2005
STATE OF THE JUDICIARY ADDRESS

The Honorable Charles E. Jones
Chief Justice of Arizona
February 21, 2005

OFFICIAL VERSION

AN ADDRESS
ON THE STATE OF THE ARIZONA JUDICIARY
Presented during the First Regular Session of the 47th Arizona
Legislature to a Joint Session of the Arizona Senate & House of
Representatives
Delivered by Arizona Supreme Court
Chief Justice Charles E. Jones
Monday, February 21, 2005
and administrative staff at all courts
throughout the State.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. President,
distinguished members of the 47th
Legislature, ladies and gentlemen:

The structure of American
government, established more than two
centuries ago, differs from that of all
other nations in that it features three
distinct branches, each required to
function independently of the others.
Each is defined as co-equal with the
others; yet notwithstanding the important
principle of judicial independence, the
branches are, in certain ways,
accountable to one another and in a real
sense, there is an interdependence
among the three that requires a close
working relationship and a cooperative
mindset that can lead only to good
government in every respect.
For
example, the courts are dependent on the
legislature for budget, whereas the
courts’ obligation and duty is to see that
legislative and executive actions are
consistent with both the state and federal
constitutions. That is how the system
was intended to work, and one method
by which judicial accountability is
achieved is by the very invitation that
the Chief Justice appear before you

Good morning. On behalf of the
Arizona Judiciary, I thank you for the
opportunity to appear in joint session.
This annual report is for each of you, the
elected lawmakers whom the people
have chosen to establish by law the
public policy of the State of Arizona.
I acknowledge also my esteemed
colleagues at the Arizona Supreme Court
– Vice Chief Justice Ruth McGregor and
Justices Rebecca Berch, Michael Ryan,
and Andrew Hurwitz. Justice McGregor
is absent today, due to a prior courtrelated commitment. As you are aware,
she is the Chief Justice elect, scheduled
to take office June 12th of this year.
Justice Berch will assume the duties of
Vice Chief Justice at the same time.
It continues to be a distinct honor
and privilege to work with these highly
qualified judicial officers as members of
the Supreme Court. The same is true
with respect to judges, court personnel,

2

civil society relieves the stress and strain
of life among its citizens.

today to report on the status of the
judicial branch. I am grateful to all for
the opportunity, and welcome the
assignment.

We are a nation founded on the
“rule of law.” The nation’s courts and
judges are sworn to uphold the
constitution
as
the
fundamental
expression of the people. We are also
sworn to apply statutes as enacted by the
people’s representatives. When people
come to the courts, they come in search
of fairness, expecting justice. Rich or
poor, powerful or weak, the nation’s
founders promised equal justice under
law. Our objective, in the end, is to do
as one of the nation’s great jurists of the
past once stated: to pursue “traditional
notions of fair play and substantial
justice.”

As you know, it is about the
people’s business that we labor. The
people of Arizona, your constituents,
resort to the courts in great numbers for
the resolution of disputes and for the
redress of grievances. Some claims have
merit, and others do not. In this last
fiscal year, the courts of Arizona
addressed roughly two and one-half
million case filings, an average of ten
thousand cases every working day. Six
hundred more judicial matters will come
through the doors of our courts during
the few minutes that I speak to you.

CHILDREN COME TO THE
COURTS. Far too often children come
because they have been neglected or
abused. Since the time the Legislature
modified the state’s public policy which
favors the protection of neglected
children -- a worthy goal -- we have seen
children in our courtrooms in ever
increasing numbers.

Last year, case volume increased
in the criminal docket 5.4 percent over
the previous year.
The domestic
relations calendar rose 11.2 percent
during the same period. DUI cases
increased 2.9% to a record of 88,207
filings.
PEOPLE FROM ALL WALKS
OF LIFE FIND THEIR WAY TO THE
COURTROOM. Let me turn to a
description of the people who use our
courts every day. They come generally
in a state of anxiety and sometimes
fearful of the experience. For the most
part, they prefer not to be there. They
are in the courts because they have been
charged with a crime, or have filed
claims to resolve a dispute or to right a
wrong. Some disputes are large and
complex, at times involving both private
as well as public institutions.
An
independent judiciary is an absolute
necessity in every nation that desires
freedom, for it provides the most reliable
and predictable mechanism by which

Children appear before the
Courts from families in turmoil often
after a dark journey of emotional pain
and personal suffering. The Supreme
Court, acting pursuant to statute enacted
in the recent special session, has
implemented new procedures for
dependency proceedings, including jury
trials for termination of parental rights
cases. These changes in policy have
resulted in a virtual explosion of
dependency cases which now strain the
ability and resources of our juvenile
courts and Foster Care Review Boards
across the State. Last year alone 3,881

3

and move cases through the system. In
response to this huge problem, the
Supreme Court has recently completed a
study and issued policy directions
proposing a complete re-engineering and
standardization of the entire domestic
relations case-processing procedure in
Maricopa County.

child dependency cases were filed, an
increase of 20.2%.
IN ADDITION TO THE
CHILDREN, WHOLE FAMILIES come
to court in increasing numbers and often
in tumultuous circumstances. More than
50,000 domestic relations cases were
filed last year and, almost unbelievably,
we received nearly that same number of
requests for Court Orders of Protection,
usually from a desperate spouse. The
plea for help from within our
communities is long and deep. On a
personal level, my most fervent wish
would be that our families remain intact.
More stable families will cure many of
the problems facing society today.

