LAW DAY 2004 Presented by Judge Bill Filmore .

LAW DAY 2004LAW DAY 2004Presented byPresented by

Judge Bill Judge Bill FilmoreFilmore

www.filmore.netwww.filmore.net

What is Law Day?What is Law Day?

Began in 1958Began in 1958 Law Day, May 1, is a national day of Law Day, May 1, is a national day of

celebration, where we traditionally honor celebration, where we traditionally honor our freedoms as Americans – freedoms our freedoms as Americans – freedoms protected by our laws and legal protected by our laws and legal institutionsinstitutions

The legal profession has played a major The legal profession has played a major role in ensuring that the rule of law role in ensuring that the rule of law remains strong in our nation, that it remains strong in our nation, that it pursues justice and defends liberty. pursues justice and defends liberty.

Beginning of Law DayBeginning of Law Day

1957 vision of 1957 vision of Washington D.C. Washington D.C. attorney Charles S. attorney Charles S. Rhyne serving as ABA Rhyne serving as ABA PresidentPresident

Proclamation by Proclamation by President Eisenhower on President Eisenhower on Feb. 3, 1958Feb. 3, 1958

Proclamation 1Proclamation 1stst Paragraph Paragraph

WHEREAS, it is fitting that the people WHEREAS, it is fitting that the people of this Nation should remember with of this Nation should remember with pride and vigilantly guard the great pride and vigilantly guard the great heritage of liberty, justice and heritage of liberty, justice and equality under law which our equality under law which our forefathers bequeathed to us; forefathers bequeathed to us; and . . .and . . .

Congressional Resolution Congressional Resolution Establishing Law Day (1961)Establishing Law Day (1961)

US Code, Title 36, Section 164US Code, Title 36, Section 164The first day of May of each year is hereby The first day of May of each year is hereby designated as Law Day, U.S.A. It is set aside as a designated as Law Day, U.S.A. It is set aside as a special day of celebration by the American people special day of celebration by the American people in appreciation of their liberties and the in appreciation of their liberties and the reaffirmation of their loyalty to the United States of reaffirmation of their loyalty to the United States of America; of their rededication to the ideals of America; of their rededication to the ideals of equality and justice under law in their relations with equality and justice under law in their relations with each other as well as with other nations; and for each other as well as with other nations; and for the cultivation of that respect for law that is so vital the cultivation of that respect for law that is so vital to the democratic way of life. to the democratic way of life.

The President of the United States is authorized The President of the United States is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon all public officials to display the flag of the United all public officials to display the flag of the United States on all government buildings on such day and States on all government buildings on such day and inviting the people of the United States to observe inviting the people of the United States to observe such day with suitable ceremonies and other such day with suitable ceremonies and other appropriate ways, through public bodies and appropriate ways, through public bodies and private organizations as well as in schools and private organizations as well as in schools and other suitable places. other suitable places.

LAW DAY THEMESLAW DAY THEMES

Since 1974 themes Since 1974 themes have be established have be established for Law Dayfor Law Day

The themes since The themes since 1997 have been 1997 have been entitled “Celebrate entitled “Celebrate Your Freedom”Your Freedom”

Individual ThemesIndividual Themes 1997 Celebrate Your Freedom: First 1997 Celebrate Your Freedom: First

Amendment Freedoms Amendment Freedoms 1998 Celebrate Your Freedom: Due 1998 Celebrate Your Freedom: Due

Process Guarantees Process Guarantees 1999 Celebrate Your Freedom: The Quest 1999 Celebrate Your Freedom: The Quest

for Equality for Equality 2000 Celebrate Your Freedom: Speak Up 2000 Celebrate Your Freedom: Speak Up

for Democracy and Diversity for Democracy and Diversity 2001 Celebrate Your Freedom: Protecting 2001 Celebrate Your Freedom: Protecting

the Best Interests of Our Children the Best Interests of Our Children 2002 Celebrate Your Freedom: Assuring 2002 Celebrate Your Freedom: Assuring

Equal Justice for AllEqual Justice for All 2003 Celebrate Your Freedom: 2003 Celebrate Your Freedom:

Independent Courts Protect Our Liberties Independent Courts Protect Our Liberties

For 2004 - The Theme For 2004 - The Theme is…is…

To Win Equality by Law:To Win Equality by Law:

Brown vs. Board Brown vs. Board of Educationof Education

Plessy v. FergusonPlessy v. Ferguson ( (18961896))

The Supreme Court of the US ruled that The Supreme Court of the US ruled that separate but equal railroad cars for blacks separate but equal railroad cars for blacks and white passengers did not violate equal and white passengers did not violate equal protection:protection:

The object of the (14The object of the (14thth) Amendment was ) Amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law, equality of the two races before the law, but in the nature of things it could not but in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political, equalitydistinguished from political, equality. .

Justice John Marshall HarlanJustice John Marshall Harlan Harlan is best known for Harlan is best known for

his eloquent dissent in his eloquent dissent in the 1896 case, the 1896 case, Plessy vs Plessy vs FergusonFerguson, which upheld , which upheld a Louisiana law a Louisiana law requiring blacks and requiring blacks and whites to ride in whites to ride in separate railroad cars. separate railroad cars. Harlan criticized the Harlan criticized the Court's adoption of the Court's adoption of the "separate but equal" "separate but equal" doctrine in these doctrine in these memorable words: "Our memorable words: "Our Constitution is color Constitution is color blind and neither knows blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes nor tolerates classes among citizens."among citizens."

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EQUAL OPPORTUNITY DEFERRED DEFERRED

THE NATION ADOPTED THE NATION ADOPTED RACIAL SEGREGATION RACIAL SEGREGATION AS PUBLIC POLICY in the AS PUBLIC POLICY in the 1896 United States 1896 United States Supreme Court decision, Supreme Court decision, Plessy v FergusonPlessy v Ferguson. .

