Here is the text we could read:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
:
:
In Re: 43rd Judicial District
38 MM 2020
Petition for Emergency Judicial Order
Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 1952(B)(2)
Petition for Emergency Judicial Order Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 1952(B)(2)
TO THE JUSTICES OF THE PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT:
Margherita Patti-Worthington, President Judge of the 43rd Judicial District,
hereby files the following Petition for Emergency Judicial Order Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A.
No. 1952(B)(2) and in support thereof, avers as follows:
1.
On March 16, 2020, we declared a judicial emergency in response to the
COVID-19 Pandemic.
30, 2021.
2.
By subsequent orders, we extended the judicial emergency through June
3.
On June 21, 2021, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court entered an order
stating “[e]ffective July 6, 2021, operation of the Unified Judicial System shall return to
pre-pandemic status. All courtrooms, adjacent judicial facilities, chambers, and offices
within the Unified Judicial System shall be fully opened and staffed by judges and other
4.
On June 24, 2021, in response to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s June
21st Order, we filed a “Petition for Emergency Judicial Order Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No.
1952(B)(2),” which was granted, in part, by Order of the Supreme Court dated June 29,
personnel.”
2021.
5.
The Supreme Court’s June 29th Order allowed this Court to “continue to
suspend any state or local rule that restricts the use of advanced communication
technology (ACT) in court proceedings,” with certain qualifications, which this Court has
followed.
District.
6.
On August 19, 2021, this Court filed a second petition, seeking to extend
the suspension of rules that restrict the use of ACT, citing specific statistics regarding
the rising number of COVID-19 cases in this County and Pennsylvania, as well as the
below average vaccination rates and high transmission rates in the Forty-Third Judicial
7.
This Court’s August 19th Petition was denied without prejudice for failure to
“sufficiently detail how the Forty-Third Judicial District is presently experiencing a
county-specific judicial emergency justifying the requested relief under Rule of Judicial
Administration 1952(B)(2).”
8.
For the following reasons, we again request that the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court grant permission for this Court to continue to suspend any state or local
rule that restricts the use of advanced communication technology (ACT) in court
proceedings, through December 31, 2021 as a proactive, preventative and necessary
measure and in support thereof avers:
a.
The full vaccination rate in the 43rd Judicial District is currently
under the average for all of Pennsylvania and our daily case count
continues to rise. Monroe County has seen a recent surge in
COVID-19 cases: the 7-day average on July 6, 2021 was 2 while
the 7-day average as of August 6, 2021 was 24, representing a
1100% increase in just one month. Moreover, the 7-day average
continues to rise, most recently to 39 on August 29, 2021.
b.
Our local medical experts have opined that the statistics are
artificially low due to lower than average testing rates in the
community.
c.
Despite the potential for artificially low numbers, Monroe County is
classified as a “high” transmission zone, with an incidence rate of
142.7 per 100,000 residents—the third highest in Pennsylvania,
above larger jurisdictions including Philadelphia and Allegheny
d.
Additionally, average daily hospitalization rates in Monroe County
continue in an upward trend and, more urgently, the percentage of
ICU beds used for COVID-19 cases has increased 10% over the
Counties.
last week.
e.
The statewide statistics are likewise increasingly troublesome. In
this Court’s August 19th Petition, we cited a 7-day average for all of
Pennsylvania of 2,098 new COVID-19 cases. This week, the 7-day
average is 3255—a 55% increase in less than two weeks.
f.
The Delta Variant of COVID-19, in conjunction with continued low
vaccination rates and increasing breakthrough infections, has
proven particularly contagious and poses significant health, safety,
and welfare issues. A recent uptick in COVID-19 cases and
exposures among court and court-related employees and staff,
despite requiring masking and social distancing (as possible) inside
all Court Facilities, has required quarantining of staff and judicial
officers.
g.
Notwithstanding, all courts in the 43rd Judicial District have been
and have remained open since our declaration of judicial
emergency with health and safety measures in place that have
enabled us to avoid any major outbreaks of COVID-19 among court
and court-related employees and staff.
h.
We have been able to remain consistently open and operational by
using both ACT and in-person proceedings at our Magisterial
District Justice offices and the Court of Common Pleas. ACT has
been vital in our ability to remain open.
i.
