Kevin Burke helped lead the effort to create the Hennepin County Drug Court in 1997, and advocated for the creation of the Hennepin County Mental Health Court as well. Appointed to the bench in 1984, he currently serves as an adjunct professor of law at the University of Minnesota and the University of St. Thomas Law School. The Center for Court Innovation’s Carolyn Turgeon spoke with Judge Burke about problem-solving justice.
Judge Jorge Simón served as the presiding judge at the Hartford Community Court in Hartford, Connecticut, from January 2003 unitl 2006. Judge Simón spoke with the Center for Court Innovation’s Carolyn Turgeon about the community court and how it works.
In 2009, Jonathan Lippman was named Chief Judge of New York State courts by Gov. David Paterson. Prior to being named chief judge, he served as the chief administrative judge to Judith S. Kaye and as the Presiding Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for the First Judicial Department. Judge Lippman has long been an advocate of problem-solving judicial reform (see, for example this op-ed).
Good Courts is the first book to describe the problem-solving court movement and features in-depth looks at Center for Court Innovation projects like the Midtown Community Court and Red Hook Community Justice Center, as well as other projects around the country, like Oregon’s Portland Community Court. By the Center for Court Innovation's founding director John Feinblatt and current director Greg Berman, Good Courts reviews the growing body of evidence that the problem-solving approach to justice is indeed producing positive results.
A summary of focus groups of judges in New York and California examining which practices of problem-solving courts can be integrated into conventional court operations.
This white paper examines the challenges and rewards of community prosecution programs in less populated and rural communities, using the experience of jurisdictions like Pueblo, Colorado; Madison County, Illinois; and Enotah, Georgia, as a guide.
Results from a survey of 500 state criminal court judges about their attitudes towards common problems within criminal courts as well as a variety of new tools and strategies for addressing these problems.
