Confidence in Court System Dips : Justice: Statewide poll finds a less favorable attitude toward the legal network after the King case. Favoritism for white males is also perceived, but judges’ competence is rated high.

Nearly half of the Californians questioned in a far-ranging new poll said they have less confidence in the court system after the Rodney King case, the state Judicial Council reported Thursday.

The survey, the first of its kind in this state, also showed that while respondents viewed the courts more favorably than the governor’s office, the Legislature and the news media, 52% had a “poor” or “only fair” overall opinion of the state judiciary.

And although most thought highly of the competence of judges, there was widespread belief that the system favors white males, gives women less credibility and is unfair to minorities, the poor and criminal defendants.

The survey was released by the council, the policy-making arm of the judiciary, at a symposium on the future of the California courts, sponsored by a commission launched last year by Chief Justice Malcolm M. Lucas.

The poll, conducted this fall by the research firm Yankelovich Clancy Shulman, surveyed 1,506 people, representing a cross-section of lawyers and the general public. Sixty-one percent of the public said they had little or no familiarity with court operations and organization. The results of the questioning caused concern among officials, lawyers and others attending the symposium.

“When 52% of Californians do not think highly of the courts, that tells me we have to come up with program to give people a better understanding of the system,” said Robert R. Dockson, chairman emeritus of CalFed and chairman of the Commission on the Future of the Courts.

Respondents were questioned on a variety of topics, including their view of the court system after not guilty verdicts were reached last April in the trial of four Los Angeles police officers in the King case.

Of all the respondents, 45% said their confidence in the courts had decreased, 47% said it remained the same, 5% said it increased and 3% said they did not know. Forty-nine percent of the Anglos, 41% of the Latinos, 38% of the blacks and 34% of the Asians said they had less confidence. Three percent of the Anglos, 10% of the Latinos, 5% of the Asians and none of the blacks said they had more confidence.

Elizabeth Ellers, senior vice president of the research firm, said the fact that the King case had no effect on 62% of blacks questioned could reflect low levels of confidence before the trial occurred.

Among those questioned were 251 attorneys, whose evaluations of the system often contrasted markedly with those of the public.

Lawyers expressed most concern that the courts were too expensive, that the wealthy received better treatment, that cases were delayed too long and that decisions were influenced by politics.

Members of the public said their chief concerns were that minorities were not treated equally, decisions depended on where a trial was held and who was the judge, defendants were not treated fairly and judges and juries did not believe women as often as men.

Lawyers said the “key strengths” of the system were reflected in its refusal to favor white males and its ability to produce correct decisions and treat defendants fairly.

General respondents said the strengths were shown in skilled judges, a “day in court” for citizens and a democratic process in which anyone can participate.

Respondents also gave broad approval to several ideas for improving the system, including neighborhood panels to resolve minor crimes and disputes; alternative sentences such as community service; more punishment for lawyers who bring frivolous cases; more flexibility for judges in sentencing, and requiring losers in civil cases to pay the winner’s attorney fees.

Two commission members, state Appellate Justice George Nicholson of Sacramento and Los Angeles attorney Richard Chernick, expressed hope that future burdens on the courts could be eased through increased use of new technology and alternative methods of settling disputes.

“Broader use of (alternative methods) means more people will have access to the court system,” said Chernick.