Presiding Judge Spurns Stopgap Steps to Ease Court Congestion

Night court and other stopgap measures will keep Orange County’s congested Superior Court system functioning, at least until permanent financing for major expansion is found, the county’s chief administrative officer has concluded.

Responding to a plea from judges for help, County Administrative Officer Larry Parrish rejected what he described as a “pessimistic” view. Parrish pointed to short-term expansion now under way and noted that paying the bill for permanent solutions ultimately may require voter approval.

Parrish’s response was quickly deemed “not acceptable” by Harmon G. Scoville, presiding Orange County Superior Court judge, who asked the Board of Supervisors last month for immediate assistance in dealing with overcrowded courtrooms.

Parrish, in a Feb. 26 letter obtained Tuesday by The Times, encouraged Scoville to begin night court sessions and recommended remodeling a building in Anaheim this year to accommodate nine or 10 new courtrooms.

In an interview, Scoville said Parrish was unrealistic and lacked an understanding of the serious threat to court operations.

“We were told we are going to be sent to a place (Anaheim) where we don’t have the legal authority to sit,” Scoville said. “That doesn’t sit well with us. That’s not acceptable to me or my colleagues.”

Only the state Legislature can select locations where Superior Court may be convened, and the Anaheim location is not one of them, Scoville said. Although legislation will be pushed this year to allow the Anaheim building, which is situated on Homer Street, to be used for court business, passage is uncertain, Scoville contended.

Scoville praised county supervisors for “extending cooperation” but said there is no “satisfactory working arrangement” with Parrish, who could not be reached for comment.

In his letter, Parrish praised judges for “controlling” the mounting backlog of Superior Court cases in Orange County in an “equitable” manner and pointedly mentioned other competing demands on county resources.

“As you know, the demands for additional resources, particularly space, from not only the courts but also the entire criminal justice system, far exceed the county’s current fiscal capability,” Parrish wrote.

“As a result, we have attempted to prudently plan for the immediate and long-term needs of the court given the realities of the county’s ability to support them.”

Parrish said it is not yet possible to assess the effects of a policy instituted last October by Dist. Atty. Cecil Hicks that forbids prosecutors to participate in plea-bargaining discussions of felony cases in judges’ chambers.

But Scoville said that policy, which has reduced the number of guilty pleas and dramatically increased the number of criminal cases scheduled for trial, is costing $500,000 a month in added demands on court resources.

Parrish agreed that additional courtrooms are needed this year, but he said they can be provided through remodeling the building in Anaheim.

Scoville contended, however, that the Anaheim facility will not be enough, based on projections of court business. Another suggestion by Scoville--moving 10 family law courtrooms out of the 1835100526leased facilities nearby--was rejected by Parrish.

County officials are continuing to plan for a new $130- to $150-million criminal courts building. About $1.2 million is now being spent for preliminary building designs.

But Scoville, in an interview, questioned Parrish’s commitment to the new building. The presiding judge said he fears that the $4 million needed for further planning may be cut this year.

Scoville recalled practicing law in Orange County before the existing courthouse opened in 1968. For years, court operations were spread about outside the old county courthouse.

“We used to try cases in basements, where we stopped every time the toilets flushed,” Scoville said. “I don’t think we should subject the citizens of Orange County to that again.”