Videoconferencing Links Federal Courts and Public

From its beginning as a pilot program in a handful of federal appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts, videoconferencing has grown to link federal courts with remote locations, prisons, and far-flung divisional courts. The U.S. attorney's offices, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons also have videoconferencing programs that are accessible to the courts or are conducted in cooperation with federal court programs. The videoconferencing experience, although not for all judges or counsel who may prefer face-to-face meetings or who may feel there is an unfair advantage to only one party being present in the courtroom, is gaining acceptance in federal courts across the country.

Appeals Courts

Videoconferencing offers appellate panels increased scheduling flexibility and time savings. In some circuits where motions proceedings are handled routinely by teleconferencing, videoconferencing may be an improvement.

Currently, the Second, Tenth and District of Columbia Circuits make use of videoconferencing. With support from the Administrative Office, the Tenth Circuit began using videoconferencing with oral arguments in criminal cases, then expanded to civil cases, and later accommodated judges in remote locations at Kansas City, Wichita and Cheyenne. The process has been accompanied by some technological tweaking, according to Judge John C. Porfilio (10^th Cir.). "We've gone to three video cameras for a larger image of the bench for the benefit of the lawyers, and we've increased the broadcasting power. We'd like to improve the delay time, too. It's disconcerting at first to see lips move and then hear the voice. However, I've found that the lawyers who participate in videoconferenced sessions, once they get over the initial impact of arguing in front of a camera, argue just as they would in a courtroom." And, Porfilio says, lawyers don't mind going to Oklahoma City from Tulsa, for example, if it saves them a day trip to Denver. In fact, last September the situation was reversed when the court sat in Oklahoma City and the proceedings were videoconferenced to lawyers in a Denver courtroom.

This map notes those courts around the country currently using video-conferencing technology. Courts whose programs are "pending" have been either approved for funding and are in thr process of purchasing and installing equipment, or they are waiting for an agreement on share expenses with a prison site or the US Marshal Service.

District Courts

While the chief value of videocon-ferencing prisoner proceedings lies in the travel time saved by judicial officers and improved scheduling, videoconferencing also eliminates security concerns involved in the transportation of prisoners. The technology is routinely used for pretrial hearings with inmates to screen civil rights complaints. However, courts also use videoconferencing for other matters when there are compelling geographic and scheduling concerns.

Judge Fred Biery (W. D. Tex.) remembers not so long ago when the Del Rio courtroom in the Western District of Texas was regularly jammed with 50 to 60 defendants awaiting sentencing, while another 50 people would be awaiting arraignment.

"In the Western District of Texas," said Biery, "we've seen the number of felony defendants go from 150 to 800 in the last five years. Most of these are handled in the Del Rio divisional courthouse where there is no full-time judge." According to Biery, defendants for the once-a-month proceedings at the court were bused from all over the district.

"We could get through 50 to 60 sentencings a day if we moved along and didn't take lunch," said Biery. "These weren't complicated cases. But it was very impersonal." Several months ago, the district began videoconferencing sentencings from the San Antonio court. "We try to do between eight and 10 sentencings every Thursday morning from San Antonio," said Biery. "We do them individually and we give them the attention I think they deserve. The majority of the defendants don't speak English, so we use a translator. I think with the videconferencing the defendant has a better perspective on what is happening. With the cameras, it's like they are sitting six feet away. There is a one-on-one relationship that just wasn't possible before."

Some courts have taken the project a step further by using the technology to take witness testimony in trials. Other courts plan to expand to other courtroom proceedings and most are regularly using videoconferencing for administrative and training functions. However, in the federal courts, the legality of using videoconferencing to con-duct certain criminal proceedings is in question. The Ninth Circuit has held that videoconferencing of arraignments violates Rules 10 and 43 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which together require the presence of the defendant in open court.

Concerns also have been raised about the use of videoconferencing for in-court proceedings involving defendants represented by attorneys appointed under the Criminal Justice Act. Some of these concerns may be allayed by the success of its use in a steadily increasing range of proceedings and its obvious advantages to parties under special circumstances. Duke Argetsinger of the AO's Court Administration Policy Staff, who has worked extensively on video-conferencing projects since the inception of its use in federal courts observed, "Videoconferencing cannot replace the physical presence of a judge. It is a tool to enhance and supplement the services that the court provides to the public. Under unique geographic and caseload circumstances, it enables the court to do its work better."

Bankruptcy Courts

In Iowa, federal courts are linked to the state's fiber optic network, which has one point of presence in each of the state's 99 counties. The network also can link to other sites throughout the country. An Iowa bankruptcy trustee recently used the network to link a meeting of creditors to a debtor in Vancouver, Canada.

Bankruptcy Judge Lee Jackwig (S. D. Iowa) has used videoconferencing in bankruptcy hearings since 1996. To date, most hearings have been between Davenport and Des Moines, where Jackwig sits. "Instead of traveling six hours round trip to Davenport to handle routine matters every other month, I run down to the third floor in our courthouse and conduct the hearings. Now I'm `virtually' in Davenport every month and can be there with 10 minutes notice." At times Jackwig has had parties in up to five locations participating in a videoconferenced hearing. "I try to maintain the traditional courtroom feel as much as possible," said Jackwig. "In the beginning, the camera is pulled back to show the bench, the door through which I'll enter, and the deputy standing to say `All rise.' And everyone at the connecting site is expected to rise because they are part of the courtroom." All parties at all locations are able to see each other without any delay in the picture or the sound because of the state's fiber optic network.

Once the hearing begins, Jackwig likes to show a picture-within-a-picture on the video screen, of her sitting at the bench and the counsel table. Her own video screen shows the entire courtroom. "I feel I'm almost better able to assess the credibility of the witnesses on the videoconferencing screen," said Jackwig, "because in at least one of the trial courts, the judge has a partial view of the witness. When they're on the screen, I see them face to face."