THE ARIZONA COURTS SUMMARY REPORT •• History, Structure and Operation State Capitol Phoenix, Arizona J Ji - PUBLISHED ON BEHALF OF THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT JAMES DUKE CAMERON, Chief Justice FRED C. STRUCKMEYER, JR., Vice Chief Justice JACK D. H. HAYS, Associate Justice WILLIAM A. HOLOHAN, Associate Justice FRANK X. GORDON, JR., Associate Justice ... BY ·-.,, THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS NOEL K. DESSAINT Administrative Director of the Courts 'i."H r, '~ i~ · :,!'; r:·· '. ~;~:./'" DECEMBER, 1977 \ " Arizon:a, S1Treme Cant±. Adro',nis±rnrtive Ditec±o sc_\,&'. HY1 ~~ THE ARIZONA COURTS SUMMARY REPORT ~,,,,,,._,, -- ... , E .,,.,,.... ,:~~~ \;n ('0 ''•• ~,q, i,, ~111\ I*,--- . ~r·,:,,-,, * 'I I I \ ~,..,,,.,~ IIW,l/1'1)/'rl,'1: ~,~ l ,, 7?. ~I •• ,,~b • \.'VI ,,~, OF t,.9- / 1'.\.''''"''~ History, Structure and Operation ARIZONA DEPT. OF LIBRARY ARCHIVES & PWBLIC RECORDS SEP 1 6 1999 State Capitol Phoenix, Arizona This publication was partially supported by Grant Number 76-149-0 II E-C(a) awarded by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration of the U.S. Department of Justice. ~ IS O()tUMIHH 1$ l" HI ,ROl't:ATY I• 01 T .. [ MUMBlfl 66368·~- DEPARlMENT o, LIBRARYANDA8.CHJVES JAN ., 1978 - AA l ~ONA - ,.,c1,vo 1 Justices of the Supreme Court of Arizona. Seated: Fred C. Struckmeyer, Jr. , Vice Chief Justice; James Duke Cameron, Chief Justice; Jack D. H. Hays, Justice. Standing: William A. Holohan, Justice; Frank X. Gordon,.Jr., Justice. /\ I 0 "'4.-r__J \ , cl -' ' , (I~: C ·;,-1?,., I r TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT . 1 INTRODUCTIONS ..... .. .. .. .. .... .. .... .. ... .. .. 2 THE CONSTITUTION . ..... .. .... ..... .... ..... .. 3 1910 . ....... .. ....... ... .. ........ ..... .. 3 MODERN COURTS AMENDMENT-1960 .... ......... 4 MERIT SELECTION-1974 . .. .. .. .. .... 5 THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES .. .. .... .. .. .. 6 CURRENT SUPREME COURT OPERATIONS AND PROCEDURES ... ................ .... ... ..... .... 8 ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR .......... .. ...... .. ... 9 CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT ..... ... .............. 9 STATE JUDICAL EXPENDITURES .... ................... 10 SUPREME COURT STATISTICS ..... ............. ...... ... 10 CASE FILINGS-BY TYPE, 1952-1976 .... .. ..... .. ... 11 CASES TERMINATED, 1912-1976 . .. ....... .. ..... .. 12 SUMMARY CASE ACTIVITY, 1970-1976 . .. .. .. .. 13 CASE ACTIVITY-BY TYPE, 1970-1976 .... ... .. ... 14-17 COURT OF APPEALS ...... .. .... ..... ... .. .. ...... .. ... 18 COURT OF APPEALS STATISTICS . .... ... .. .. .. ....... 19 DIVISION 1-SUMMARY-CASE ACTIVITY, 1965-1976 . 20 DIVISION 1-CASE ACTIVITY-BY TYPE, 1965-1976 .. 20-23 DIVISION 2-SUMMARY-CASE ACTIVITY, 1965-1976 . .. 24 DIVISION 2-CASE ACTIVITY-BY TYPE, 1965-1.976 .. 24 -26 COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS ... .. ..... 27 TH E SUPERIOR COURT . ......... .. ............. .. ... .... 28 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUPERIOR COURT STATISTICS . ..... ..... ......... .. .. 29 FILINGS, 1942-1964 .............. .. .... .. ......... 30 STATEWIDE CASE ACTIVITY, 1965-1976 SUMMARY .. .. 31 STATEWIDE CASE ACTIVITY, 1976 SUMMARY .. ... .. 32 STATEWIDE CASE ACTIVITY, 1975 SUMMARY . .. .... 33 STATEWIDE CASE ACTIVITY, 1974 SUMMARY ... ..... 34 STATEWIDE CASE ACTIVITY, 1973 SUMMARY . .. ...... 35 STATEWIDE CASE ACTIVITY, 1972 SUMMARY . ....... 36 STATEWIDE CASE ACTIVITY, 1965-1971 SUMMARY .... 37 APACHE COUNTY .......... ............. .. ....... 38-41 COCHISE COUNTY ..... ..... ............ ..... ... 42-45 COCONINO COUNTY .... .............. .. .. 46-49 GILA COUNTY . ..... ...... ...................... 50-53 GRAHAM COUNTY ... .. .... .. ...... .... .. .... 54-57 GREENLEE COUNTY ... ... ...... .. .. .. ... .. .... 58-61 MARI COPA COUNTY .... ... ... .... .... ... 62 -65 MOHAVE COUNTY . .......................... ... 66-69 NAVAJO COUNTY ............ .. .. ............... 70-73 PIMA COUNTY ............... .. .. ......... ...... 74-77 PINAL COUNTY .... ... ....... .. .. ............. 78-81 SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ...... ... ................ 82-85 YAVAPAI COUNTY ........ .... .. .... ... ......... 86-89 YUMA COUNTY ..... ....... .. ................... 90-93 THE JUSTICES OF THE PEACE AND MUNICIPAL COURTS . 94 COURTS OF NON-RECORD, STATISTICS ... ... ...... .... 95 JUSTICE OF THE PEACE STATISTICS .... ... ....... 95-97 APPENDICES APPENDIX I, SUPREME COURT JUSTICES .......... 98-103 APPENDIX II, COURT OF APPEALS JUDGES .. .... 103-104 APPENDIX Ill, ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTORS AND APPELLATE CLERKS .......................... 105 APPENDIX IV, SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES . .... .. 105-107 APPENDIX V, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS ............ ...... 