Volume 24, No. 7 April 2014 

E-SJI NEWS SJI NEWS

In this Issue 

Second Quarter Grant 

Awards 

1 

Human Trafficking and 

the State Courts 

1 

Human Trafficking 

Courts in New York 

2 

Evidence-Based Sentencing Resources 3 

Page 1 

SJI Awards FY 2014 Second Quarter Grants 

Find Exclusive 

SJI Content on 

Facebook and 

Twitter

For more content from the recent SJI Board meeting, important national resource announcements, and partner updates, look 

no further than the SJI Facebook

and Twitter pages. 

The SJI Board of Directors met on March 31, 2014, 

to make decisions on quarterly grant applications and 

awarded a total of ten (10) grants. 

Two (2) Strategic Initiatives Grants were approved, 

including: a joint project of the Self-Represented 

Litigation Network (SRLN) and the National Center 

for State Courts (NCSC) to develop and conduct an 

assessment of programs and technologies to provide 

services to self-represented litigants through remote 

or virtual means, and identification and documentation of business and technical requirements for a full

-service “triage portal” that will serve as a single 

point of entry to legal information and services for 

self-represented litigants; and Phase II of the Civil 

Justice Initiative which will add an evaluation of the 

Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on expedited actions 

to further inform the Civil Justice Committee’s decisions and recommendations on effective civil case 

processing. 

Two (2) Project Grants were approved, including: a 

self-help forms expansion project for the Hawaii 

Judiciary; and a weighted caseload assessment for 

the Vermont Supreme Court. Five (5) Technical 

Assistance (TA) Grants were approved, including: 

assessment of service processing for the Delaware 

Justice of the Peace Court; assessment of staffing, 

organization, and processes for the Oregon Supreme 

Court; sex offender strategic planning for the Guam 

Judiciary; a D.C. jury service improvement project 

by the Council for Court Excellence; and strategic 

planning and performance measurement for the Superior Court of Maricopa County, Arizona. One (1) 

Curriculum Adaptation & Training (CAT) Grant was 

approved for courthouse security training in Massachusetts. 

Human Trafficking and the State 

Courts Collaborative 

In FY 2013, the SJI Board of Directors established 

Human Trafficking and the State Courts as one of its 

Priority Investment Areas for grant funding. The SJI

-funded Human Trafficking and the State Courts 

Collaborative was then established. The Collaborative features a diverse partnership of the following 

national court support organizations: Center for Public Policy Studies (CPPS); Center for Court Innovation (CCI); National Judicial College (NJC); Legal 

Momentum; and, National Association for Women 

Judges (NAWJ). 

The Collaborative’s website provides reports, statistics, and tools that will help state courts more effectively address human trafficking issues. As the Collaborative develops resources, their website, Twitter, 

and Facebook page, will provide the latest information on this critical issue. 
E-SJI News Volume 24, No. 7 April 2014 

Page 2 

On September 25, 2013, Chief Judge Jonathan 

Lippman of the New York State Unified Court 

System announced the launch of the Human 

Trafficking Intervention Initiative, the nation’s 

first statewide system of dedicated courts designed to intervene in the lives of trafficking 

victims. In New York, human trafficking 

manifests itself most prominently in the form 

of sex trafficking. This trailblazing initiative 

focuses on individuals charged with prostitution-related offenses in an effort to identify 

and assist sex trafficking victims, opening the 

door for thousands across the state to escape a 

life of abuse and torture. 

Many domestic and foreign-born individuals 

who end up in New York’s criminal courts on 

prostitution charges are recruited into the commercial sex industry by force, fraud and/or 

coercion. Embracing a newly emerging criminal justice approach, 11 Human Trafficking 

Intervention Courts in the state will seek to 

promote a just and compassionate resolution to 

these cases - treating defendants as victims 

who are often in need of critical services. With 

the collaborative efforts of the court system’s 

criminal justice partners and service providers 

across the state, this unprecedented system of 

dedicated courts will work to connect these 

individuals with meaningful intervention and 

link them to resources aimed at breaking the 

cycle of exploitation and arrest. 

Human Trafficking Intervention Courts 

Provide Critical Services in New York 

District attorneys across the state have also 

affirmed their commitment to investigating and 

bringing charges against traffickers and those 

who patronize prostitutes. 

This approach is supported by both prosecutors 

and defense counsel. In the pilot jurisdictions, 

all cases with misdemeanor prostitution or related charges that continue past arraignment are 

transferred to a Human Trafficking Intervention 

Court; once transferred to that specialized court, 

defendants are evaluated by on-site staff. The 

court connects defendants to tailored counseling 

and case management services, which range 

from shelter and healthcare to immigration 

assistance, drug treatment, and counseling. 

These counselors/social workers also screen for 

indicators of trafficking. 

Human Trafficking Intervention Courts also 

link participants to education and job training 

programs to help prevent their return to the 

commercial sex industry. For example, in the 

Bronx, Brooklyn, and Manhattan, defendants 

are referred to the Women’s Independence, 

Safety, and Empowerment (WISE) program, 

operated by the Center for Court Innovation 

(CCI). WISE provides trauma-informed individual and group programming that aims to 

reduce the shame and isolation associated with 

prostitution and trafficking by creating a safe 

space for clients to address their underlying 

needs. A defendant’s charges may be dismissed 

or reduced contingent upon compliance with 

these court-mandated services and programs. 

