholas Sellers 32-1-11 Wayne, Pa. William M. Daisher 46-3-02 Clearfield, Pa. Charles S. Bottino 32-1-12 Folsom, Pa. Stephen Purnella 46-3-03 Winburne, Pa. Harry P. Merlino 32-1-13 Crum Lynne, Pa. Alice L. Gregg 46-3-04 Coalport, Pa. Joseph M. Dougherty, II 32-1-14 Springfield, Pa. Martin J. Kerns 32-1-15 Upper Darby, Pa. CLINTON COUNTY Michael G. Cunen 32-1-16 Upper Darby, Pa. Carl R. Hamberger 25-3-01 Lock Haven, Pa. Richard 1. Colden, Jr .. 32-1-17 Upper Darby, Pa. Kermit A, Dietrich 25-3-02 Mill Hall, Fa. Vincent J. Cirilli 32-1-18 Chester, Pa. Kevin R. Dwyer 2.5-3-03 Renovo, Pa. George W. Paige 32-1-19 Boothwyn, Pa. John L. Laskey, Jr. 32-2-01 Clifton Heights, Pa. COLUMBIA COUNTY Henry J. Silva 32-2-02 Aston, Pa. C. Walter McCray, Jr. 32-2-04 Brookhaven, Pa. R. Donald Holter 26-2-01 Bloomsburg, Pa. 26-3-01 Millville, Pa. Leonard McDevitt 32-2-05 Glenolden, Pa. Delbert L. Pennpacker Anthony M. Truscello 32-2-06 Essington, Pa. Nickolas B. Piazza 26-3-02 Berwick, Pa. 26-3-03 Catawissa, Pa. John J. Neilson 32-2-07 Glenolden, Pa. William L. Breech David T. Videon 32-2-10 Newtown Square, Pa. I' j1 Robert M. Shaffer 32-2-11 Ridley Park, Pa. CRAWFORD COUNTY Denneth N. Miller 32-2-12 Upland, Pa. Meadville, Pa. I, John A. Kittrell 30-2-01 r' Dewey Larosa 32-2-13 Media, Pa. 30-3-01 Linesville, Pa. \' Carol Good I' Francis J. Murnaghan 32-2-14' Yeadon, Pa. Harry E. Randall 30-3-02 Meadville, Pa. Paul Ewaka 32-2-15 Lima, Pa. Robert J. Leonhart 30-3-03 Cambridge Springs, Pa. I: Leon J. Mascaro 32-3-01 Concordville, Pa. Maurice L. Dickson 30-3-04 Cochranton, Pa. I Clarence B. Nesbitt, Jr. 32-4-01 Thornton, Pa. 30-3-05 Centerville, Pa. I Charles T. Gillette L 30-3-06 Titusville, Pa. I' ELK COUNTY Ronald A. Cole, Sr. I I CUMBERLAND COUNTY Daniel T. Brahaney 59-3-02 Johnsonburg, Pa. I: Elizabeth J. Friedl 59-3-03 St. Marys, Pa. James W. Spotts 09-1-01 Camp Hill, Pa. 1 Wormleysburg, Pa. I' Edward J. Carl 09-1-02 i: ERIE COUNTY Meade G. Lyons 09-2·01 Carlisle, Pa. " Violet Cassner 09-3·01 Shippensburg, Pa. r Sophie C. I-logan 06-1-01 Erie, Pa. Esther i\1. Cohick 09-3·02 Newville, Pa. p Frank B. Pelkowski 06-1-02 Erie, Pa. t, J olm A. Vendetti Chester H. Brymesser 09·3·03 Mt. Holly Springs, Pa. 1: 06-1-03 Erie, Pa. j ~ Ross A. McAlicher 09-3-04 Mechanicsburg, Pa. L. Elliott Lefaiver, Sr. 06-1-04 Erie, Pa. Lal'ry R. Fabrizi Nicholas A. Povendo 09-3·05 Mechanicsburg, Pa. 11 06-1-05 Eric, Pa. Ii" " II 