House Journal: Page 79: Wednesday, January 13, 1999

comprehensive public education program which will include developing law-related 

education programs for schools and promoting public understanding of the courts. 
The last priority concerns technology.  Information technology is rapidly changing 
the way people communicate and conduct business, including that of the courts.  We 
are exploring technological advances such as electronic filing of court papers and 
electronic data management for storage and retrieval of court records.  
As with most plans to enhance the effective administration of justice, successful 
implementation of our priorities will require broad public support.  We ask for yours.
Much of the court system's ability to remain effective in the 21st Century hinges on 
the use of technology.  Someone once said: technology is like a steamroller.  If you are 
not the steamroller, then you are destined to become part of the road.  I am pleased to 
report that we are not part of the road.  In fact, Iowa has one of the most 
technologically advanced state court systems in the nation.  
Although computer technology offers the promise of a bright future, it is not 
problem free.  Predictions of global disaster abound because of the infamous Y2K bug.  
Those of you who know of my love affair with computers will understand my 
assessment of the situation when I say, I have seen the future and it does not compute.  
But I assure you that we are prepared.  Our critical software applications have been 
upgraded to understand the year 2000.  And if that does not work, I have a large 
stockpile of sharpened pencils! 
We are preparing our courts to meet the challenges of the future.  But we must not 
overlook the challenges of today, for they will not simply disappear come January 1, 
2000.  Only with your assistance can we overcome our most immediate challenge - 
coping with high caseloads.
This is not a new development.  Indeed, a few years ago, I reported to you about the 
court system's struggle with rising caseloads.  You helped ease the situation 
temporarily by providing some new judgeships throughout the state over a period of 
three years and we greatly appreciate that assistance.  Nonetheless, as the tide of cases 
rises, the demand for judges continues to exceed our supply.
As in the past, our criminal and juvenile caseloads are the most demanding. 
Caseload statistics, however, do not illustrate the problems as well as personal 
accounts from our trial judges who are on the front lines.  So rather than recite 
statistics,  I ask that you carefully study the information provided with these remarks.
Swift court action is one of the most effective deterrents to crime.  Long time lags 
between conviction or plea of guilty and sentencing undermine the effectiveness of the 
punishment and ultimately the effectiveness of the criminal justice system.  Here are 
some examples of sentencing delays around the state.
In the district associate court in Black Hawk County, criminal cases are so backed 
up at times that it takes three months after conviction or entry of a guilty plea before a 
defendant can be sentenced. 
A similar situation exists in Johnson County district associate court where there is 
a six to eight week delay from entry of a guilty plea until sentencing.

© 1999 Cornell College and League of Women Voters of Iowa

Comments about this site or page? hjourn@legis.iowa.gov.
Please remember that the person listed above does not vote on bills. Direct all comments concerning legislation to State Legislators.

Last update: Thu Jul 15 13:40:03 CDT 1999
URL: /DOCS/GA/78GA/Session.1/HJournal/00000/00079.html
jhf