The Plessy case The Plessy case centered on segregated centered on segregated seating in passenger seating in passenger cars on Louisiana trains. cars on Louisiana trains. After this decision After this decision segregation spread in segregation spread in public accommodations public accommodations and schools. and schools.

Jim Crow LawsJim Crow Laws

From the 1880s into the 1960s, a majority From the 1880s into the 1960s, a majority of American states enforced segregation of American states enforced segregation through "Jim Crow" laws (so called after a through "Jim Crow" laws (so called after a black character in minstrel shows). black character in minstrel shows).

From Delaware to California, and from North From Delaware to California, and from North Dakota to Texas, many states (and cities, Dakota to Texas, many states (and cities, too) could impose legal punishments on too) could impose legal punishments on people for consorting with members of people for consorting with members of another race. another race.

The most common types of laws forbade The most common types of laws forbade intermarriage and ordered business owners intermarriage and ordered business owners and public institutions to keep their black and public institutions to keep their black and white clientele separated. and white clientele separated.

Examples of Jim Crow Laws in AlabamaExamples of Jim Crow Laws in Alabama NursesNurses No person or corporation shall require any white No person or corporation shall require any white

female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in hospitals, either female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in hospitals, either public or private, in which negro men are placed. public or private, in which negro men are placed.

BusesBuses All passenger stations in this state operated by any All passenger stations in this state operated by any motor transportation company shall have separate waiting motor transportation company shall have separate waiting rooms or space and separate ticket windows for the white and rooms or space and separate ticket windows for the white and colored races. colored races.

RailroadsRailroads The conductor of each passenger train is The conductor of each passenger train is authorized and required to assign each passenger to the car or authorized and required to assign each passenger to the car or the division of the car, when it is divided by a partition, the division of the car, when it is divided by a partition, designated for the race to which such passenger belongs. designated for the race to which such passenger belongs.

RestaurantsRestaurants It shall be unlawful to conduct a restaurant or It shall be unlawful to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment. street is provided for each compartment.

Pool and Billiard RoomsPool and Billiard Rooms It shall be unlawful for a negro It shall be unlawful for a negro and white person to play together or in company with each and white person to play together or in company with each other at any game of pool or billiards. other at any game of pool or billiards.

Toilet Facilities, MaleToilet Facilities, Male Every employer of white or negro Every employer of white or negro males shall provide for such white or negro males reasonably males shall provide for such white or negro males reasonably accessible and separate toilet facilities. accessible and separate toilet facilities.

The One who laid the ground workThe One who laid the ground work

You have a large You have a large number of people number of people who have never who have never heard of Charlie heard of Charlie Houston.Houston.

That man was the That man was the engineer of all of engineer of all of it… if you do it it… if you do it legally, Charlie legally, Charlie Houston made it Houston made it possible.possible.

Thurgood MarshallThurgood Marshall

Charlie HoustonCharlie Houston Houston was born in Houston was born in

1895 in Washington 1895 in Washington D.C.D.C.

1915 Graduated 1915 Graduated magna cum laudemagna cum laude from Amherst Collegefrom Amherst College

Graduated Graduated cum laude cum laude from Harvard Law from Harvard Law School in 1922School in 1922

He was first African-He was first African-American Editor of American Editor of Harvard Law ReviewHarvard Law Review

Vice-Dean (1929-35) Vice-Dean (1929-35) of Howard Law School of Howard Law School training ¼ of nation’s training ¼ of nation’s black law students.black law students.

1935-40 Special 1935-40 Special Counsel to NAACPCounsel to NAACP

Charlie Houston (con’t)Charlie Houston (con’t) 1935-48 – Argued 8 cases before the US Supreme 1935-48 – Argued 8 cases before the US Supreme

Court and won 7.Court and won 7. April 26, 1950, Died at age of 54.April 26, 1950, Died at age of 54. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, “when Brown v. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, “when Brown v.

Board of Education was being argued in the Board of Education was being argued in the Supreme Court, … there were some two dozen Supreme Court, … there were some two dozen lawyers on the side of the Negroes fighting for lawyers on the side of the Negroes fighting for their schools,… and of those thirty lawyers … there their schools,… and of those thirty lawyers … there were only two who hadn’t been touched by Charlie were only two who hadn’t been touched by Charlie Houston.”Houston.”

Federal Circuit Judge A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr. Federal Circuit Judge A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr. wrote: “You must understand this: without wrote: “You must understand this: without BrownBrown there would have been no civil rights movement, there would have been no civil rights movement, no civil rights act and no voting rights act. Without no civil rights act and no voting rights act. Without Houston there would have been no Houston there would have been no BrownBrown.” .”

Houston paved the way for Houston paved the way for BrownBrown

Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada (1938)(1938) The University of Missouri refused The University of Missouri refused to admit Lloyd Gaines to its law school to admit Lloyd Gaines to its law school because it believed the school was only for because it believed the school was only for whites. It was common for the state to whites. It was common for the state to send black students to neighboring states send black students to neighboring states for courses of study not offered in the for courses of study not offered in the black schools. Since Missouri did not have black schools. Since Missouri did not have a separate and equal law school for a separate and equal law school for African Americans, the U.S. Supreme Court African Americans, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Gaines must be allowed to attend ruled Gaines must be allowed to attend the University of Missouri Law School. the University of Missouri Law School.

McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education (1950)for Higher Education (1950)

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that George The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that George W. McLaurin, a student who was required to W. McLaurin, a student who was required to eat and study at separate tables, must be eat and study at separate tables, must be treated the same as white students. treated the same as white students.

Chief Justice Fred Vinson said in the ruling Chief Justice Fred Vinson said in the ruling that separate accommodations denied that separate accommodations denied McLaurin “his personal and present rights to McLaurin “his personal and present rights to equal protection of the laws” under the 14equal protection of the laws” under the 14thth Amendment. Amendment.

