Though the effort is set to last for six months, Lippman said that at that time court administrators will "see where we are. Hopefully not in this fix again."
'Living With Uncertainty'
Bronx District Attorney Robert Johnson voiced enthusiasm for the project in his own remarks following Lippman's speech.
"I can't wait to begin this project," said Johnson, a longtime advocate of more judges for the Bronx. He added that it is "very rare" for a prosecutor's case to "get easier with age." He noted, for example, that "witnesses disappear and memories fade."
Moreover, said Johnson, the backlog has led to defendants and victims "living with uncertainty and anxiety" about the resolution of their cases.
Johnson, whose office has more than 400 prosecutors, said assistants' caseloads will be re-evaluated and, where possible, reassignments will be made to balance pending cases.
Saying yesterday that he had been "screaming as loud as I can for as long as I can" for additional judges, Johnson said, "It's so wonderful to hear there are going to be 10 judges here almost immediately to try cases."
Members of the defense bar also praised the measure.
Steven Banks, the Legal Aid Society's attorney-in-chief, said his organization "stands ready" to work with the courts and the prosecution to tackle the backlog.
Banks thanked Lippman for "making the magic additional ingredient of additional resources available."
Likewise, Marvin Ray Raskin, cochair of the Bronx County Bar Association's criminal law section, thanked Lippman and said, "We will do everything in our control to make the court system function effectively."
In his speech, Lippman acknowledged that the Bronx has long been confronted with large backlogs.
Subscribe to New York Law Journal
-
Michael
Over 2 year wait for trial. I wonder if the dopey Judges will charge that time to the "People" for speedy trial purposes? 6 months from arraignment to felony trial, yet they admit a backlog from 2-3 years. Seems logic, common sense and the LAW would indicate the easy and legal way to end the backlog, is grant the speedy trial motions sua sponte, since there is no 'reasonable excuse' that can be used to charge the time to the defendants. Of course, the Judges will skirt the speedy trial rule, and convince the mostly poor and indigent defendants to plea to jail time, when the fact is all these cases should be dismissed.
-
Former Criminal Defense
It was obvious from the beginning that the merger would do nothing more than clog already congested court calendars, as Supreme Court judges would now have to preside over Class A and B misdemeanors and violations IN ADDITION to the serious felony crimes. The merger was a ridiculous experiment that only infringed on defendants' rights to a speedy trial in the Bronx.
-
Former Criminal Defense
It was obvious from the beginning that the merger would do nothing more than clog already congested court calendars, as Supreme Court judges would now have to preside over Class A and B misdemeanors and violations IN ADDITION to the serious felony crimes. The merger was a ridiculous experiment that only infringed on defendants' rights to a speedy trial in the Bronx.
-
Former Criminal Defense
It was obvious from the beginning that the merger would do nothing more than clog already congested court calendars, as Supreme Court judges would now have to preside over Class A and B misdemeanors and violations IN ADDITION to the serious felony crimes. The merger was a ridiculous experiment that only infringed on defendants' rights to a speedy trial in the Bronx.
Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.
Reader Comments