The continued use of ACT in Preliminary Hearings, Preliminary and
Formal Arraignments, Pretrial Conferences, Guilty Plea Hearings,
Bench Warrant Hearings, Sentencing Hearings, Post Sentence
Motions Hearings, Bail Hearings, and PCRA Hearings is necessary
during this COVID-19 surge in Monroe County. The availability of
ACT as an alternative to conducting in-person proceedings in the
above matters allows this Court to limit the number of people in the
Courthouse, overall, and the courtrooms, individually, to prevent the
spread of COVID-19, and increase the availability of lawyers to
handle multiple matters across multiple courtrooms or counties.
ACT also allows this Court to continue conducting these types of
proceedings with individuals incarcerated at state correctional
facilities, to further cut down on transportation-related exposure. All
judges and staff have been and will continue to preside in the
courtroom and Court Facilities.
j.
Since March of 2020, we have had 8,050 criminal dispositions,
including 21 jury trials and 20 bench trials. We have been working
consistently over the last several months to reduce the backlog of
cases that resulted from the initial state-wide shut down of Court
Facilities. We have been able to maintain these numbers, despite
space limitations, through the use of ACT. In our Courthouse, we
are limited, based on safe social distancing standards, to selecting
k.
Nearly every Custody petition filed in this Court requires either a
only one jury at a time in our largest courtroom, as opposed to
multiple juries in multiple courtrooms. Additionally, throughout the
course of a jury trial, we must internally simulcast the proceedings
to another location in order to maintain proper public access.
Furthermore, we have been conducting all bench trials via ACT in
an effort to free Courtroom space for jury trials to keep cases
moving through the system in a fair and efficient manner.
hearing or a conciliation conference. Just last month, we had
approximately 124 Custody petitions filed. These hearings and
conciliations are conducted utilizing ACT. Without the use of ACT,
we would be entirely unable to process our current Custody
caseload. As explained above, Court Facility space that can be
effectively used with proper social distancing is at a premium and
must be used for jury trials where possible. By being able to
conduct Custody hearings and conciliations via ACT, we do not
have to divert precious Court Facility space, we can protect the
litigants, including children who are not yet eligible for vaccination,
and Court officers involved, and we can keep up with the ever
increasing Custody filings without compromising on space, safety,
or efficiency.
l.
The use of ACT has been favorably received by our justice partners
in that it has proven efficient and effective in allowing the courts of
the Forty-Third Judicial District to move matters through the system.
The continued use of ACT will allow for further prompt resolution of
cases.
m.
Additionally, the vaccination rate of our local jail population (31%) is
well below the statewide average and ACT has proven to increase
the safety of prisoners while providing a cost-effective alternative to
the often unnecessary transport of prisoners to and from in-person
proceedings.
n.
85% or more of preliminary hearings are waived and the Magisterial
District Justice offices of this Judicial District do not provide enough
space to effectively implement social distancing precautions. ACT
proceedings in this Judicial District have and continue to be
invaluable to the health, safety, and welfare of all involved while
maintaining the ability to move cases through the judicial process.
o.
For example, with the use of ACT proceedings for incarcerated
individuals, we have been able to avoid transporting these
individuals to MDJ Offices by police vehicles, which are small and
confined and offer no ability for social distancing, and then back to
the jail, where there is limited space to effectively quarantine. If this
Judicial District were forced to abandon our pandemic-related ACT
practices, these types of exposures could easily spark a
widespread infection at the jail.
p.
This Court seeks permission to continue using ACT in the manner
we have been since the beginning of this pandemic pursuant to the
definition of “emergency” as “an event or events that . . . poses a
threat to the health and safety of court personnel, court users or the
public,” Pa. R.J.A. No. 1950, in order to prevent a major outbreak of
COVID-19 at the jail or in any judicial facility, and to continue
processing matters safely, fairly, and expeditiously.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that in consideration of efficiencies in
reducing backlog, cost effectiveness, and the health, safety, and welfare of the public,
court and county employees, and the judges and staff of the 43rd Judicial District, this
Court provide the following relief:
1. Authorize the President Judge of the 43rd Judicial District to suspend any
state or local rule that restricts, directly or indirectly, the use of ACT in court
proceedings until December 31, 2021, with the exception of Rule of Criminal
Procedure 600, to allow the continued use of ACT where at all possible and
practicable for any and all proceedings within this Judicial District.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________________
Margherita Patti-Worthington, President Judge
43rd Judicial District
Monroe County, Pennsylvania