Continuing, Vinson said “McLaurin must Continuing, Vinson said “McLaurin must receive the same treatment . . . as students receive the same treatment . . . as students of other races.” of other races.”

Sweatt v. Painter (1950)Sweatt v. Painter (1950)

This case was an important This case was an important predecessor to predecessor to Brown v. Board of Brown v. Board of EducationEducation, because the U.S. , because the U.S. Supreme Court decided 9-0 that Supreme Court decided 9-0 that the “separate but equal” the “separate but equal” doctrine established in the doctrine established in the PlessyPlessy case was unworkable and case was unworkable and ultimately doomed.ultimately doomed.

Combined Combined BrownBrown Cases 1951-54 Cases 1951-54 Five cases from Delaware, Kansas, Washington, Five cases from Delaware, Kansas, Washington,

D.C., South Carolina and Virginia were appealed to D.C., South Carolina and Virginia were appealed to the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court combined these cases into a single case Court combined these cases into a single case which eventually became Brown v. Board of which eventually became Brown v. Board of Education. This grouping was significant because it Education. This grouping was significant because it showed school segregation as a national issue, not showed school segregation as a national issue, not just a southern one. The five case were:just a southern one. The five case were:

DelawareDelaware – Belton v. Gebhart (Bulah v. Gebhart) – Belton v. Gebhart (Bulah v. Gebhart) KansasKansas – Brown v. Board of Education – Brown v. Board of Education Washington, D.C.Washington, D.C. – Bolling v. Sharp – Bolling v. Sharp South CarolinaSouth Carolina – Biggs v. Elliot – Biggs v. Elliot VirginiaVirginia – Davis v. County School Board of Prince – Davis v. County School Board of Prince

Edward County Edward County

DelawareDelaware – Belton v. Gebhart – Belton v. Gebhart (Bulah v. Gebhart)(Bulah v. Gebhart)

A Delaware court ruled that the plaintiffs A Delaware court ruled that the plaintiffs were entitled to immediate admission to were entitled to immediate admission to White public schools. White public schools.

In both of the In both of the GebhartGebhart cases, the court ruled cases, the court ruled that the plaintiffs were being denied equal that the plaintiffs were being denied equal protection of the law and ordered that the protection of the law and ordered that the 11 children involved be immediately 11 children involved be immediately admitted to Delaware’s White schools. The admitted to Delaware’s White schools. The board of education appealed the decision. board of education appealed the decision. (Only case where the Plaintiffs won below)(Only case where the Plaintiffs won below)

Washington, D.C.Washington, D.C. – Bolling v. – Bolling v. SharpSharp

Charles Houston provided legal representation for Charles Houston provided legal representation for the Consolidated Parents Group, who, under the the Consolidated Parents Group, who, under the direction of Gardner Bishop, attempted to enroll a direction of Gardner Bishop, attempted to enroll a group of Black students in all White John Philip group of Black students in all White John Philip Sousa Junior High School, in Washington, D.C.Sousa Junior High School, in Washington, D.C.

In 1950 while preparing the Bolling case, Charles In 1950 while preparing the Bolling case, Charles Hamilton Houston suffered a heart attack. As a Hamilton Houston suffered a heart attack. As a result he asked colleague and friend James Nabritt, result he asked colleague and friend James Nabritt, Jr. to help Gardner Bishop and his group. At that Jr. to help Gardner Bishop and his group. At that point the equalization of facilities idea was dropped point the equalization of facilities idea was dropped and Nabritt replaced it with a challenge to and Nabritt replaced it with a challenge to segregation per se.segregation per se.

The The BollingBolling case became one of the consolidated case became one of the consolidated BrownBrown cases. The U. S. Supreme Court would cases. The U. S. Supreme Court would eventually file a separate opinion on eventually file a separate opinion on BollingBolling because the 14th Amendment was not applicable because the 14th Amendment was not applicable in Washington, D.C. in Washington, D.C.

South CarolinaSouth Carolina – Biggs v. Elliot – Biggs v. Elliot

This South Carolina case went to trial. This South Carolina case went to trial. Marshall and the NAACP presented a vast Marshall and the NAACP presented a vast array of social science evidence showing array of social science evidence showing how segregation harmed Black school how segregation harmed Black school children, including evidence from children, including evidence from sociologist Kenneth Clark's controversial sociologist Kenneth Clark's controversial "Doll Study." "Doll Study."

The U. S. District Court denied the The U. S. District Court denied the BriggsBriggs plaintiff’s request to order desegregation of plaintiff’s request to order desegregation of Clarendon County, SC, schools and instead Clarendon County, SC, schools and instead ordered the equalization of Black schools. ordered the equalization of Black schools. Judge Julius Waring was the lone dissenter. Judge Julius Waring was the lone dissenter.

VirginiaVirginia – Davis v. County School – Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward CountyBoard of Prince Edward County

NAACP lawyer Spottswood Robinson NAACP lawyer Spottswood Robinson filed filed DavisDavis v. v. Prince Edward CountyPrince Edward County, , a challenge to Virginia's segregated a challenge to Virginia's segregated schools. schools.

Davis et al. County School Board of Davis et al. County School Board of Prince Edward County, Virginia, et Prince Edward County, Virginia, et alal., was another of the cases ., was another of the cases eventually consolidated as eventually consolidated as BrownBrown v. v. Board of EducationBoard of Education. .

Davis v. County School Board of Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County (con’t)Prince Edward County (con’t)

Moton High was typical of the all-black schools in Moton High was typical of the all-black schools in the central Virginia county.the central Virginia county.

It was built in 1939 to hold half as many students It was built in 1939 to hold half as many students as it did by the early 1950s; its teachers were paid as it did by the early 1950s; its teachers were paid substantially less than teachers at the all-white substantially less than teachers at the all-white high school; and it had no gymnasium, cafeteria, or high school; and it had no gymnasium, cafeteria, or auditorium with fixed seats like the nearby white auditorium with fixed seats like the nearby white Farmville High had.Farmville High had.

Repeated attempts made by Moton's principal and Repeated attempts made by Moton's principal and PTA to convince the school board to erect a new PTA to convince the school board to erect a new black high school were fruitless.black high school were fruitless.

So, in the spring of 1951, the students, led by 16 So, in the spring of 1951, the students, led by 16 year-old Barbara Johns, took matters into their own year-old Barbara Johns, took matters into their own hands.hands.

They went on strike and asked for help from the They went on strike and asked for help from the NAACP's special counsel for the Southeastern NAACP's special counsel for the Southeastern region of the United States. region of the United States.

Farmville vs. MotonFarmville vs. MotonSeparate but Equal?Separate but Equal?

Davis v. County School Board of Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County (con’t)Prince Edward County (con’t)

The NAACP lawyers told the striking students The NAACP lawyers told the striking students that the only way the organization could that the only way the organization could commit to getting involved in the students' commit to getting involved in the students' cause was to sue for the end of segregation cause was to sue for the end of segregation itself. itself.

This was a huge step beyond the students' This was a huge step beyond the students' goal of obtaining a new school building!goal of obtaining a new school building!

After thinking it over very carefully and After thinking it over very carefully and gathering the support of their parents, the gathering the support of their parents, the students agreed to challenge segregation students agreed to challenge segregation directly. directly.

On May 23, 1951, a NAACP lawyer, on behalf On May 23, 1951, a NAACP lawyer, on behalf of 117 Moton students and their parents, filed of 117 Moton students and their parents, filed suit in the federal district court in Richmond. suit in the federal district court in Richmond.

Brown vs. BoardBrown vs. Board

Thirteen parents volunteered to participate Thirteen parents volunteered to participate in a case that was initiated by members of in a case that was initiated by members of the local NAACP chapter in Topeka, Kansas. the local NAACP chapter in Topeka, Kansas.

In the summer of 1950, they took their In the summer of 1950, they took their children to schools in their neighborhoods children to schools in their neighborhoods and attempted to enroll them for the and attempted to enroll them for the upcoming school year. All were refused upcoming school year. All were refused admission. The children were forced to admission. The children were forced to attend one of the four schools in the city for attend one of the four schools in the city for African Americans. For most this involved African Americans. For most this involved traveling some distance from their homes.traveling some distance from their homes.

Brown vs. BoardBrown vs. Board These parents filed suit These parents filed suit

against the Topeka Board of against the Topeka Board of Education on behalf of their Education on behalf of their children. Oliver Brown, a children. Oliver Brown, a minister, was the first minister, was the first parent listed in the suit, so parent listed in the suit, so the case came to named the case came to named after him.after him.

Linda Carol Brown—who is Linda Carol Brown—who is seven-years-old and lives in seven-years-old and lives in Topeka, Kansas—has to Topeka, Kansas—has to walk across railroad tracks walk across railroad tracks and take an old bus to get and take an old bus to get to school, even though to school, even though there is a better school five there is a better school five blocks from her house. blocks from her house. Linda can't go to that school Linda can't go to that school because she is black, and because she is black, and the schools in Topeka are the schools in Topeka are segregated. segregated.

Robert Carter and Jack Robert Carter and Jack Greenberg of the NAACP Greenberg of the NAACP Legal Defense represented Legal Defense represented the Plaintiffs.the Plaintiffs.

Rev. Oliver L. Brown and Rev. Oliver L. Brown and daughter Linda Carol daughter Linda Carol BrownBrown

Monroe Elementary School is Monroe Elementary School is now an Historic Site now an Historic Site maintained by National Park maintained by National Park Service.Service.

U.S. Supreme Court DecisionU.S. Supreme Court Decision On May 17, 1954, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Earl On May 17, 1954, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Earl

Warren delivered the unanimous ruling in the Warren delivered the unanimous ruling in the landmark civil rights case landmark civil rights case Brown Brown v. v. Board of Board of Education of Topeka, KansasEducation of Topeka, Kansas. .

State-sanctioned segregation of public schools State-sanctioned segregation of public schools was a violation of the 14th Amendment and was was a violation of the 14th Amendment and was therefore unconstitutional. therefore unconstitutional.

This historic decision marked the end of the This historic decision marked the end of the "separate but equal" precedent set by the "separate but equal" precedent set by the Supreme Court nearly 60 years earlier and served Supreme Court nearly 60 years earlier and served as a catalyst for the expanding civil rights as a catalyst for the expanding civil rights movement during the decade of the 1950s. movement during the decade of the 1950s.

In 1955, the Court ordered that the schools in In 1955, the Court ordered that the schools in Brown be integrated under supervision of the Brown be integrated under supervision of the district courts “with all deliberate speed.”district courts “with all deliberate speed.”

End and BeginningEnd and Beginning The Court’s decision in 1954 The Court’s decision in 1954

was both an end and a was both an end and a beginning.beginning.

The doctrine of “separate but The doctrine of “separate but equal” was officially refuted, equal” was officially refuted, but a new round of battles was but a new round of battles was about to begin over the about to begin over the necessity, extent, and pace of necessity, extent, and pace of integration in schools around integration in schools around the country. the country.

Students entered Central High School in Little Rock under the protection of federal troops.

Thurgood MarshallThurgood Marshall

1930 Lincoln U. (cum laude)1930 Lincoln U. (cum laude) 1933 Law Degree Howard U. 1933 Law Degree Howard U.

magna cum laudemagna cum laude 1940-1961 Legal Director of 1940-1961 Legal Director of

NAACP – 29 Sup. Ct. victoriesNAACP – 29 Sup. Ct. victories 1954 Brown v. Board1954 Brown v. Board 1961 Appointed Circuit Judge 1961 Appointed Circuit Judge 1965 Appointed U.S. Solicitor 1965 Appointed U.S. Solicitor

General by Pres. JohnsonGeneral by Pres. Johnson 1967 Becomes the 11967 Becomes the 1stst

African American elevated to African American elevated to U.S. Supreme CourtU.S. Supreme Court

1991 Retires from Supreme 1991 Retires from Supreme Ct.Ct.

1993 Dies at 84 1993 Dies at 84

The LawyersThe Lawyers The lawyers were the ones The lawyers were the ones

who changed the course of who changed the course of America.America.

