Court: Superior Court, Rockville
Date: Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Time: 9:50a.m. -11:25a.m. In order to complete this assignment, a few classmates and I attended the court in Rockville. We arrived at the parking garage around 9:30a.m. We arrived in the courtroom on the main level at around 9:50 a.m. The matters we observed here were not quite what I was expecting. I knew not to expect anything too exciting or anything quite like what I see in movies or on television, but I didn’t think I’d witness what I did. Pretty much everything we saw resulted in a continuance. The pattern for what we saw was that the state’s attorney would read the case file, stating who the defendant was and what they had done wrong, along with police reports and any other pertinent information. The state’s attorney also noted whether or not the defendant applied for a particular program and whether or not the state opposed admission to said program (they did not oppose even once throughout the time that we were there). Then, the judge would address the defendant and state their rights (not necessarily every time, there was a precursory statement of rights before the court began its session, but there were times when certain rights were re-stated or new rights needed to be addressed). The judge also asked the defendants if there was anything they had to say in support of their admission to whatever program they were applying for, and usually granted the program and a continuance for (usually) one year. Pretty much all of the cases we witnessed were like this. My most note-worthy impressions definitely started with how casually everyone was dressed. Walking from the parking garage to the courthouse, we saw a man in jeans and a button-down dress shirt, with fairly nice shoes. I thought that was casual, only to be later surprised when we got to the courtroom to find that most of the people in the gallery, especially the ones who were later identified as defendants, were dressed even more casually. We saw cotton shirts, jeans, sneakers, windbreakers, and all sorts of casual attire. It seemed that the people who had more to lose, namely the younger defendants whose academic future and careers may have been at stake, were the ones who were adorn with dressier attire. Something else that made a great impression on me was the security guard monitoring the metal detector at the entrance to the courthouse. I was expecting him to be somewhat grumpy, or even just neutral, but he ended up to be really nice and helpful. I figured a person in that position would have to deal with a lot of mischief and grief and would likely have an unhappy disposition about coming to work every day. This man was not, and it was very comforting. When we asked him for a little direction and informed him that we wished not to offend anyone, he pointed us to the courtroom and implied that things were casual and that we likely wouldn’t offend anyone. At the end of our time in the courtroom, a different kind of defendant was brought into the courtroom. I was most surprised by the outfits that the assumed incarcerated individuals were wearing. The movies encourage society to believe that bright orange is the usual color for jumpsuits, but these men were wearing a creamy brown-ish beige color and I found my thoughts wondering as to why. I figured orange was usually the color of choice, should the individual escape the chains and handcuffs or supervision of an officer or bailiff, due to the fact that it is easily picked out of a crowd. This color, although unusual (and quite unattractive in my eyes), was a lighter hue than I think would be effective for this purpose. It did, however, make me feel like I wasn’t as much in danger as I would have been with someone in bright orange. I was also impressed with the fact that there were two guards per jumpsuited individual at all times. One was blocking the entrance through which they entered the court, and the other was on the opposite side of the defendant, in the direction of the other exits. This seemed like just the right amount of supervision, it didn’t seem to ostentatious or embarrassing, and it didn’t seem like too little. Just right. As for justice, I think the results of my visit were border-line. The judge seemed very fair. She came off as an intelligent woman and I respected her authority from the get-go. She did, however, grant a few more continuances than I would have expected. She was lenient in some cases where it was important (one woman needed to delay her entrance to an alcohol program because she needed to make arrangements for transportation since her license was suspended), but a little too easy-going in other instances. This one younger gentleman had apparently been informed of the programs he needed to apply to and how much it would cost, and yet he came to court without having filed one of his applications and without any money. He claimed he had recalled applying but was willing to admit that if the court didn’t have his application, he’d need to file another one. The judge allowed him a continuance initially for 3 weeks, then changed it to 5 weeks for him to have enough time to get the money together. But then the defendant asked for a different date because Wednesdays didn’t work for him! I was surprised he would even think to ask, but the judge said that a Thursday was fine, and he had 5 weeks and 1 day to get the money and submit the application, despite the fact that he had already been informed of these requirements. His seeming lack of motivation was not lost on her, but she was willing to give him another chance. This seemed fair, but only if the judge did not allow for another continuance should he show up at his next court date without the necessary materials. Overall, the judge seemed understanding and fair. Because most of the events we saw were just re-scheduling or discussion of programs needed to drop the charges, there did not seem like there was much room for injustice to occur, but given the situations we were witness to, I think everyone who deserved a second chance was given one, and
-first guy in casual clothes near parking garage
-security guard was really nice
-matters observed included mostly continunances
-with exception of few cases at the end, which were still continuances but they were for incarcerated individuals
-noteworthy impressions: clothing, nice security guard, metal detector set off by my shoes, judge was not wearing white wig, state’s attorneys were not all dressed the same way