CONNECTICUT JUDICIAL COUNCIL REPORTS BY LANE W. LANCASTER

Wulcyan Uniam&

The Connedicut leaislrdvre a ~ ~ e ? > k r m n e an& rejects other recommenda-

ONE of the more recent states to join the movement for the perfection of judicial organization and procedure was Connecticut. The general as- sembly of 1937 showed its interest in the subject by the creation of a Judicial C~unci l .~ The first report of the Coun- cil w e laid before the 1939 session which adjourned early in May. It was distinguished by the evidences of care in its study and preparation and by the thoroughness with which its various recommendations were presented, and it is a matter of considerable regret that the legislature did not see fit to enact its principal suggestions. The body of respectable lay and professional opinion outside the l@slature favorable to the report is, however, so great that we may assume that the assembly was simply “playing safe” after the ap- proved legislative psychology in the “land of steady habits,” and that more progress will be made in later sessions.

I Although there is probably less to

“reform ” about Connecticut’s sub- stantive law and procedure than in many other states, some notion of existing abuses and imperfections may be gained from a brief summary of the Council’s recommendations .

(1) To students of government prob-

1 Ch. 190, Public Ads, 192’7. The act follows closely the Massschusetts ad of 1 9 s . The Connecticut Judicial Council consists of the chid justice of the Supreme Court of Errors, one judge of the Superior Court, one of a Common Pleas Court, one of a city court. one state’s attorney and four practicing attorneys.

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ably the most important suggested change was that having to do with the appointment of town and city judges. At present there are in the state 59 of these tribunals, created by special act, and presided over by judges and as- sociate judges named by the general assembly? Names for nomination to these judgeships are usually presented by the local representatives in the legislature, approved by the joint com- mittee on the judiciary, and ratified by the two houses. While there are no such unseemly controversies over these appointments as occurred with some frequency ten or fifteen years ago, it cannot be said that the method of elec- tion adds to the dignity of the local bench, and it undoubtedly lays a heavy burden on the already overworked judiciary committee. The Judicial Council recommended that the power of appointment be transferred to the governor, which practice is now followed in the case of the higher courts. This idea did not commend itself to the as- sembly, ostensibly because of a fear of one-man power. There can be no doubt, however, that considerations of practical politics were decisive, since the local bench is an integral part of the dam- inant party organization which controls all branches of the state government.

(a) Under the law as it existed prior

* Five of these courts were created by the 1999 general assembly. They have criminal, and. in some csses. dvil jurisdiction and take the place of justices of the peace in the t o m ha- them. The salariea of the judges and 0th- offiicials are set by statute but paid from the local treasury.

440

CONNECTICUT JUDICIAL COUNCIL REPORTS 441

to 1929 any criminal court might sus- pend sentence indehitely except in cases after commitment to the state’s prison or reformatory. This power ex- tended to the many local courts in the state, and it is a matter of common knowledge that these courts have used the power in order to impose fhes with a suspended jail sentence in order not to risk the loss of a h e to the treasury in case a jail sentence is imposed and an appeal taken. Acting on the recom- mendation of the Council the legisla- ture amended the law to provide that sentence may be suspended if the mitigating circumstances are made a part of the record, but that no sentence may be suspended in cases of convic- tion of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of liquor if such offense shall have been committed within six years following conviction for a like offense or if the offender has been pre- viously twice convicted of a felony. (3) A third recommendation of the

Council which, however, failed of enact- ment, had to do with petty violations of the motor vehicle acts and local traf- fic regulations. Here it was suggested that in cases where the penalty w8s.a fine, in the first two offenses the ac- cused might request that judgment be taken against him and thus waive trial upon payment of the statutory h e and costs. The benefits of such a law in speeding up the work of the local courts and in securing uniformity of procedure throughout the state are obvious, and it seems likely that it will eventually pass.s

(4) Chapter 134, Public Acts of 1929, embodies the Council’s recommenda- tion concerning false &davits by giv- ing to the courts power to allow to the

SIn this connection it is interesting to note that the amembly passed what is apparently the first state-wide traffic control act. Senate Bill No. 518.

plaintiff double costs with a reasonable counsel fee, where in its opinion af- fidavits have been 6led without just cause or for the purpose of delay.

( 5 ) In line with the Council’s sug- gestion for discouraging divorces for trivial eauses, Chapter 105 provides that no complaint claiming a divorce shall be heard or any decree granted thereon until after the expiration of ninety days from the day on which such complaint is made returnable. (6) The Council’s recommendation

that a state bureau of criminal identi- fication be established is now in the process of being carried out under the superintendent of state police.

n Three other matters of considerable

interest were recommended for action by the Council but rejected by the legislature. After a very able review of the pros and cons of this ancient prohibition, the Council suggested an amendment to the General Statutes which would permit the state’s attorney in criminal trials to comment u h n the failure of the accused to testify. The assembly also failed to repeal a statute enacted in 1923 which in effect deprived the courts of the complete power which they had had until that year to make all rules and orders necessary to give effect to the practice act of the state. What appeared to be excellent sugges- tions looking toward the improvement of the character of jurors were also rejected.

Other matters now being studied by the Council are: the advisability d having the jury consist of less than twelve; the wisdom of having jury verdicts rendered by less than the entire jury; a study of expert testi- mony; the practical working of the system of local justices of the peace; and the small claims court.