108 APPENDIX VI, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSIONS ON APPELLATE AND TRIAL COURT APPOINTMENTS .... 108 STATE OF ARIZONA JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT SUPREME COURT Chief Justice* Vice Chief Justice* 3 Justices 6 Year Terms Ariz. Const., Art. VI, Sec. 3 COURT OF APPEALS 12 Judges - 6 Year Terms Division I - Phoenix Division II - Tucson Chief Judge* & 8 Judges Chief Judge* & 2 Judges 3 Departments (A, B & C) Presiding Judge* & 2 Judges Ea. Counties: Cochise, Gila, Graham, Greenlee, Counties: Apache, Coconino, Pima, Pinal, Maricopa, Mohave, Navajo, Santa Cruz Yavapai, Yuma Ariz. Const., Art. VI, Sec. l; A.R.S. § 12-120 SUPERIOR COURT 73 Judges - 4 Year Terms Presiding Judge Each County** I-- Maricopa 35 Coconino 2 Navajo 2 I--- Pima 15 Yuma 3 Gila 2 Cochise 3 Pinal 3 One each : Apache, I. Yavapai 2 Mohave 2 Graham, Greenlee, Santa Cruz Ariz. Const., Art. VI, Sec. 10, 11 JUSTICES OF THE PEACE CITY MAGISTRATES 84 Judges - 84 Courts (Precincts) 4 Year Terms 90 Magistrates 70 Cities Maricopa 18 Coconino 5 Pima 5 Pinal 12 Navajo 5 Graham 2 City Charters, Apache 4 Yuma 6 Greenlee 3 A.R.S. 22-402, Yavapai 7 Gila 5 Santa Cruz 2 22-403 Cochise 6 Mohave 4 Ariz . Const., Art. VI, Sec. 32 * Elected by Their Members *'~ Appointed by the Supreme Court Date: Nov. 16, 1977 1 INTRODUCTIONS The following statistical and historical summary The quality of justice can never be measured by of the first 65 years of the Arizona Judiciary shows the number of cases decided by a court. In addi­ the steady increase in the work of the Arizona state tion, case statistics do not fully demonstrate the court system since statehood. The increase in cases complete work of the judges and supporting per­ reflects not only the State's spectacular increase in sonnel. We are, however, in an era in which the population but the increased complexity of our demands for information are great and the uses of society as compared to the simpler and less hur­ that information are many. Statistical data is neces­ ried life of the Arizona Territory. sary for managing, planning, budgeting and policy formulation. Such information is also necessary to Statistics, however, cannot adequately portray foster a better understanding of the work and func­ the people behind each case that is filed with the tions of the judicial branch of government. court. These statistics are but cold representations of the drama of a trial, the trauma of a sentence, or Important historical developments in the Arizona the joy of an adoption proceeding. Statistics that Judicial System have been emphasized here. An show a judicial system becoming more congested attempt has also been made to present the avail­ and delayed must be viewed in light of the human able statistical data reflecting the work and growth needs and desires behind each case. It is only of the courts. The statistics contained in this report then that we can appreciate the need for accurate are based upon information maintained at the Su­ information which will enable us to administer the preme Court and on reports received from the needs of today's courts and the people they serve Arizona courts. In some instances statistical infor­ and to plan for the future. mation was not available, or. was not considered sufficiently reliable for publication in this report. Because of time and personnel restraints, we The lack of uniformity in some of the statistics is were unable to present in this volume a complete a result of differences in maintaining or collecting statistical history of each county. Starting with the the information. Annual Report covering 1977, we hope to update each year the statistics for one or more counties. An analysis of the data contained in this report We should have a complete set of statistics for has not, for the most part, been made but the each of the State's 14 counties by 1984. report will serve as a basis for future comparisons and analyses. It will also be used as a base for fu­ Thanks are due to many people who helped pre­ ture annual reports. pare this Summary Report: the county clerks and court administrators who cooperated; William L. Since a statewide annual report has not been McDonald, Deputy Administrative Director of the published since 1963, Chief Justice Cameron has Courts; Mrs. Faye Jennings, Financial and Statistical directed the present Administrative Director to re­ Clerk for the Administrative Director's Office; Mrs. sume publication of an annual judicial report com­ Marjorie C. Manson, Secretary, for cheerfully typing mencing with 1977. Inasmuch as the Supreme Court the copy; Dr. John Goff, Professor of History at wishes to more accurately reflect the work of the Phoenix College and author of Arizona Territorial judicial system, pending case inventories have been Officials I, The Supreme Court Justices, 1863-1912 required at every level of the court system, in­ (1975), for his help in getting this project started; cluding the Supreme Court. These