152 u 153 Magisterial Magisterial Name and County District # Office Location Office Location Name and County District # INDIANA COUNTY ERIE COUNTY (cont.) Erie, Pa. Richard G. Orendorff 40-2-01 Indiana, Pa. Sumuel U. Hossiter 06-2-01 Erie, Pa. Geraldine M. Wilkins 40-:~-01 Clymer, Pa. Charles H. Wise 06-2-02 06-2-03 Lawrence Park, Pa. Louis J. Nocco 40-3-02 Homer City, Pa. Joyce K. Dunn Corry, Pa. Angelo C. Cravotta 40-3-03 Blairsville, Pa. Patsy A. Nichols 06-2-04 06-3-01 Erie, Pa. Peter P. Nakoski, Jr. JEFFERSON COUNTY 06-3-02 North East, Pa, Frank Abate, Jr, Erie, Pa. Stephen C. Ostrowski 06-3-03 Guy M. Lester 54-3-01 Punxsutawney, Pa. Union City, Pa. Bill G. \Vescoat Mary J. Fuller 06-3-04 54-3-02 Reynoldsville, Pa. 06-3-05 Waterford, Pa. George B. Miller 54-3-03 Brookville, Pa. Anna O. McCall McKean, Pa. Honald E. Stuck 06-3-06 06-3-07 Girard, Pa. JUNIATA COUNTY I-larry L. Joslin East Springfield, Pa. Harvey G. Fritzges 06-3-08 Marian S. Mertz 41-3-01 Mifflintown, Pa. Betty G. Gingrich 41-3-02 Port Hoyal, Pa. FAYETTE COUNTY 14-1-01 Uniontown, Pa. LACKAWANNA COUNTY Lawrence Blair Connellsville, Pa. Charles F. Hartz 14-1-02 Frank F. Talerico 45-1-01 Old Forge, Pa. 14-2-01 Uniontown, Pa. Thomas M. Hart Harold Parker Uniontown, Pa. 45-1-02 Scranton, Pa. Charles E. Pillar, Sr. 14-2-02 Joseph B. Eiden 45-1-03 Brownsville, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Dona S. Saunders 14-2-03 Eugene T. Cadden Masontown, Pa. 45-1-04 Scranton, Pa. Paul Shenal 14-3-01 Daniel 1. Kelleher 45-1-05 Fairchance, Pa. Scranton, Pa. 14-3-02 James P. Kennedy 45-1-06 James E. Hare Hepublic, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Anthony A. Shu Ii 14-3-03 Michael S. Polizzi Fayette City, Pa. 45-1-07 Dunmore, Pa. Andrew E. Turick 14-3-04 John E. V. Peiski Perryopolis, Pa. 45-1-08 Olyphant, Pa. Michael Rubish 14-3-05 Ferdinand A. Grunik 45-2-01 Dunbar, Pa. Jessup, Pa. Lloyd A. Williams 14-3-06 James T. McHale 45-3-01 Connellsville, Pa. Clarks Summit, Pa. Grant Nicholson 14-3-07 Donald Andrews 45-3-02 Farmington, Pu. Moscow, Pa. Leila Van Sickle 14-3-08 Mary A. McAndrew 45-3-03 Carbondale, Pa. Donald A. Yurgosky 45-3-04 Jermyn, Pa. FOREST COUNTY Tionesta, Pa. Arthur D, Sager 37-4-02 LANCASTER COUNTY Marienville, Pa. Hegis A. Fleming 37-4-03 Joseph J. Lees 02-1-01 Lancaster, Pa. Peter S. Schweich 02-1-02 Lancaster, Pa. FRANKLIN COUNTY Louise B. Williams 02-2-01 Lancaster, Pa. Chambersburg, Pa. Joseph W. Gotwals 39-1-01 William A. Hull, Jr. 02-2-02 Lancaster, Pa. Waynesboro, Pa. Bruce C. Ingels 39-2-01 John S. Alexander 02-2-03 Lancaster, Pa. Roxbury, Pa. :Murray H. I-lorton James L. Campbell 39-3-01 02-2-04 Lancaster, Pa. Scotland, Pa. Mabel Shoemaker 39-3-02 Richard A. Sheetz 02-2-05 Landisville, Pa. Chambersburg, Pa. Charles C. Harrison 39-3-03 Edward A. Hennesky 02-2-06 Columbia, Pa. Chambersburg, Pa. Esther L. Cordell 39-3-04 Stella V. Caldwell 02-3-01 Millersville, Pa. Greencastle, Pa. Justus F. Bard 1 Robert E. Eberly 39-3-05 t· 02-3-02 Lancaster, Pa. I Mercersburg, Pa. I. Mary F. Wilkinson 02-3-03 ;j Helen Y. Martin 39-3-06 i Lancaster, Pa. Joseph W. Bledsoe 02-3-04 Quarryville, Pa. L .\ FULTON COUNTY Gilbert R. Book 02-3-05 Gap, Pa. Fort Littleton, Pa. Richard L. Reeser 02-3-06 Blue Ball, Pa, Don C. Knepper 39-4-01 t J McConnellsburg, Pa. I' George C. Kelec 02-3-07 Denver, Fa. Dorothy S. Brantner 39-4-02 l. Warfordsburg, Pa. John W. Miller 02-3-08 Ephrata, Pa. J. Pierce Gordon 39-4-03 'l ! Sharron A. Simpkins 02-3-09 Lititz, Pa. 1 r ,1 t! Paul K. Cassel 02-3-10 Manheim, Pa. GREENE COUNTY ~ Harold E. Greiner 02-3-11 Elizabethtown, Pa. 1 13-3-01 Waynesburg, Pa. . I John C. Watson Frank1in Twsp. (Waynesburg), Pa. r Raymond B. Knorr 02-3-12 Mount Joy, Pa. Anne H. Hughs 13-3-02 j 13-3-03 Carmichaels, Pa. L JIj, Joseph Hapchak I' LAWRENCE COUNTY \ f: Howard B. Hanna 53-1-01 New Castle, Pa. HUNTINGDON COUNTY I' j' Wayne E. Shaffer 53-3-01 Ellwo'od City, Pa. 20-3-01 Alexandria, Pa. Ilp Daniel S. Davis .[ Betty Lou Kradel Huntingdon, Pa. 53-3-02 Edinburg, Pa, James H. Kyper 20-3-02 Ruth E. French Mount Union, Pa. 11 53-3-03 New Castle, Pa. Gretchen A. Krouse 20-3-03 Donald H. Kenehan 53-3-04 New Castle, Pa. 20-3-04 Orbisonia, Pa. I!L N. Dale Wakefield H I' t! 11 155 154 ~ Magisterial Magisterial Name.. t!~: County DisM:it # Office Location Name and County District # Office Location LEBANf;'!\'1 COUNTY McKEAN COUNTY John F. ArnoM 52-2-01 Lebanon, Pa. Robert V. Zimmerman Robert W. Anspach 52-2-02 Lebanon, Pa. 48-1-01 Bradford, Pa. David D. Feheley 48-3-01 Catherine M. Coyle 52-2-03 Lebanon, Pa. Edward M. Rosenwie Eldred, Pa. JoAnn Shultz 52-3-01 Myerstown, Pa. 48-3-02 Smethport, Pa. Joseph J. Framnton 48-3-03 Lucy A. Dinunzio 52-3-02 Lebanon, Pa. Patricia J. Morey Bradford, Pa. Mary M. Spanuuth 52-3-03 Jonestown, Pa. 48-3-04 Kane, Pa. Jacob D. Ensminger 