By VAL VAN BROCKLIN
In January of this year, the Anchorage Daily News published two articles that uncovered widespread, shocking delays of felony cases in the Anchorage trial courts. They occurred with no regard for the suffering inflicted on victims, some of whom died during the delays, or their constitutional right to “a timely disposition” of the cases.
Appalled by what I read, I researched and revealed in a commentary that the problem was alarming before 2008. That year, a group co-chaired by an Alaska Supreme Court justice determined the average time to disposition for felony cases in Anchorage had nearly quadrupled. “This finding amounted to a ‘call to arms’ for improvements …(.)”
Some judges and court personnel were sent to training in Phoenix. A consultant was brought to Anchorage to meet with judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys. The consultant issued a 59-page report that recommended the trial courts log every requested continuance, the party requesting it, the reasons given, whether the continuance was granted, and the delay incurred if it was granted. It also recommended:
“Every six months, the chief criminal judge shall report to the Presiding Judge on the number of continuances requested and granted during the previous period(.)”
While the Anchorage court system subsequently issued repeated orders “intended” to address delays, none contained the recommended provisions ensuring accountability.
The problem worsened. From 2014 through 2022, the Office of Victims’ Rights reported annually to the legislature that case continuances were the most prevalent victims’ rights violation.
In March, the ADN reported on a new Alaska Supreme Court order “intended to facilitate” a reduction in the undue delay of felony cases. What the ADN story didn’t report is, just like previous court orders beginning in 2009, this latest order also omits any accountability for trial judges granting delays to report them to the court system for review. That’s a significant problem, especially in Anchorage, where the trial courts have a long, well-established record of ignoring such orders.
In its 2019 Annual Report to the Legislature, the Office of Victims’ Rights repeated that the worst violator of victims’ right to a timely disposition of the criminal case was Anchorage. That report noted, “While the Anchorage Court put two new procedures in place that should have helped the pre-trial delay issues, neither procedure is being adhered to uniformly and consistently as designed by practitioners or judges.”
Two years later, in its 2021 annual report, the Office of Victims’ Rights repeated that the delay problem remained worst in Anchorage and blamed the judges for not controlling their dockets, adhering to standing court orders and court rules, following the law, or protecting victims’ rights. The report observed that continuances were “rubber stamped.”
In 2022, the Office of Victims’ Rights focused again on the Anchorage court system’s delays, documenting the harms, as well as the lack of accountability.
“Pretrial delay is most prevalent in the Third Judicial District, particularly Anchorage. … The court persistently fosters long pendency of cases by its failure to act. These delays come at a considerable financial and emotional cost. These delays certainly affect whether a crime victim is treated with dignity, respect, and fairness and affect whether the victim and the community see a just criminal outcome.
“The issue of continuances is a particular concern for victims as it violates their constitutional right to a timely disposition. It also negatively impacts the court system, prosecution, defense attorneys, defendants, and the Department of Corrections. Resources are limited and inefficiency only aggravates the situation. Pretrial delay not only affects victims, it affects every agency and every person associated with the criminal justice system.
“…One problem is there is no accountability. Judges are not held accountable. … Another problem in Anchorage is there is no will to change. Even when an order is issued which would seemingly address some of the pre-trial delay causes, the judges don’t follow the order or stick to it and there are no ramifications for failure to do so. More timely disposition is possible. This is evident because other judicial districts in the state move felony cases quicker, in general, than felony cases move through the Anchorage court. OVR applauds the steps taken by judges, notably in other parts of the state, to move cases more effectively through the system.”
The court system has “intended” to reduce inexcusable felony case delays since 2008. It has repeatedly failed in Anchorage with orders that do not hold trial judges accountable. The recent State Supreme Court order set to go in effect May 12th is no different. The question that should be answered is,
“Why has the Alaska Supreme Court consistently refused to require trial judges in Anchorage to report on continuances they grant so they can be held accountable?”
If the State Supreme Court refuses to answer that question, Alaskans should hold it accountable for the cost of delays when it comes to the courts’ budget and during judicial retention elections when voters decide whether to retain particular judges.