Other features of Human Trafficking Courts 

include increased coordination and communication between the court, its criminal justice partners, local service providers, and other stakeholders; a single presiding judge to handle all 

the cases, tracking them through to disposition; 

regularly assigned prosecutors and defense 

attorneys; on-site or conveniently located service providers to offer vital support to participants, as well as valuable updates to the court 

and prosecutor; and specially trained court 

staff who recognize the dynamics of sex trafficking and the challenges defendants must 

overcome to reintegrate into mainstream society. 

Over 2,500 defendants have already appeared 

in New York’s Human Trafficking Intervention Courts. These courts offer the potential 

for identification of victimization and trafficking, and the opportunity to connect defendants 

to services. As one example, during the fall of 

2013 (September – December), the Human 

Trafficking Intervention Court within the Midtown Manhattan Community Court reported 

that 83 percent of defendants with prostitution 

charges reported some type of present or past 

victimization, such as sexual assault or domestic violence, while 33 percent reported indicators of sex trafficking( force, fraud and/or 

coercion). As the pilot trafficking courts continue to develop and expand, identifying the 

incidence of victimization among these defendants will be critical to breaking the cycle of re

-arrest and continued trauma. 

Reprinted, with edits, by permission of the 

Center for Court Innovation. 
Page 3 

SJI Board of Directors

Chairman 

James R. Hannah 

Chief Justice 

Supreme Court of Arkansas 

Little Rock, AR 

Vice Chairman 

Daniel J. Becker 

State Court Administrator 

Utah AOC 

Salt Lake City, UT 

Secretary 

Gayle A. Nachtigal 

Senior Circuit Court Judge 

Washington County Circuit Court 

Hillsboro, OR 

Treasurer 

Hernan D. Vera 

President & CEO 

Public Counsel Law Center 

Los Angeles, CA 

Chase T. Rogers 

Chief Justice 

Supreme Court of Connecticut 

Hartford, CT 

Jonathan Lippman 

Chief Judge of the State of New York 

New York Court of Appeals 

New York, NY 

David V. Brewer 

Justice 

Oregon Supreme Court 

Salem, OR 

Wilfredo Martinez 

County Judge 

9th Judicial Circuit of Florida 

Orlando, FL 

Marsha J. Rabiteau 

Executive Director 

Legal Policy Strategies Group 

Bloomfield, CT 

John B. Nalbandian 

Partner 

Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP 

Cincinnati, OH 

Isabel Framer 

President 

Language Access Consultants, LLC 

Copley, OH

Jonathan D. Mattiello 

Executive Director 

The State Justice Institute is a federallyfunded, non-profit corporation established by 

federal law in 1984 to improve the quality of 

justice in the state courts. 

E-SJI News Volume 24, No. 7 April 2014 

In 2007, the Conference of Chief Justices

(CCJ) and the Conference of State Court 

Administrators (COSCA) passed a joint 

resolution that called for the: a) adoption 

of sentencing and corrections policies and 

practices that are effective, as determined 

through research and evaluation, in reducing recidivism; b) working with the executive and legislative branches to promote 

such policies and practices; and, c) urging 

members of the judiciary to educate themselves about evidence-based programs that 

work. 

In support of the resolution, the State Justice Institute (SJI) partnered with the Pew 

Public Safety Performance Project to provide funding for research, training, and 

technical assistance on evidence-based 

sentencing and corrections practices. The 

initial effort resulted in the Center for Sentencing Initiatives (CSI), a dedicated webEvidenced-Based Sentencing Resources 

site for information, 

education, and assistance related to evidence-based sentencing 

policies and practices 

for the state court community, inclusive of: 

A ground-breaking model curriculum on 

evidence-based sentencing for judges; 

Two research briefs on sentencing commissions; and, 

Several national- and state-level presentations. 

Subsequent partnership work involved convening inter-branch meetings to discuss sentencing 

and corrections policies; creating an online version of the model curriculum for judges; establishing a National Working Group and developing a set of guiding principles for using offender 

risk and needs assessment information at sentencing; and providing training and technical 

assistance to numerous states. In addition, SJI 

has funded separate projects addressing evidence

-based sentencing and corrections practices in 

California and Wisconsin. 

These efforts provided the groundwork and ongoing infrastructure for court efforts to implement evidence-based sentencing reforms. Since 

passage of the 2007 resolution, numerous states 

and local jurisdictions have adopted policies and 

practices that focus on recidivism reduction 

strategies, such as using risk and needs assessment information to inform sentencing decisions, 

targeting conditions of probation at relevant offender characteristics to achieve effective sentencing outcomes, and basing responses to violations of probation on research-based practices. 

This area of court reform has benefitted greatly 

from the contributions of the work supported by 

SJI and continues to expand. For more information about evidence-based practices and risk 

assessment, CSI encourages judges and judicial 

officers to join its listserv.