Riverside County court dismissals are unacceptable; we need more judges, now

It seems the Sixth Amendment needs a rewrite here in Riverside County: “The accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, except in Riverside County, where your case may be dismissed before it’s heard at all.”

Our county has a backlog of over 2,800 cases. Since emergency COVID-19 orders ended in October, there have been 948 criminal cases dismissed. Of those cases, 70 were felonies and 878 were misdemeanors, including one dismissed felony assault case in which a machete was used as a weapon which caused great bodily injury to the victim.

Why? There weren't enough judges available to try the cases as quickly as the Constitution requires.

Typically, a person charged with a misdemeanor who is not in custody is entitled to a trial within 30 to 45 days of being arraigned. For felony charges, the window is within 60 days. Sometimes, attorneys and defendants waive these rights for a variety of reasons, extending the time within which a trial must occur.

These time requirements were halted during the COVID-19 pandemic, as the county court suspended trials at various points over the past two years as the threat of COVID-19 transmission rose and fell. That left many charged with crimes in limbo as they waited for their day in court.

Although COVID is not over, courts are back in session and the regular rules are back in effect. Riverside County’s backlog has one of the worst in the state. Whose fault is it? It seems to be a case of j’accuse in every direction.

The Riverside Superior Court can point fingers at historical backlogs, the District Attorney’s office can point fingers at the court, courts can point to the state, the state can point to the governor, but pointing fingers is inexcusable inaction by the judicial, legislative and executive branches of our local and state governments in this consequential situation.

The Riverside County Superior Court has long had a shortage of judges. In an Oct. 25 press release, Riverside County Presiding Judge John M. Monterosso said the 3.7 judicial officers per 100,000 residents in Riverside County is “woefully short of the statewide average of 11.4 judicial officers per 100,000 residents.”

Superior court judges serve six-year terms and are elected by county voters on a nonpartisan ballot at a general election during even-numbered years. Vacancies occurring during those terms—due to retirements, deaths, or other departures—are filled through appointment by the governor.

The governor’s budget includes total funding of $4.9 billion in 2022-23 for the judicial branch, of which $2.8 billion is provided to support trial court operations. The Judicial Council is responsible for managing the resources of the judicial branch.

The Legislature requires the council to provide an update every two years on the need for new judgeships in Golden State superior courts, and the November 2022 report is damning.

According to that document, of the 98 judges needed statewide, 52 are needed in San Bernardino and Riverside counties. San Bernardino leads the “needs” list with 30 judges followed by Riverside with 22.

That’s more than half of the state’s entire need right here in the Inland Empire.

And yet between San Bernardino and Riverside counties, only 10 new judgeships were funded in 2022, with six in San Bernardino and four in Riverside County. (Statewide, 23 judgeships were issued.)

How are four new judges going to make a dent in a backlog of 2,800 cases? How can we expect police to continue to do their jobs if the courts just throw cases out?

When people are arrested and charged with crimes, but then the case is dismissed before trial due to a shortage of judges, that creates cynicism toward the justice system, particularly among victims and the police.

The backlog is creating injustices for crime victims as well as those accused who are facing lengthy waits for their cases to be adjudicated or eventually dismissed without a trial. Disturbingly, the DA's office says "most dismissed cases involve domestic violence charges."

For many domestic violence victims, it takes courage to work up the nerve to go to authorities about abuse. In counties without a case backlog, such cases have a good chance of going before a judge, even if they’re misdemeanors. In Riverside County, domestic violence victims seem to be at a distinct disadvantage due to the backlog. That likely puts them at risk to be victimized again.

Since dismissed misdemeanors cannot be refiled, according to District Attorney Mike Hestrin’s office, where does that leave the victim?

It’s imperative this problem be addressed now, not piecemeal over the course of 10 years. When the logjam is this high in two counties of our state, those in power simply have to address it, particularly when California is flush with cash.

Our county is represented by three state senators, seven members of the Assembly, five county supervisors and three members of the U.S. House whose districts are fully or partially in Riverside.

Gov. Gavin Newsom will propose his 2023-24 budget in January. Since the Judicial Council allocates where funding goes, it must place more emphasis on Riverside County in an emergency capacity.

Another report on the state of things won’t cut it.

A top priority for our lawmakers in Sacramento in 2023 needs to be fully funding the judgeships that Riverside County residents need and deserve.

This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Riverside County court dismissals are unacceptable; we need judges now