Under the leadership of Maricopa
County Presiding Judge Colin Campbell
and Family Court Presiding Judge
Norman Davis, the court is now
implementing comprehensive procedures
to resolve these problems, and in March,
the Arizona Judicial Council will
complete its work on a detailed set of
new family court rules which the
Supreme Court will then formalize later
this year. Moreover, new Arizona child
support guidelines went into place last
month along with additional online tools
to assist individuals going through the
process.
I am both pleased and
optimistic about our prospect for success
in this program.

Permit me then to borrow a
phrase uttered by one of America’s great
religious leaders some thirty-five years
ago when he said: “No other success
can compensate for failure in the home.”
I am aware that many of you have heard
that statement and give it your full
endorsement. Unfortunately, however,
when families come to court, the failure,
often, has already occurred. Families in
crisis need swift resolution of their
financial issues, their property issues,
and their child custody issues in order to
stabilize what is left of their lives. And,
although many worthwhile programs
have been established over recent years,
the family court system, particularly in
Maricopa County, has become overly
complex and somewhat fragmented.
Delays have been long and the process
has been confusing.

OTHERS SEEN FREQUENTLY
IN THE COURTS ARE PEOPLE
CHARGED
WITH
CRIMINAL
behavior, many of whom are addicted to
drugs and alcohol. This session, the
Judiciary is again requesting help to
expand our Drug Court program in order
to increase the number of defendants
able to receive help in the form of
treatment and counseling.
These “problem solving” courts,
as we call them, are achieving enormous
success in virtually every part of the
United States. They have been equally
successful where used in Arizona.
Yuma County for example, under
Presiding Judge Tom Cole’s direction,
has developed a highly successful

Eighty-three percent of family
law cases in Arizona currently involve
parties who lack the assistance of legal
counsel. This causes an immediate
impact on the ability of courts to manage

4

as one of five national legislative
priorities this year. It is part of a larger
and deeply disturbing trend across the
nation.

program.
Representative
Bill
Konopnicki from District 5 has
introduced House Bill 2088 to highlight
discussion of this ongoing process which
offers
both
consequences
for
misbehavior and hope for the future in
the lives of those who complete the drug
court curriculum.

In Arizona, once again, we have
taken the lead in an effort to bring this
problem under control. At our urging,
you enacted laws in a recent session by
which fiduciaries must be certified,
complaints must be investigated, and
violations must be prosecuted. We are
making full use of that authority through
our Administrative Office but will need
your help. Currently we cannot keep up
with the volume of meritorious
complaints against fiduciaries and the
necessary investigations that must
follow.
Representatives Nelson and
Kirkpatrick have agreed to bring this
issue to your attention this session. As
our population continues to age, the need
for added protection of our senior
citizens will necessarily become more
critical.

MANY COME TO OUR
COURTS TO BE PLACED ON
PROBATION, BOTH JUVENILE AND
ADULT. Currently, over 66,000 adult
felons and 9,000 juveniles are on
supervised probation on our streets.
Notwithstanding the number, we can
report at this time that our probation
programs are functioning well and that
Arizona has what is considered one of
the outstanding probation systems in the
nation. It continues to be a system in
need of significant resources, however,
and as you know, the alternative –
incarceration – is roughly three thousand
percent more expensive.

PEOPLE COME TO THE
COURTS IN GREAT NUMBERS, BUT
THEY COME IN THE GREATEST
NUMBERS TO OUR COURTS OF
LIMITED JURISDICTION. These are
the local Justice of the Peace and
Municipal Courts. Many are unaware
that the limited jurisdiction courts
statewide actually address ninety-two
percent of all cases filed.

OUR COURTS ALSO SEE
VULNERABLE SENIOR CITIZENS
IN INCREASING NUMBERS. These
are people who have reached the elderly
stage of life. The courts depend on
public and private fiduciaries to oversee
the properties and assets of these
citizens. Unfortunately, and in some
cases tragically, there have been
fiduciaries in our State who have taken
advantage of elderly persons unable to
protect themselves by exploiting their
financial wherewithal.

Though it is true this caseload is
substantially less complex than in the
superior court, cases must nevertheless
be resolved.
Many involve traffic
citations, but some also involve more
serious issues, including DUI. These are
the judges and court personnel who
serve on the judiciary’s front lines,
providing first-contact service to people

Statewide, fiduciary defalcations
have become a disgrace with over $20
million in proven aggregate losses to
date. And the problem is not confined to
Arizona. The AARP documented this as
a national problem and has designated it

5

programs function better today than they
did three, four, and five years ago.

who come to the courts. The combined
challenge of meeting this work load and
retaining court staff and necessary
infrastructure requires monumental
effort.

ON
ANOTHER
FRONT,
PEOPLE OFTEN LEAVE OUR
COURTS FACING A COURTORDERED FINE, A FEE, OR AN
ORDER OF RESTITUTION FOR
CRIMINAL
DAMAGE.
This
constitutes debt owed to the State. If
these Orders are to have meaning, they
must be enforced. Please be advised that
we are doing what we can to enforce
them.

Let me give you a snapshot of
things we have done. Within our limited
jurisdiction courts over the past three
years we have taken steps greatly to
improve our education and training
program for judges. We want to ensure
that each judge -- law trained or not -- is
given the education and the tools
essential to do this important judicial
work. In these courts, we strive for
consistency and equality in the
application of the law, a worthy goal, but
one that is not yet achieved.

I can now report that while our
aggregate caseload has increased only
three percent over the past five years,
our revenues have increased over forty
percent. During this past year alone we
increased collections in the courts by an
additional $22.4 million.

During this renewed focus on
education and training, some have
suggested -- erroneously I might add -that the Chief Justice had undertaken a
campaign to eliminate non-law trained
judges by adopting a new and expanded
education and testing program.
Of
course, it was never our intent to
eliminate non-law trained judges.

The quest to improve court
collections began in 1989 when
statewide court collections were at $70
million per year. The commitment was
made to the Legislature to increase
revenues to $100 million per year within
five years. We achieved that goal in just
three years. And, since 1989, the courts
have collected an aggregate of more than
$1.3 billion in excess of the 1989
benchmark of $70 million per year.

However, I can report to you that
we have now completed three full
training cycles under the new and much
expanded curriculum.
Every newly
appointed or elected judge has taken the
examinations successfully.
Some
needed extra help and additional
training, but all have passed the tests.

This has been an effort to help
state and local government. It has come
to be called the FARE program for
“Fines,
Fees
and
Restitution
Enforcement.”

The Court’s new judicial training
program has been well received and has
garnered enthusiastic reviews by
participating judges.
Clearly, those
Limited Jurisdiction Courts that have
had the benefit of these new training

The monies collected do not
remain with the courts, but are passed to
the State, to our fifteen counties, and to
our ninety-three cities and towns. This
increased success of collecting unpaid

6

one-half million customers. Our online
Child Support Calculator, for example,
received 6.8 million hits last year, and
people were able successfully to perform
4.8 million child support calculations in
the same year.

debt owed to Arizona government has
clearly played an important role these
past two years in alleviating the effects
of the statewide revenue shortfall. The
implementation of these collection
programs also includes the online
payment of fines and the interception
and withholding from state income tax
refunds, monies otherwise owed the
State. This, too, has been successful.

We
have
also
achieved
automated status for court Orders of
Protection. When a court takes the time
to hear and grant an Order of Protection
to a petitioner pleading for safety, it will
serve no value if the Order itself is not
available on scene when local police
respond to a desperate call for help. By
automation, much of this problem has
now been resolved.

ON
ANOTHER
TOPIC,
PEOPLE CAN NOW ACCESS OUR
COURTS IN LARGE NUMBERS –
without being physically present. The
critical role of court technology and
related communications in providing
access to court information cannot be
overstated. This is especially true in a
State as large as Arizona with great
geographical distances between our
communities.

Also,
our
Juvenile
case
management system has been made
available to all law enforcement
agencies and has been linked to the
Juvenile Department of Corrections.
Our Court Clerks now send child support
orders directly into the DES central
clearinghouse for processing.

We now have case information
online in over 137 Courts, some ten
million cases and six hundred forty
million records. We have digitized
millions of documents.
We are
distributing minute orders electronically
in ever increasing numbers. We are
pleased at the amount of automation the
judiciary has been able to establish over
recent years. This huge investment has
helped make manageable what would
otherwise be unmanageable.
But
Arizona’s courts and the people who use
them daily will continue to depend on
funding by the legislature for the
adequacy of automation resources, both
existing resources and those systems in
the planning stage.

