Plan on Court Consolidation Will Shift Judges’ Roles : Law: More jurists will hear civil suits and serious criminal cases. Some have called the changes unnecessary and illegal.

More judges will be available to hear cases involving civil suits and serious criminal matters when a court-reorganization plan goes into effect next month, court officials said Friday.

Under the consolidation plan, scheduled to go into effect a week from Monday, a number of the county’s 27 judges have received new assignments and the distinction between the Superior and Municipal courts has blurred.

Two Municipal Court judges will be transferred to the more prestigious Superior Court to handle felony cases, including capital-punishment trials.

The downside: fewer judges will hear misdemeanor cases.

But officials say the public will not be adversely affected by that because judges’ assignments have been better organized to maximize efficiency.

“I think the bottom line is we get more and better work out of the same number of people,” said Superior Court Presiding Judge Melinda A. Johnson.

Others, however, believe the changes to be unnecessary and illegal.

“I just happen to believe that this is an unlawful takeover of power that does not belong to the judges,” said Superior Court Judge James McNally, who has criticized the consolidation from the start.

But Johnson disagreed. “We think it’s legal or we wouldn’t be doing it,” she said.

Under the changes, McNally was transferred from hearing felony matters to presiding over cases involving child neglect and abuse.

As it now stands, California law requires counties to operate with a two-tiered judicial system. Municipal Courts oversee relatively minor criminal and civil matters, and Superior Courts handle more serious cases.

McNally claimed that the consolidation is a step toward a single-tiered court system.

Although proponents of the plan say it will help make the courts more efficient, McNally argued that “our business is not efficiency. Our business is justice.”

“If you want to talk efficiency, the most efficient way is a lynch mob with a hundred feet of hemp rope,” he said.

But Municipal Court Presiding Judge John R. Smiley and other jurists who designed the plan deny that they are trying to unify the Superior and Municipal courts. Instead, they contend they are only cross-assigning judges to give the court more flexibility in directing its resources to where they are needed most.

They say the flexibility is needed because of new legislation, such as the “three strikes” statute, which requires life sentences for some habitual offenders.

In addition, nine judges will begin hearing major civil cases, compared to eight before the consolidation, Johnson said.

Nearly every aspect of the courts’ operations, with the exception of juvenile and family law, will be affected by the consolidation, she said.

Sheila Gonzalez, the Ventura County courts executive officer, told a noon gathering Friday that similar plans have been effective in San Bernardino, Napa, Yolo and Los Angeles counties.

“All these counties are reporting wonderful success stories,” Gonzalez said.

Unveiling the changes to a crowded lunchtime meeting of court staff members and attorneys, Smiley smiled broadly after explaining the changes, which have been under discussion for about a year.

“I am very proud of what we have done,” he said.