Val Van Brocklin was a senior trial attorney with the Anchorage District Attorney’s Office before she was asked to join the state’s Office of Special Prosecution and Appeals, where she had statewide responsibility for cases so complex they required specialized investigative and prosecution efforts. She was then recruited by the U.S. Attorney’s Office to prosecute complex white collar crime, for which she received the FBI’s commendation. Now she is an author, international speaker, and trainer whose work has been featured on ABC and Discovery. More about Val at this link.
There is no excuse for not holding everyone accountable on this issue. Maybe as voters we must become more aware of what, how, and why elected judges are doing in their respective areas concerning ensuring swift justice in their cases.
The entire system should be audited. I have a transcript of my son’s trial in 2019. There were charges for which they had no proof, but they wanted to levy other charges and stated that if they used those, they had to also charge him with the one for which they had no proof. They also stated during a discussion that when in doubt, they should rule in the state’s favor. Pardon me if I am not understanding correctly, but my belief my entire life was that a person is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Apparently, it doesn’t work that way in Alaska.
So(!), we wait for another election cycle, resulting in palpable turnout (sub 25%) to cast responsible ballots to rectify the situation with these unhinged – liberal – lazy judges, only resulting in the “business as usual” to continue onward.
Maybe(?), it’s time to start actively forcing the issue of ‘early retirement’ via immediate IMPEACHMENT. If that’s not achievable then possibly other means, such as: Legislative Removal (Address or Resolution), Judicial Disciplinary Processes, or Executive Removal.
And who here forwarded this article to our state politicians including our Governor? !!!!!!
This is why I vote NO on ALL Judges They are only here for the money, USELESS
The bottom line is that there seems to be no accountability for the conduct of judges in the state of Alaska. Some seem to handle their cases expeditiously while an alarming number of judges do not. Is this due to incompetence or corruption? A step in the right direction would be to amend the State Constitution by eliminating the Judicial Council which selects judge candidates for the Governor choose from. The Council has devolved into selecting judges they like at the expense of the elected governor. The governor then gets to select the ‘least worst’ from the list the Council provides.
There is a groundswell of public interest in the ‘grand jury’ process the State Constitution provides. At the center of this is widespread allegations of judicial corruption. The grand jury process to investigate these allegations is being thwarted by the administration and the judiciary to investigate potentially very serious violations of law. The Attorney General has the means to investigate ‘public corruption’ but avoids doing so. There is no political will to do so. The public outcry to use the constitutional authority to impanel grand juries to investigate public corruption is building. This is not going away.
Well Mr. Ogle, why doesn’t the public just jump on board the effort to have Judge Matthews RELEASE THE GRAND JURY REPORT. Now held 2 full years by Matthews in secrecy this April, this report done by the Grand Jury was an attempt to bring to light the systemic corruption running rampant in our judicial system. Ironically, Judge Matthews was most certainly a subject that was studied by the Grand Jury!
Now, here he is, keeping this GJ Report hidden from the public.
But you are right, the truth will eventually be exposed. We know what they are hiding.
Delay, defend, delay, delay. Isn’t that the tactic of criminal defense attorneys? Multiple continuances are part of the strategy of defense attorneys, not the judges. The judges need to quit being so liberal with criminals and their facilitators. No more continuances. Period.
So, ADN actually reported something factual? Or did I miss something somewhere?
Call me confused…didn’t we just vote to retain all judges?
Excellent, excellent! Muwahahahaa! All according to plan! Excellent!
Repeating the underlying dark rooted problem …”One problem is there is no accountability. Judges are not held accountable. … Another problem in Anchorage is there is no will to change.”
We need to pick on two or three of the offending judges and raise holy hell with them personally and judicially. Make their lives as miserable as they have made the defendants position for their non-accountability. Give no quarter and attack with vigor.
We need to fight as if there is no tomorrow. Fight just like the liberals do with producing personal and business wise total disruption.
Quit playing so stupid as we have —FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT