SJI NEWSLETTER SJI NEWSLETTER

In this Issue 

Page 1 

Volume 26, No. 4 

Statement on the Passing of 

Chief Justice Jim Hannah 

Promoting 

Our Work

SJI not only uses Facebook and 

Twitter to promote the work of 

its grantees, but also shares information of interest to the entire state court community. If 

your organization’s work complements our work, let us know 

and we will share it. 

SJI Remembers Chief 

Justice Jim Hannah 

1 

CCE Releases 

Revisited D.C. Jury 

Trial Study 

2 

Ramsey County, MN 

Caseflow Assessment 

3 

 

SJI is sad to announce the passing of our Board 

Chairman, and former Chief Justice of Arkansas, Jim 

Hannah. 

Jim Hannah served as the Chief Justice of the Arkansas Supreme Court from 2005 to 2015, and successfully ran statewide contested elections for Chief Justice (2004) and Associate Justice (2000). At the time 

of his retirement, he was the longest serving judge in 

the state of Arkansas. He was appointed by Chief 

Justice Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court Judicial 

Conference Committee on Federal-State Jurisdiction, 

and by President Obama to SJI, where he served as 

Chairman from 2010 until his death. He also served 

as President of the Conference of Chief Justices; 

Chairman of the National Center for State Courts 

Board of Directors; and former President and Board 

Member, Arkansas Judicial Council. 

Chief Justice Hannah served as a Juvenile Judge for 

White County, Arkansas from 1976-1978, and was 

elected as a Chancery/Probate Judge in the 

17th Judicial District, 1979-2000. His previous work 

in the legal profession included serving as the Searcy 

City Attorney; Deputy Prosecuting Attorney for 

Woodruff County; City Judge for Kensett and Rosebud; City Attorney for Augusta, Bradford, Des Arc, 

Garner, Kensett and Rosebud; and Private Attorney, 

Lightle, Tedder, Hannah & Beebe Law Firm, Searcy, 

Arkansas. 

His many accolades and accomplishments include the 

establishment of the White County Juvenile Court 

and Juvenile Probation Office; former Chair, Arkansas Judicial Council’s Judicial Resources AssessJanuary 2016 

ment, Legislative, and Retirement committees; Member, Arkansas Supreme Court Committees for Access 

to Justice, Client Security Fund, Technology, Child 

Support and District Court Resources Board; Chair, 

Drug Court Advisory Committee; Faculty Advisor, 

National Judicial College; Member, Arkansas Board 

of Pardons and Paroles, 1972-79; former legislative 

assistant to then-Governor Dale Bumpers; former 

Chairman and past member of the Arkansas Court 

Reporters Examiners Board; and Member, Arkansas 

Bar Association. 

Chief Justice Hannah graduated from the University 

of Arkansas School of Law in 1968, and held a BSBA 

(Accounting) from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. 
Page 2 

SJI Newsletter Volume 26, No. 4 January 2016

With assistance from SJI, the Council for Court Excellence (CCE) 

launched a new comprehensive study of issues relating to jury service 

in D.C. from the perspective of jurors, judges, and lawyers (SJI-14-T086). 

Working out of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia 

and the Superior Court of the District of Columbia over a 12-month 

period, a CCE Project Committee reexamined the jury system in the 

District of Columbia, as a follow up to CCE’s initial study of jury 

service in 1998. The Committee was comprised of subject matter 

experts, staff, and local stakeholders. The results of their reexamination are available in the final report: Jury Service Revisited: Upgrades 

for the 21st Century. 

Included in the summary of recommendations are lists related to Juror 

Care; Jury Pool and Summoning; and Trial Structure. The report includes exhibits that feature items in use by the D.C. Courts including 

forms, pamphlets, and letters. 

In addition to the collection of data and metrics provided by the 

Courts on jury trials and protocols used in selecting jurors, a total of 

24 trials were observed; Voir Dire information evaluated in selected 

cases; and juror survey experiences analyzed. 

The report provides updated information relative to the jury experience that did not exist as a concern in 1988, namely social mediarelated policies for jurors, greater real-time access to information, and 

technology advancements in court systems allowing for greater automation of the process. 

The Committee acknowledged that their overall goal is to support 

citizens in their roles as jurors and improve the effective administration of justice through juries. Beyond assembling and analyzing the 

requisite data, as well as generating findings for this report, the Committee is exploring the following next steps: 

Encourage and support testing of proposed improvements through pilot projects in courtrooms of the D.C. 

Superior Court and the U.S. District Court for DC. 

Support implementation of recommendations contained 

in the D.C. Jury Project Report. 

Council for Court Excellence Releases 

Report on Jury Service in D.C. 

Suggest educational programs for the bench, the bar, 

jurors, and the public concerning any prospective jury 

reforms. 

Establish methods to periodically examine the utilization of any newly adopted rules and procedures to determine their effects, and suggest modifications when 

necessary. 
Page 3 

SJI Board of Directors

Chairman 

James R. Hannah 

Chief Justice (ret.) 

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 

Principal 

Bird Marella P.C. 

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. 

SJI Newsletter Volume 26, No. 4 January 2016

Ramsey County, Minnesota 

Completes Assessment of Caseflow 

The 2nd Judicial District of Minnesota is a multi-site District Court, 

which handles criminal, civil, family, juvenile, probate, commitments, 

housing, and problem-solving court caseloads. With technical assistance provided by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) and 

the support of SJI, the District Court explored ways to improve case 

processing and calendaring (SJI-15-T-042). 

The final report makes recommendations regarding the most effective 

use of judicial time. Other recommendations include: 

1. Judicial education for new judges as a means to improve their transition to the bench, to include education 

on caseflow and calendaring practices; 

2. Further examination of the pretrial hearing process in 

felony cases; 

3. Incorporation of the District’s Differentiated Case 

Management System (DCM) and Expedited Civil Litigation Track (ELT) Pilot Project to achieve desired 

disposition and cost-efficiencies; 

4. Reorganization of the four problem-solving courts 

inclusive of a redesigned “global” triage process; 

5. Development of a published case management plan 

providing details about caseflow management processes and techniques that will be employed in any new 

or altered calendaring and assignment system. 

During the assessment, the NCSC conducted a formal review of operational processes, data, previous case studies, and completed observation in several court settings across caseloads. The NCSC team 

then presented the full report to the District and its stakeholders. 

The full report is available online through the National Center for 

State Courts (NCSC) Library and Digital Archive.