In the decades leading up In the decades leading up to Brown, these lawyers to Brown, these lawyers progressively chipped progressively chipped away at the legal structure away at the legal structure fortifying segregation.fortifying segregation.

The legal profession must The legal profession must be as varied and diverse as be as varied and diverse as the public to retain its the public to retain its essential role as essential role as connecting link with the connecting link with the rule of law.rule of law.

Data indicate that although Data indicate that although society rapidly is becoming society rapidly is becoming more diverse, the legal more diverse, the legal profession remains mostly profession remains mostly white.white.

Alabama LawyersAlabama Lawyers

In-state 11,632In-state 11,632 Out-of-State 2,089Out-of-State 2,089 Total = 13,721Total = 13,721 Male 10,225 = 75%Male 10,225 = 75% Female 3,496 = 25%Female 3,496 = 25% Caucasian 12,942 = 94%Caucasian 12,942 = 94% African American 726 = 5.3%African American 726 = 5.3% Other 53 = 0.4% Other 53 = 0.4%

This Law Day, as we This Law Day, as we celebrate our freedoms celebrate our freedoms

as Americans, let us as Americans, let us rededicate ourselves to rededicate ourselves to working toward making working toward making rhetoric and reality onerhetoric and reality one..

THE ENDTHE ENDPresented byPresented by

Judge Bill FilmoreJudge Bill Filmore


DALE COUNTYDALE COUNTYDISTRICT COURTDISTRICT COURT

Federal CourtFederal Court

U.S. Supreme Court

Circuit Court of Appeals

District Courts

Alabama State CourtsAlabama State Courts

Supreme CourtSupreme Court

Circuit CourtsCircuit Courts

Court of Criminal AppealsCourt of Criminal AppealsCourt of Civil AppealsCourt of Civil Appeals

District CourtsDistrict Courts

3333RDRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT JUDICIAL CIRCUITCIRCUIT COURT

FAMILY COURT FAMILY COURT

DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT COURT PLACE 2

DISTRICT COURT PLACE 1

DALE GENEVA


DALE COUNTY, DISTRICT DALE COUNTY, DISTRICT COURT, PLACE ONECOURT, PLACE ONECivil DivisionCivil DivisionSmall Claims DivisionSmall Claims DivisionCriminal DivisionCriminal DivisionTraffic Division Traffic Division Child Support DivisionChild Support DivisionEx Officio Circuit Judge for DREx Officio Circuit Judge for DR

CIVILCIVIL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISIONSMALL CLAIMS DIVISION Up to $1,500Up to $1,500 $1,500 to $3,000$1,500 to $3,000 Exclusive Jurisdiction Rests with District Exclusive Jurisdiction Rests with District

Court Court

CIVIL DIVISIONCIVIL DIVISION $3,000 to $10,000 (Concurrent with $3,000 to $10,000 (Concurrent with

Circuit Court)Circuit Court)

Small ClaimsSmall Claims

Improvements in CourtImprovements in Court Begin at 8:30 a.m., support mediation, Begin at 8:30 a.m., support mediation,

notice of case and trial procedurenotice of case and trial procedure Types of CasesTypes of Cases

Individual collections of money for rent Individual collections of money for rent or personal loansor personal loans

Disputes concerning car repairsDisputes concerning car repairs Consumer type complaintsConsumer type complaints Instant Cash Company CollectionsInstant Cash Company Collections

District CivilDistrict Civil

Improvements in CourtImprovements in Court Start cases at 1:30 p.m. on afternoon of Start cases at 1:30 p.m. on afternoon of

frequent Small Claims docketfrequent Small Claims docket Types of CasesTypes of Cases

EvictionsEvictions Collection of loans by companiesCollection of loans by companies Car accidents within jurisdictional Car accidents within jurisdictional

amountamount

DISTRICT CRIMINALDISTRICT CRIMINAL

Type of Cases – Misdemeanors Type of Cases – Misdemeanors NWNINWNI Possession of Marihuana 2Possession of Marihuana 2ndnd

Possession of ParaphernaliaPossession of Paraphernalia AssaultAssault HarassmentHarassment Reckless EndangermentReckless Endangerment Criminal TrespassCriminal Trespass Game & Fish ViolationsGame & Fish Violations Gambling Gambling

NWNINWNI

Greatest number of casesGreatest number of cases $1 amount of check can result in a $1 amount of check can result in a

fine of $20 plus costs of $323+fine of $20 plus costs of $323+ Usually result of people not having Usually result of people not having

the money and not getting money to the money and not getting money to take care of before court.take care of before court.

Reflects economic conditionsReflects economic conditions

Possession of MarijuanaPossession of Marijuana

Fine $600 +Fine $600 + Up to 1 year in jailUp to 1 year in jail Costs of Court $234 minimumCosts of Court $234 minimum Driver’s License suspended for 6 Driver’s License suspended for 6

monthsmonths Court Referral ProgramCourt Referral Program 22ndnd Offense of Possession is Felony Offense of Possession is Felony

DISTRICT CRIMINALDISTRICT CRIMINAL

Felony CasesFelony Cases First Appearance HearingsFirst Appearance Hearings Appoint Attorneys to IndigentAppoint Attorneys to Indigent Bond HearingsBond Hearings Preliminary HearingsPreliminary Hearings

Improvements in CourtImprovements in Court Begin Court & Call Docket at 8:30 a.m.Begin Court & Call Docket at 8:30 a.m. Improved forms to facilitate handling of casesImproved forms to facilitate handling of cases Require CRO ProgramRequire CRO Program Use Camera for First Appearance HearingsUse Camera for First Appearance Hearings

