The Middletown Press (Middletown, CT)
Lawyer: Conn. courts opening but not far enough
Federal lawsuit will not be rescinded
BRIDGEPORT — The state Judicial Branch has announced further resumptions in court operations that were shut down by the pandemic but a local lawyer says it’s not nearly enough.
On Wednesday, Chief Court Administrator Judge Patrick L. Carroll III announced the reopening of eight courthouses across the state that had been closed for several months.
Effective July 20, the Judicial Branch is planning to resume some court operations at the courthouse on Golden Hill Street in Bridgeport; three courthouses in Hartford; the Judicial District at Meriden courthouse; the Judicial District at Norwich courthouse; the Judicial District at Waterbury courthouse and the Judicial District at Tolland courthouse.
Carroll also announced that an expansive range of civil, criminal, family and juvenile proceedings are now being processed both by remote technology and within open court facilities. Judicial Branch officials, he said, are also currently attempting to develop strategies to safely resume jury trials in courthouses.
“We continue to expand the ability of the Judicial Branch to resolve matters brought before it, both physically within our courthouses and by use of remote technology,” Carroll said. “We are simultaneously doing all we are able to do to mitigate the spread of the COVID-19 virus and protect the health and safety of the public, the bar, and our employees and judges.”
But Bridgeport lawyer Robert Berke said the announcement by Carroll will not dissuade him from continuing with his federal lawsuit accusing the state Judicial Branch of violating the constitutional rights of criminal defendants and their lawyers with its restrictions on the state’s criminal case docket because of the pandemic.
“The state’s judicial system is still completely disorganized,” Berke said Thursday. “Every court has a different set up and a way they operate; there is no organization.”
He said every court has its own concept of operating remotely, pointing out that in the Bridgeport court remotely means going to a separate courtroom with your client and talking to a judge via video who is in another courtroom in the same courthouse.
“That’s not exactly protecting the public,” he said.
Berke said he is looking forward to taking a deposition of
Bridgeport’s Golden Hill Street courthouse is scheduled to reopen on July 20.
Carroll for his case.
Carroll has declined to comment on Berke’s lawsuit.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Bridgeport, claims court officials are giving deference to civil case proceedings over criminal cases in allowing hearings and other proceedings.
“Notwithstanding the unpreparedness of the Judicial Branch
to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, the defendant ... has not fulfilled his statutory charge of ensuring the prompt disposition of cases and the proper administration of judicial business,” the lawsuit states. “The differentiation of judicial branch policies toward criminal and civil matters has no rational basis.”
The suit seeks a judgment that
the current policies of the Judicial Branch regarding the pandemic violate the constitution; that a special committee be appointed to examine the branch’s policies and recommend modifications; and that the state not enforce the current policy that private lawyers appear in person for court hearing while public defenders can appear by video conferencing.