On a related front, the “Law for
Kids” web site created and placed online
by the Arizona Foundation for Legal
Services and Education is a dramatic
success story of automated public
service with 87 million computer
inquiries from three million visitors over
the last four years. This award-winning
interactive web site, now replicated in
other states, is but one example by which
useful service is provided on-line.
We have also traveled the long
and difficult road developing electronic
case management systems that serve our
courts statewide. But the systems now
suffer the infirmities of age and are
challenged by continuous demands from
the public for more and better service.

With more than twenty-five
million inquiries logged by computer
users this past year, the court’s Web site
provided valuable information to nearly

7

rules require attorneys to represent their
clients – not zealously, but “honorably.”

We struggle to keep our systems
together and to find a way to upgrade all
of them in the face of current
technological advancement.

Not long ago, complaints against
bar members were delayed two to three
years before resolution.
That was
unacceptable. Accordingly, we have
now set in place new and more efficient
procedures such that today some ninety
percent of all bar complaints are
addressed and resolved within six
months, and the remainder, normally the
more complex cases, are resolved within
twenty-two months.

WE ALSO SEE PEOPLE IN
ARIZONA’S
COURTS
WITH
SERIOUS
DOCUMENTATION
PROBLEMS. Many come without legal
representation, expecting an easy
resolution of sometimes complex
situations.
They often come with
documents prepared by commercial
document preparers, some of whom are
selling flawed and ineffectual court
documents to unsuspecting citizens.
This has become a serious problem as it
results in substantial fraud on the public,
causing severe monetary loss because
formal legal documents are being
prepared by unqualified persons.

IN CONCLUSION, this will be
my last opportunity as Chief Justice to
address the Legislature in a State of the
Judiciary Address. As the constitution
requires, I will retire from the Court this
June by reason of age. But from the
perspective of one who has witnessed
several decades of dramatic change in
our state both in the private and public
sectors, let me leave you perhaps with a
better understanding and appreciation of
the pride and the good fortune each of us
should feel about the Arizona judiciary.

We have in part solved the
problem with a recently established
formal certification program for
commercial
document
preparers
requiring that standards be met. Many
document preparers are qualified and are
now certified, but some are not. At
present, the problem is far from settled.

Today, Arizona has one of the
highest ranked and respected court
systems in the United States. It has been
listed in the category of the “best” by the
United States Chamber of Commerce,
the business community’s key indicator
that addresses a state’s ability to attract
new business. It was not always this
way. As one who practiced law under
the old system, prior to 1974, I believe
the superior quality of Arizona’s judicial
branch and its high degree of national
recognition are directly attributable to
the merit selection system by which
urban trial judges and appellate judges
and justices have been appointed to
office.

IN COURT, WE ALSO SEE
PEOPLE WITH A COMPLAINT
AGAINST AN ATTORNEY.
In
Arizona, we have an outstanding state
bar organization. Without reservation, I
state that I am proud to have served as a
licensed, active member of the legal
profession for almost 43 years. In 2002,
the Supreme Court adopted revised
ethical rules to govern the practice of
law. In doing so, we made an important
change in direction. In the past, the rules
required attorneys to be “zealous”
advocates for their clients. Regrettably,
some took that to the extreme. The new

8

America has created the great
model.
Three branches working
independently, but hopefully, with a
proper measure of mutual cooperation.
WE SHOULD SURELY PROMOTE
THE STRENGTHENING OF FREE
INSTITUTIONS EVERYWHERE ––
BUT WE MUST REMAIN PROUD OF
WHAT WE HAVE IN ARIZONA.

The
Arizona
judiciary’s
reputation for integrity, innovation, and
commitment to public service is
recognized by colleagues in state court
systems across the entire nation. It is
appropriate indeed that we note that two
members of the Arizona bar continue to
give distinguished service to the entire
nation as members of the Supreme Court
of the United States.
In addition,
members of the current Arizona
Supreme Court have been recognized
and serve on a variety of Committees
and Commissions at the national level.

I know that each of you feels
privileged to serve in the elected
political office you hold, just as I and my
colleagues are privileged to serve as
judicial
officers.
As
elected
representatives, the people have placed
confidence in all of you, as do I.

As we witness the turmoil of
nations embroiled in armed conflict and
social upheaval, as we ponder large
populations impacted by catastrophic
natural disasters, we are reminded that
life in the United States, even with its
problems, has provided and continues to
provide good fortune for so many. With
a bounty of plenty and the blessings of
individual liberty, our nation continues
to pursue its founding commitment to
self-determination, human values, and
the rights of the individual.
An independent judiciary is
absolutely essential if the rule of law is
to be maintained. I am aware that some
of you have expressed unhappiness over
a number of court decisions. I suggest,
however, that by reason of our
constitutional structure, tension between
the branches has been with us in varying
degree since the beginning of the
Republic. It will probably continue as
long as we remain a free and
independent people. I simply express
the hope that tension not become a
destructive force.

9