TRAFFIC COURTTRAFFIC COURT

4,400 cases a year4,400 cases a year Traffic offenses committed Traffic offenses committed

in Dale County in Dale County Tickets written by State Tickets written by State

TroopersTroopers Police in Cities that don’t Police in Cities that don’t

have a Municipal Courthave a Municipal Court

Common OffensesCommon Offenses

DUIDUI Driving While Revoked or SuspendedDriving While Revoked or Suspended Excessive SpeedExcessive Speed SpeedingSpeeding Window TintWindow Tint Seat BeltSeat Belt No InsuranceNo Insurance

Stats on Drinking & DrivingStats on Drinking & Driving In 2002, more than 17,000 people were In 2002, more than 17,000 people were

killed in alcohol-related crashes on the killed in alcohol-related crashes on the nation’s highways, representing a death nation’s highways, representing a death every 30 minutes. every 30 minutes.

An estimated 258,000 people were injured in An estimated 258,000 people were injured in crashes where police reported that alcohol crashes where police reported that alcohol was present – an average of one person was present – an average of one person injured approximately every two minutes. injured approximately every two minutes.

Approximately 1.5 million drivers were Approximately 1.5 million drivers were arrested in 2000 for driving under the arrested in 2000 for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. This is an influence of alcohol or narcotics. This is an arrest rate of 1 for every 130 licensed arrest rate of 1 for every 130 licensed drivers in the United States. drivers in the United States.

19921992 1,0311,031 498498 48%48%

19931993 1,0441,044 476476 46%46%

19941994 1,0831,083 472472 44%44%

19951995 1,1141,114 494494 44%44%

19961996 1,1461,146 516516 45%45%

19971997 1,1921,192 499499 42%42%

19981998 1,0711,071 442442 41%41%

19991999 1,1381,138 465465 41%41%

20002000 996996 426426 43%43%

20012001 994994 376376 38%38%

Alabama Fatalities Alcohol Related

DATE TOTAL ALC/REL %

21 year old minimum21 year old minimum All states and the District of Columbia now have 21-All states and the District of Columbia now have 21-

year-old minimum drinking age laws. year-old minimum drinking age laws. NHTSA estimates that these laws have reduced NHTSA estimates that these laws have reduced

traffic fatalities involving drivers 18 to 20 years old traffic fatalities involving drivers 18 to 20 years old by 13 percent and have saved an estimated 20,970 by 13 percent and have saved an estimated 20,970 lives since 1975.lives since 1975.

In 2001, an estimated 927 lives were saved by In 2001, an estimated 927 lives were saved by minimum drinking age laws.minimum drinking age laws.

Alabama still top 1/3 of all states with highest rate of Alabama still top 1/3 of all states with highest rate of Alcohol related deaths. Tied with FL for 16Alcohol related deaths. Tied with FL for 16thth highest. highest.

40 other states reduced fatalities more sharply than 40 other states reduced fatalities more sharply than Alabama.Alabama.

Alabama has been above the US average every year Alabama has been above the US average every year since 1986. Could get worse with less Troopers. since 1986. Could get worse with less Troopers.

Alcohol Related Fatalities by County

DUIDUI

11stst Offense Offense Fine $600-$2,100 + costsFine $600-$2,100 + costsJail not more than 1 yearJail not more than 1 yearCompletion of Court Completion of Court Referral ProgramReferral Program

Driver’s License Driver’s License Suspended – 90 daysSuspended – 90 days

DUIDUI

22ndnd Offense (within 5 years) Offense (within 5 years) Fine $1,100 - $5,100 plus costsFine $1,100 - $5,100 plus costs Imprisonment: Not more than 1 Imprisonment: Not more than 1

year year nor less than 5 days or 30 nor less than 5 days or 30 days community servicedays community service

Completion of Court Referral Completion of Court Referral ProgramProgram

Driver’s License Revoked for 1 yearDriver’s License Revoked for 1 year

DUIDUI

33rdrd Offense (within lifetime) Offense (within lifetime)Fine $2,100 - $10,100 plus Fine $2,100 - $10,100 plus costscosts

Imprisonment: Not more than 1 Imprisonment: Not more than 1 year with minimum mandatory year with minimum mandatory 60 days60 days

Completion of Court Referral Completion of Court Referral ProgramProgram

Driver’s License Revoked for 3 Driver’s License Revoked for 3 yearsyears

DUIDUI

Fourth & Subsequent (within Fourth & Subsequent (within lifetime)lifetime)FelonyFelony Fine $4,100 - $10,100 plus felony costsFine $4,100 - $10,100 plus felony costs Imprisonment: One year and One Day Imprisonment: One year and One Day

– 10 years (Minimum 10 days in jail)– 10 years (Minimum 10 days in jail) Completion of Court Referral ProgramCompletion of Court Referral Program Driver’s License Revoked for 5 yearsDriver’s License Revoked for 5 years

Driving WhileDriving WhileSuspended or RevokedSuspended or Revoked

Fine $150 - $250 or greaterFine $150 - $250 or greater Revocation of license for 6 monthsRevocation of license for 6 months Possible jail sentencePossible jail sentence Costs of CourtCosts of Court Common to give suspended sentence Common to give suspended sentence

of 30 – 180 days; suspended sentence of 30 – 180 days; suspended sentence is contingent on paying all fines and is contingent on paying all fines and costs and not receiving another DL costs and not receiving another DL suspended or revoked in next 6 suspended or revoked in next 6 months months

Stats on UnlicensedStats on Unlicensed

Study by AAA’s Foundation for Traffic Study by AAA’s Foundation for Traffic SafetySafety

Crashes involving unlicensed or Crashes involving unlicensed or improperly licensed drivers killed improperly licensed drivers killed about 57,000 people from 1993 to about 57,000 people from 1993 to 1999 1999