52-3-04 Ono, Pa. MERCER COUNTY Thomas C. Reinhard 52-3-05 Palmyra, Pa. William M. Coleman 35-2-01 Sharon, Pa. LEHIGH COUNTY Frank J. Tamber 35-2-02 Donald L. Buckel Sharon, Pa. Roland B. Downing 31-1-01 Allentown, Pa. 35-3-01 Mercer, Pa. George E. McCandless 35-3-02 Wilbur K. Gilbert 31-1-02 Allentown, Pa. Francis W. Brown Grove City, Pa. George H. Schadler 31-1-03 Allentown, Pa. 35-3-03 Greenville, Pa. Ralph H. Beck 31-1-04 Allentown, Pa. MIFFLIN COUNTY James E. Stahl 31-1-05 Allentown, Pa. Joseph J. Maura 31-1-06 Bethlehem, Pa. E. Frank Burlew 58-3-01 William M. Foster Lewistown, Pa. Edward R Ernst 31-1-07 vVhitehall, Pa. 58-3-02 Lewistown, Pa. William H. Burdette 31-1-08 Allentown, Pa. Bennie L. Rizzotto 31-2-01 Allentown, Pa. MONROE COUNTY Edward F. Pressmann 31-2-02 AJ1.,:mtown, Pa. Graden Praethorius 43-2-01 Donald E. Walter 31-2-03 Emmaus, Pa. Eleanor K.. Randolph Stroudsburg, Pa. 43-2-02 East Stroudsburg, Pa. Willis E. Hankee 31-3-01 Slatington, Pa. Clara Pope 43-3-01 Richard J. Levan 31-3-02 Macungie, Pa. Earl R Ammerman Mt. Pocono, Pa. 43-3-02 Stroudsburg, Pa. Charles A. Deutsch 31-3-03 Coopersburg, Pa. Gerald D. Cantfield 43-3-03 Theodore L. Russiano 31-3-04 Allentown, Pa. Glenn A. Borger Tannersville, Pa. 43-3-04 Brodheadsville, Pa. Emanuel Scavone 43-4-01 LUZERNE COUNTY Marjorie J. Shumaker East Stroudsburg, Pa. 43-4-02 Mountainhome, Pa. Michael J. Collins 11-1-01 Wilkes Barre, Pa. J olm A. Bednarz 11-1-02 Wilkes Barre, Pa. MONTGOMERY COUNTY James W. Scarcella 11-1-03 Hazleton, Pa. Elaine J. Adams Leonard C. Olzinski 38-1-01 Norristown, Pa. 11-1-04 Nanticoke, Pa. James L. O'Brien 38-1-02 Joseph M. Angello 11-1-05 Pittston, Pa. William W. Reed Elkins Park, Pa. Richard P. Adams 38-1-03 Elkins Park, Pa. 11-1-06 Kingston, Pa. M. William Peterson 38-1-04 Andrew Barilla, Jr. 11-1-07 Swoyersville, Pa. Frank V. Plummer Abington, Pa. Bernard J. Wujcik 38-1-05 North Hills, Pa. 11-1-08 Plymouth; Pa. Robert P. Johnson 38-1-06 Carmen J. Maffei 11-2-01 West Pittston, Pa. Seymour L. Green Penn Valley-Narberth, Pa. Joseph Verespy 38-1-07 Ardmore, Pa. 11-2-02 Plains, Pa. George R Eastburn, Jr. 38-1-08 Patrick L. Cooney 11-2-03 Wilkes Barre, Pa. Donald O. Riehl Flourtown, Pa. 38-1-09 King of Prussia, Pa. Robert Marshall 11-3-01 Shickshinny, Pa. L A. T. Maynard, Jr. l. 38-1-10 Ambler, Pa. Viola S. Mrochko 11-3-02 Berwick, Pa. 1 Charles A. Dasch r 38-1-11 Pottstown, Pa. Burton