Expediting Dependency Appeals: Strategies to Reduce Delay By Ann L. Keith and Carol R. Flango © 2002 The National Center for State Courts 300 Newport Avenue (23185) P.O. Box 8798 Williamsburg, VA 23187-8798 Web site: www.ncsconline.org ISBN 0-89656-197-6 This document was developed by The National Center for State Courts under a grant from the State Justice Institute (No. SJI-00-N-209). The points of view expressed do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of The National Center for State Courts or the State Justice Institute ii Advisory Committee THE HONORABLE EVELYN LUNDBERG STRATTON, CHAIR Justice The Supreme Court of Ohio 30 East Broad St., Columbus, OH 43266-0419 LESLIE D. GRADET JUSTICE CHARLOTTE ANNE PERRETTA National Conference of Appellate Court Clerks Commonwealth of Massachusetts Maryland Court of Special Appeals The Appeals Court 361 Rowe Blvd. 1500 New Courthouse Annapolis, MD 21301 Boston, MA 02108 CY GURNEY, MSW NCJFCJ MEMBERS: Regional Administrator MARY V. MENTABERRY North Carolina Guardian ad Litem Director Services Division Permanency Planning for Children Superior Court Judges Chambers Department Durham County Judicial Building, 6th Floor National Council of Juvenile and 201 E. Main St. Family Court Judges Durham, NC 27701 P.O. Box 8970 ALEXANDER MCNEIL Reno, NV 89507 Court Administrator THE HONORABLE SHARON MCCULLY The Appeals Court Third District Juvenile Court 1500 New Courthouse 450 S. State St., Suite 209 Boston, MA 02108 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-04431 EDWARD MCSWEENEY Staff Attorney Vermont Supreme Court 109 State Street Montpelier, VT 05609-0801 National Center for State Courts CAROL R. FLANGO TED RUBIN Project Director Consultant ANN L. KEITH TONI KNORR Court Research Associate Program Specialist DAWN RUBIO DEBORAH SIEGEL Senior Court Management Consultant Intern State Justice Institute OLIVIA GRANT SJI Project Monitor 1650 King St., Suite 600 Alexandria, VA 22314 iii Acknowledgments his report on expediting dependency appeals is the result of a collaboration between The TNational Center for State Courts and the State Justice Institute, with information, contribu- tions, and assistance from the appellate courts in all fifty states, whose contact information is located in Appendix A. The project’s advisory committee included representatives from state supreme courts, intermediate appellate courts, a juvenile court, and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. The committee met to analyze surveys of the state courts and to develop a process for appellate courts to use when implementing an expedited procedure for dependency appeals. In addition to the committee members and state court contacts, the following individuals contrib- uted their expertise and experience toward this effort: Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye of the New York Court of Appeals, who contributed suggestions to the process for expediting dependency appeals and included the project on the Conference of Chief Justice’s Child Welfare Committee’s agenda, and Connie Crim, Clerk to Justice Evelyn Lundberg Stratton, Supreme Court of Ohio, who assisted with the coordination and communication between The National Center and Justice Stratton. The authors would also like to express their appreciation to Associate Justice Charlotte Anne Perretta; Chief Judge Christopher Armstrong; Alex McNeil, Court Administrator; Ashley Ahearn, Clerk of Court; and Chris Micchia, Assistant Clerk, of the Appeals Court of the Commonwealth of Massa- chusetts, for their contributions and hospitality during the project’s site visit. Dr. Victor E. Flango, Vice-President of Research of The National Center, presented the im- portance of outcome measures to the project’s committee and participated in the site visit to the Appeals Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Bill Hewitt, Senior Court Research Associ- ate at The National Center, contributed ideas and suggestions to the project regarding transcript and record production. The National Center’s Education and Technology Studio’s Ray Foster and Kevin Mittler answered technical questions about courtroom technology for the committee during their meeting in Williamsburg. Sara Lewis and Chuck Campbell copyedited the final publication and coordinated its printing. Pam Petrakis assisted with the formatting and organization of the final draft. Finally, we are very grateful for the State Justice Institute’s support and to Olivia Grant, Project Monitor, for her help, guidance, and enduring patience to see this project to completion. v Table of Contents Foreword ...................................................................................................................................ix Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................xi Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 Project Overview ........................................................................................................................ 3 Survey of Courts that Are Expediting Dependency Appeals ................................................. 3 Expedited Dependency Appeal Case Types .......................................................................... 5 Legal Process for the Expedition of Dependency Appeals by State ....................................... 6 Promising Practices in Expediting Permanency: Eight Steps ...................................................... 7 Assess the Appellate Environment ...................................................................................... 7 Appoint a Leader .............................................................................................................. 10 Assemble a Task Force ...................................................................................................... 10 Develop a Plan ................................................................................................................. 10 Draft a Rule ...................................................................................................................... 11 Implement Internal Operating Procedures ....................................................................... 11 Consider Strategies to Improve the Appellate Process ....................................................... 12 N Notice of Appeal ................................................................................................ 12 N Transcripts and the Record ............................................................................... 12 N Computer-Aided Transcription (CAT) ................................................................ 13 N Electronic Filing of Records ............................................................................... 13 N Briefing ............................................................................................................. 14 N Oral Argument and Conferencing ...................................................................... 15 N Decisions .......................................................................................................... 15 N Posting of Decisions .......................................................................................... 15 N Other Ideas ....................................................................................................... 15 Review and Refine the Process ......................................................................................... 16 Expectations for the Trial Courts ...................................................................................... 16 State Court Highlights .............................................................................................................. 19 Georgia ............................................................................................................................. 19 Iowa ................................................................................................................................. 20 Massachusetts .................................................................................................................. 22 Minnesota ........................................................................................................................ 25 New York .......................................................................................................................... 27 Ohio ................................................................................................................................. 28 Vermont ........................................................................................................................... 29 Virginia ............................................................................................................................. 33 Appendix A: State and Trial Court Contacts .............................................................................. 35 Appendix B: Survey .................................................................................................................. 39 Appendix C: Telephone Process for Expediting Dependency Appeals........................................ 47 Appendix D: State Statutes and Court Rules ............................................................................. 53 Appendix E: Iowa’s Petition and Response Forms .................................................................... 63 vii Foreword e are very