This is 8,215 people per yearThis is 8,215 people per year The official death toll on 9/11 was The official death toll on 9/11 was

2,9762,976

Excessive SpeedExcessive Speed

Over 25 mph over posted speed limitOver 25 mph over posted speed limit Fine $250Fine $250 Court Costs $106Court Costs $106 Court has driving history and may Court has driving history and may

give suspended sentence like in DL give suspended sentence like in DL suspended and may require driving suspended and may require driving school as part of punishment for school as part of punishment for extensive recordextensive record

SpeedingSpeeding 25 mph or less over posted limit 25 mph or less over posted limit Fine $20+Fine $20+ Costs $106Costs $106 For clean driving histories, driving school For clean driving histories, driving school

is alternative that the Court has discretion is alternative that the Court has discretion to grant. If you are approved for driving to grant. If you are approved for driving school you would complete the course at school you would complete the course at costs of $30 and bring your certificate to costs of $30 and bring your certificate to the Clerk of Court and pay the $106 Court the Clerk of Court and pay the $106 Court Costs and then the ticket would be Costs and then the ticket would be nol nol prossedprossed and will not go on record. Online and will not go on record. Online course is available at cost of $40.course is available at cost of $40.

SPEEDSPEED NUMBER OF NUMBER OF FATALITIES FATALITIES

INVOLVED IN INVOLVED IN SPEED SPEED

RELATED RELATED CRASHES, 2001CRASHES, 2001

PERCENT OF PERCENT OF FATAL FATAL

CRASHES THAT CRASHES THAT ARE SPEED ARE SPEED

RELATED, 2001RELATED, 2001

ESTIMATED ESTIMATED COST OF ALL COST OF ALL

SPEED SPEED RELATED RELATED

CRASHES, 2000CRASHES, 2000

ALAALA 351351 34.7%34.7% $534 $534 MillionMillion

SPEED KILLS!

InsuranceInsurance

If didn’t have proof, must come to court to If didn’t have proof, must come to court to show proof of insurance at time of ticket show proof of insurance at time of ticket and case will be dismissed. Section 32-7A-and case will be dismissed. Section 32-7A-2020

$100 fine + $106 costs if provide proof of $100 fine + $106 costs if provide proof of insurance (if didn’t have insurance at time insurance (if didn’t have insurance at time of ticket) of ticket)

$150 fine + $106 costs, if don’t get $150 fine + $106 costs, if don’t get insurance (Up to $500 fine for first insurance (Up to $500 fine for first conviction and up to $1,000 fine for second conviction and up to $1,000 fine for second conviction, and could cause suspension of conviction, and could cause suspension of registration)registration)

Points Against LicensePoints Against License DUI = 6 pointsDUI = 6 points Reckless Driving = 6 pointsReckless Driving = 6 points Speeding in excess of 85 mph = 5Speeding in excess of 85 mph = 5 Failure to yield right of way = 5Failure to yield right of way = 5 Passing stopped school bus = 5Passing stopped school bus = 5 Wrong side of road = 4Wrong side of road = 4 Illegal passing = 4Illegal passing = 4 Following too closely = 3Following too closely = 3 Disregarding traffic control devices = 3Disregarding traffic control devices = 3 Speeding = 2Speeding = 2 All other violations = 2All other violations = 2

Suspension for PointsSuspension for Points

12-14 Points over 2 year period = 60 days12-14 Points over 2 year period = 60 days 15-17 Points over 2 year period = 90 days15-17 Points over 2 year period = 90 days 18-20 Points over 2 year period = 120 18-20 Points over 2 year period = 120

daysdays 21-23 Points over 2 year period = 180 21-23 Points over 2 year period = 180

daysdays 24 and above Points over 2 year period = 24 and above Points over 2 year period =

365 days365 days

Vehicular HomicideVehicular Homicide § 32-5A-192. Homicide by vehicle or vessel.§ 32-5A-192. Homicide by vehicle or vessel. (a) Whoever shall unlawfully and unintentionally (a) Whoever shall unlawfully and unintentionally

cause the death of another person while engaged in the cause the death of another person while engaged in the violation of any state law or municipal ordinance violation of any state law or municipal ordinance applying to the operation or use of a vehicle, or vessel, applying to the operation or use of a vehicle, or vessel, as defined in Section 33-5-3, or to the regulation of traffic as defined in Section 33-5-3, or to the regulation of traffic or boating, shall be guilty of homicide when the violation or boating, shall be guilty of homicide when the violation is the proximate cause of the death.is the proximate cause of the death.

(b) Any person convicted of homicide by vehicle or (b) Any person convicted of homicide by vehicle or vessel shall be fined not less than five hundred dollars vessel shall be fined not less than five hundred dollars ($500) nor more than two thousand dollars ($2,000), or ($500) nor more than two thousand dollars ($2,000), or shall be imprisoned for a term not less than one year nor shall be imprisoned for a term not less than one year nor more than five years, or may be so fined and so more than five years, or may be so fined and so imprisoned. All fines collected for violation of this section imprisoned. All fines collected for violation of this section relating to vessels shall be paid into the State Water relating to vessels shall be paid into the State Water Safety Fund.Safety Fund.

Examples Examples

Teenage Drivers – Fatal Crashes Teenage Drivers – Fatal Crashes %%

Driver AgeDriver Age 1616 17-1917-19 20-4920-49 Driver ErrorDriver Error 8080 7575 6262 SpeedingSpeeding 3636 3131 2222 3+ 3+ occupantsoccupants 3333 2626 1919 Single Single vehiclevehicle 4141 3737 3030 Drivers .01+Drivers .01+ 88 2525 4747 16 yrs old - Night time crash twice as high than 16 yrs old - Night time crash twice as high than

dayday

Alabama License RestrictionAlabama License Restriction

§ 32-6-7.2. (Effective October 1, 2002) § 32-6-7.2. (Effective October 1, 2002) Restrictions on issuance to persons under Restrictions on issuance to persons under 18.18.