E. Balliet 11-3-03 Sugarloaf, Pa. t . Richard E.. Evans Edward Verbonitz I 38-1-12 Pottstown, Pa. 11-3-04 Hazleton, Pa. I: J oim T. Sachaczenski 38-1-13 Electra M. O'Donnell 11-3-05 Freeland, Pa. I: J oim C. Bready, J r Conshohocken, Pa. Ronald W. Swank 38-1-14 Willow Grove, Pa. 11-3-06 Mountain Top, Pa: j: Donald B. McIntyre 38-1-15 Francis P. Flynn 11-3-07 Wilkes Barre, Pa. Grant Musselman Willow Grove, Pa. Leonard Harvey 38-2-02 Souderton, Pa. 11-3-08 Dallas, Pa. I Sherwood F. Zepp 38-2-04 Earl S. Gregory 11-3-09 Shavertown, Pa. r Marton R Kiggins Lansdale, Pa. .. !~ 38-2-05 /. Royersford, Pa. t: Bernard J. Maher LYCOMING COUNTY 38-2-06 Collegeville, Pa. Everett P. Arnold 38-2-08 George H. Knoell, Jr. Huntington Valley, Pa. James T. Nesbitt 29-1-01 Williamsport, Pa. [:l 38-2-13 Ronald Furlin Blue Bell, Pa. Richard T. Eisenbeis 29-1-02 Williamsport, Pa. 38-2-14 Horsham, Pa. I' James W. Speers Dean E. Dawes 29-3-01 Williamsport, Pa. I: 38-2-17 Lafayette Hill, Pa. II Francis J. Lawrence Ronald E. Blackburn 29-3-02 Williamsport, Pa. t: 38-2-18 Norristown, Pa. I! Robert A. Saraceni John W. Callahan 29-3-03 Hughesville, Pa. 38-2-19 Norristown, Pa. l: Leonard P. Flack 38-2-20 Norristown, Pa. I: "- Leroy S. Oelschlager 38-3-01 East Greensville, Pa. j: Jack B. Greenberg II 38-3-02 Gilbertsville, Pa. I: Carroll A. Rosenberger fi 38-3-03 Schwenksville, Pa. 11 " .::'" 156 \1 ~. 157 Magisterial ,., Magisterial Name and County District # Office Location Name and County District # Office Location MONTOUR COUNTY SOMERSET COUNTY Guy H. Williams 26-3-04 Danville, Pa. Constant N. Ferre 16-3-01 Anthony F. Muscatello Boswell, Pa. NORTHAMPTON COUNTY 16-3-02 Windber, Pa. Jon A. Barkman 16-3-03 John Gombosi 03-1-01 Bethlehem, Pa. Frances L. Cornish Somerset, Pa. 16-3-05 Confluence, Pa. Fred J. Pacchioli 03-1-03 Easton, Pa. Hobert tv!. Philson 16-3-06 Wilma L. Zweifel 03-2-01 Bethlehem, Pa. ~IIeyersdale, Pa. William B. Griffith 03-2-02 Bethlehem, Pa. SULLIVAN COUNTY Dennis J. Monaghan 03-2-03 Bethlehem, Pa. Milo D. Clinton 44-3-03 Joseph E. Martin 03-2-04 Hellertovm, Pa. Francis M. McCarty Dushore, Pa. David T. Reibman 03-2-05 Easton, Pa. 44-4-03 Forksville, Pa. Pat J. Maragulia 03-2-06 Easton, Pa. SUSQUEHANNA COUNTY Peter Stout 03-2-07 Northampton, Pa. Marjory A. Wheaton Elmo L. Frey, Sr. 03-2-08 Nazareth, Pa. 34-3-01 George H. Stover Montrose, Pa. Walter F. Auch, Jr. 03-2-09 Easton, Pa. 34-3-02 New