The Significance As states and courts determine how to proceed with the use of the technology, some jurisdictions are beginning to take the matter into their own hands. Several courts in Pennsylvania have continued to use remote technology without authorization from the state’s high court, according to Nyssa Taylor, criminal justice strategic litigation and policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania. Even when remote technology restrictions are properly lifted, the practical limitations of remote proceedings can impede defendants’ abilities to convene with their attorney and fully take part in proceedings, Taylor said. Still, some proponents of remote technology note the potential financial savings the technology could provide. Jude Faccidomo, former chair of Dade County Bar Association’s Criminal Court Committee and co-chair of the Miami-Dade Jury Trial Task force, said before the pandemic, court appointed attorneys would bill the state while they were waiting in court for their case to be called, and now, they only bill for the time they are on the record. If courts used remote technology permanently, Florida would save hundreds of thousands of dollars in savings to the Judicial Administrative Commission. Besides the financial savings, remote technology could also help bring more work-life balance to the criminal defense profession. “Obviously, all law practice is stressful, but criminal practitioners are dealing with a human being’s freedom, and sometimes even their life,” he said. “That is a weight that cannot be quantified and if the use of remote proceedings makes criminal practice more sustainable then it must be continued.” The Information
Want to know more? Here's what we've discovered in the ALM Global Newsroom: Most of Pa.'s Rules Committees Are Proposing Expanded Use of Technology in Courts State Budget Deal Would Extend Video Proceedings in Criminal Cases 'All of My Cases Keep Me up at Night': The Heavy Toll of Criminal-Defense Lawyering Did Philadelphia's Continued Suspension of Court Rules Expose Rift on Pa. High Court? Courts 'Can't Continue' Without More Appellate Justices, California Chief Justice Says 'I Don't Know What Happened in the Third:' Chief Justice Launches Workgroup to Investigate Appellate Court Delays What’s Changed?: Checking In With Kent Raygor of Sheppard Mullin Judges Lisette Shirdan-Harris and Daniel Anders: Keeping Phila.'s Civil Division Moving The Forecast At the beginning of the pandemic, Zoom hearings in criminal cases in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California were constrained by the availability of space at the jailhouse for defendants to be able to participate in a video call and still socially distance themselves, noted then-U.S. Attorney David Anderson in a February 2021 interview. Anderson, who is now a partner in Sidley Austin’s white collar, government litigation and investigations practice group, said this was one of the many practical problems that emerged as the federal court attempted to keep cases moving. The court, he said, “did an amazing job” solving the issues. “But they weren't, and couldn't possibly, be solved overnight,” he said. As courts continue to deploy remote technology in criminal cases, serious and immediate problems will likely continue to surface. Reports of the failures of the technology might be enough to deter adoption of remote technology for criminal proceedings in most court systems across the country. Still, lawmakers and judges who value the possible benefits of the technology might take on the problems that will emerge, develop best practices and provide a roadmap for the rest of the nation. | 