(c) A person who is issued a regular driver's (c) A person who is issued a regular driver's license after October 1, 2002, who is age 17 license after October 1, 2002, who is age 17 and has been licensed for less than six and has been licensed for less than six months or who is age 16 shall be deemed to months or who is age 16 shall be deemed to have a restricted driver's license. The have a restricted driver's license. The person may not operate a vehicle under any person may not operate a vehicle under any of the following conditions:of the following conditions:

License RestrictionLicense Restriction (1)(1) Between Between 12:00 o'clock midnight and 6:00 12:00 o'clock midnight and 6:00

o'clock a.m.o'clock a.m. unless the following exceptions apply: unless the following exceptions apply: a. The licensee is accompanied by a parent or legal a. The licensee is accompanied by a parent or legal

guardian.guardian. b. The licensee is accompanied by a person who is a b. The licensee is accompanied by a person who is a

licensed driver and is at least 21 years of age and the consent licensed driver and is at least 21 years of age and the consent of a parent or legal guardian of the driver is given.of a parent or legal guardian of the driver is given.

c. The licensee is driving to or from a place where the c. The licensee is driving to or from a place where the licensee is employed on a regular basis.licensee is employed on a regular basis.

d. The licensee is driving to or from a school sponsored d. The licensee is driving to or from a school sponsored event.event.

e. The licensee is driving to or from an event sponsored e. The licensee is driving to or from an event sponsored by a religious organization.by a religious organization.

f. The licensee is driving for the purpose of a medical, f. The licensee is driving for the purpose of a medical, fire, or law enforcement related emergency.fire, or law enforcement related emergency.

(2)(2) If there are more than four occupants in the vehicle If there are more than four occupants in the vehicle not including the parents or legal guardians of the licensee.not including the parents or legal guardians of the licensee.

License RestrictionLicense Restriction

A violation of this subsection shall not A violation of this subsection shall not result in a suspension of the person's result in a suspension of the person's driver's license, but shall extend the driver's license, but shall extend the time period for six months that the time period for six months that the person is subject to the restrictions of person is subject to the restrictions of this subsection before the person is this subsection before the person is eligible to be designated as an eligible to be designated as an unrestricted driver's license holder or unrestricted driver's license holder or until age 18.until age 18.

TRAFFIC COURTTRAFFIC COURT

Improvements in Court Improvements in Court Have a docket of casesHave a docket of cases Court begins and docket called at 8:30 Court begins and docket called at 8:30

a.m.a.m. Records run on DUI, D/L Revoked or Records run on DUI, D/L Revoked or

Suspended and Excessive SpeedSuspended and Excessive Speed Require CRORequire CRO Improved forms for the proper and Improved forms for the proper and

efficient handling of cases efficient handling of cases

CHILD SUPPORT DIVISIONCHILD SUPPORT DIVISION Type of casesType of cases

Contempt petitions for non-paymentContempt petitions for non-payment Visitation petitionsVisitation petitions Post minority support petitionsPost minority support petitions Modifications of supportModifications of support

Standard for ContemptStandard for Contempt If the finds that the reason for non-payment is not If the finds that the reason for non-payment is not

inability to pay, but willful refusal to pay child support inability to pay, but willful refusal to pay child support the Court can and does incarcerate the Defendant for the Court can and does incarcerate the Defendant for contempt.contempt.

ImprovementsImprovements - Due to willingness of Court to - Due to willingness of Court to enforce the Standard for Contempt, child support enforce the Standard for Contempt, child support collections have increased $20,000 per month in collections have increased $20,000 per month in 2003 over previous year 2003 over previous year

Ex-Officio Circuit JudgeEx-Officio Circuit Judge

Domestic Relations cases that arise Domestic Relations cases that arise out of child support matters don’t out of child support matters don’t have to be re-assignedhave to be re-assigned

Emergency DR OrdersEmergency DR Orders Any DR Orders arising out of Unified Any DR Orders arising out of Unified

Family CourtFamily Court DR Cases as assigned or receive due DR Cases as assigned or receive due

to conflicts of other courtsto conflicts of other courts

Additional Court ImprovementsAdditional Court Improvements Utilizing technologyUtilizing technology. Using a video camera for . Using a video camera for

First Appearances which cuts down on expense First Appearances which cuts down on expense and promotes safety for jail personnel. Developed and promotes safety for jail personnel. Developed and maintains a web site for District Court and maintains a web site for District Court Information where the general public can obtain Information where the general public can obtain information about the civil and criminal law and information about the civil and criminal law and procedures used in District Court. procedures used in District Court. www.filmore.netwww.filmore.net Court allows the option of an on-line driving school Court allows the option of an on-line driving school in alternative sentencing for speeding.in alternative sentencing for speeding.

Working with Dale County Domestic Violence Working with Dale County Domestic Violence Task ForceTask Force to inform the public about the to inform the public about the domestic violence. In May 2004 will present a domestic violence. In May 2004 will present a legal seminar and be the Judge for a Mock Trial on legal seminar and be the Judge for a Mock Trial on domestic violence.domestic violence.

Working with School SystemsWorking with School Systems. Re-established . Re-established Law Day activities in the schools. Present Traffic Law Day activities in the schools. Present Traffic Court class to Driver’s Ed and other classes. Court class to Driver’s Ed and other classes. Supports reading initiatives in schools by Supports reading initiatives in schools by presenting awards. Serving on Executive presenting awards. Serving on Executive Committee of Dale County Children’s Policy Committee of Dale County Children’s Policy Council.Council.

THE ENDTHE ENDPresented byPresented by



LAW DAY 2004 Presented by Judge Bill Filmore .

Documents

Transcript of LAW DAY 2004 Presented by Judge Bill Filmore .