Milford, Pa. Harold R. Weaver, Jr. 03-3-01 Danielsville, Pa. 34-3-03 Harford, Pa. I 03-3-02 Wind Gap, Pa. Frederick A. Reinhart TIOGA COUNTY Sherwood R. Grigg 03.3-03 Bangor, Pa. William A. Buckingham NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY 04-3-01 Elkland, Pa. Thomas L. Bolton 04-3-02 Eleanor Trask Wellsboro, Pa. Michael F. Mychak 08-2-01 Mt. Carmel, Pa. 04-3-03 Mansfield, Pa. Kenneth R. Fairchild 08-3-01 Milton, Pa. Wade J. Brown 08-3-02 Sunbury, Pa. UNION COUNTY John E. Moore 08-3-03 Shamokin, Pa. Paul Crow E. 17-3-01 William D. Yohn Lewisburg, Pa. PERRY COUNTY 17-3-02 Mifflinburg, Pa. Howard R. Maguire 41-3-03 Duncannon, Pa. VENANGO COUNTY Donald F. Howell 41-3-04 Newport, Pa. Mary E. Nosko 28-3-01 Helen M. Goodling 41-3-05 Loysville, Pa. Pleasantville, Pa. Charles R. Thurau 28-3-02 Robert E. Billingsley, Sr. Oil City, Pa. PIKE COUNTY 28-3-03 Franklin, Pa. Donald E. Sloan, Jr. 28-3-04 Carolyn H. Purdue 43-3-05 Milford, Pa. Emlenton, Pa. Dore N. James 43-3-06 Hawley, Pa. WARREN COUNTY Judy C. Lobdell POTTER COUNTY 37-2-01 Warren, Pa. Ruth J. Mills 37-3-01 Edward L. Easton 55-3-01 Coudersport, Pa. Suzanne M. Hodges Russell, Pa. 37-3-02 Sugar Grove, Pa. Laura Hemphill 55-4-01 Shinglehouse, Pa. Frances r. Rhodes 37-3-03 Jeanne M. Cole 55-4-02 Ulysses, Pa. Allan D. Carlett Youngsville, Pa. 37-3-04 Sheffield, Pa. Katherine G. Flynn 55-4-03 Galeton, Pa. Garwood K. Lodge 37-4-01 Mary A. Walters 55-4-04 Austin, Pa. Tidioute, Pa. WASHINGTON COUNTY SCHUYLKILL COUNTY John Luongo 27-1-01' William J. Purcell 21-2-01 Pottsville, Pa. Clyde G. Tempest Washington, Pa. Catherine E. Thompson 21-2-02 Pottsville, Pa. 27-1-02 Monongahela, Pa. Matthew L. Cowell, Sr. 27-1-03 Bernard Brutto 21-2-03 Shenandoah, Pa. Norbert K. Lesniakowski Charleroi, Pa. Joseph B. Weyman 21-3-01 Ashland, Pa. 27-2-01 Cannonsburg, Pa. Joseph P. Reichel 27-3-01 Norman H. Richards 21-3-02 Tamaqua, Pa. Stephen J. Morgo Finleysville, Pa. John H. Rhubright, Sr. 21-3-03 Tamaqua, Pa. 27-3-02 Bentleyville, Pa. Daryl A. Azorsky 27-3-03 John E. Lurwick 21-3-04 Port Carbon, Pa. Louis r. Quail California, Pa. Frank Gallo 21-3-05 Mahanoy City, iPa. 27-3-04 Richeyville, Pa. Henry Mavricb 27-3-05 Ray A. Lengle 21-3-08 Tremont, Pa. Tony Bartkus Cannonsburg, Pa. Robert T. Brennan 21-3-09 Saint Clair, Pa. 27-3-06 McDonald, Pa. Thomas McGraw . 27-3-07 . Lester M. Reber 21-3-10 Orwigsburg, Pa. / June B. Lilley . Burgettstown, Pa. Stephen R. Salve 21-3-12 Minersville, Pa. 27-3-08 Meadow Lands, Pa. Albert Ferralli 27-3-09 Richard L. Martin Washington, Pa. SNYDER COUNTY 27-3-10 Claysville, Pa. . Clark H. Arbogast 17-3-03 Selinsgrove, Pa. William C. Saylor 17-3-04 Middleburg, Pa. 158 159 - -- ",ry ,u -', ':l'-~'" ,,-.~,', ,-- <- - I I Magisterial Name and County District # Office Location WAYNE COUNTY Allan V. Campfield 22-3-01 Hawley, Pa. ylarjorie B. Kinsman 22-3-02 Honesdale, Pa. Margaret C. Farley 22-3-03 Waymart, Pa. Charles H. Buckert 22-3-04 Lake,vood, Pa. WESTMORELAND COUNTY Donald C. J apalucci 10-1-01 Jeannette, Pa. John F. Billy 10-1-03 Monessen, Pa. vVilliam S. Guido 10-1-04 Lower Burrell, Pa. Buddy P. Cipolla 10-1-05 Arnold, Pa. Ernest M. Johnson 10-2-01 Youngwood, Pa. James II. 1\l1ann, Jr. 10-2-02 Vandergrift, Pa. Lance Brown 10-2-03 Irwin, Pa. ~/Iartha Medich 10-2-04 Irwin, Pa. Jeane C. i\!lesher 10-2-06 Belle Vernon, Pa. Victor B. Stader, Jr. 10-2-08 Latrobe, Pa. Michael G. Moschetti 10-2-10 Greensburg, Pa. Lois L. Diehl 10-3-01 Jeannette, Pa. Robert E. Scott J.0-3-02 Murrysville, Pa. Shirley Miller 10-3-03 Herminie, Pa. C. McKee Speer 10-3-05 Apollo, Pa. Hobert J. LOl1charich 10-3-07 Latrobe, Pa. Carmen C. Perna 10-3-08 Loyalhanna, Pa. Terry F. Marolt 10-3-09 Ligonier, Pa. R. Daniel Smith 10-3-10 Scottdale, Pa. LI Margaret 1. Tlmnac 10-3-11 Mount Pleasant, Pa. II / , ,/ 'I 1" __ ~(;-(.':'J./ ,·PI]-:.. --I WYOMING COUNTY 7 Leo P. Conway 44-3-01 Factoryville, Pa. 1; Herbert W. Downs 44-3-02 Tunkhannock Pa. 'I 'f Kathryn H. Burgess 44-3-04 Laceyville, Pa. J :l, l~ YORK COUNTY I Mildred G. Becker 19-1-01 York, Pa. 1'J Curtis S. Forry 19-1-02. York, Pa. .~ Curtis C. Sponseller 19-1-03 Hanover, Pa. Arthur D. Weeks 19-2-01 York, Pa. 1 Jack H. Barton 19-2-02 York, Pa. Harold C. Dixon 19-2-03 York, Pa. James G. Wallace 19-3-01 Windsor, Pa. 1 Lois J. Mundorff 19-3-02 Airville, Pa. Virginia 1. Klinefelter 19-3-03 Stewartstown, Pa. i) James W. Reedy 19-3-04 Seven Valleys, Pa. .j Margaret L. Klinedinst 19-3-05 Glennville, Pa. Paul M. Diehl, Jr. 19-3-06 Spring Grove, Pa. Quentin R. Stanmbaugh 19-3-07 Thomasville, Pa. Donald G. Rode 19-3-08 Emigsville, Pa. J. Wilbur Kriner 19-3-09 Etters, Pa. Samuel A. Hill 19-3-10 Franklintown, Pa. JUDGES OF THE PHILADELPHIA TRAFFIC COURT -- . Louis Vignola, President Judge Samuel Clark, Jr. Salvatore DeMeo Raymond A. Malone Dominick Iannarelli George Twardy 160