CHIEF JUSTICE

ROY S. MOORE,
oF GALLAIIT

ASSOCIATE JUSTICES
LYN STUART, OF BAY MINETTE MICHAEL F. BOLIN, OF BIRMINGHAM

ST]PREME COTIRT OF
3OO

ALABAMA

TOM PARKER, or MoNTcoMERY GLENN MURDOCK, OF BIRMINGHAM

GREG SHAW, OF MONTGOMERY JAIvIES ALLEN N{AIN, oF MoNTcoMERY A. KELLI WISE, OF PRATTVILLE TOMMY ELI.AS BRYA}I, OF BRA}ITLEY

JUDICIAL BUILDING
DEXTER AVENUE MONTGOMERY, ALABATW{ 36 I 04.37 4I
(334)229-0700

March 6,2013

The Honorable D. Patrick Harris Secretary of the Senate Alabama State House 11 South Union Street Montgomery, Alabam a 36 1 30
Gentlemen:

The Honorable Jeff Woodard Clerk of the House of Representatives Alabama State House 11 South Union Street Montgomery, Alabam a 36 1 30

Pursuant to Article VI, $ 151(a) of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901 (amend. 328), the Supreme Court of Alabama, having found that"aneed exists for increasing or decreasing the number of circuit or district judges," hereby certifies its findings and recommendations to the Legislature regarding judge needs in the Alabama Unified Judicial System. Accordingly, the Court's "Circuit and Diskict Judge Need" report recommending specific judge kansfers or reallocations is enclosed.

Additionally, pursuant to Article VI, $ 151(b), the Supreme Court hereby reports to the Legislature its recommendation concerning a House Bill29, a bill which proposes an additional circuit judgeship in the Sixth Judicial Circuit. As indicated in the enclosed report, the Supreme Court does recommend an additional circuit judgeship in the Sixth Judicial Circuit; however, the Sixth Judicial Circuit ranks fourth in need and we would recommend that the other needs be met prior to the creation of this new judgeship.

If you conclude that the Court can be of any further assistance in your consideration of this matter, please contact me or the Administrative Director of Courts, Dr. Rich Hobson, at your earliest convenience. Thank you for your work on behalf of our court system.

Supreme Court of Alabama RSlr4/wa Enclosures

CIRCTIIT AI\D DISTRICT JUDGE NEED IN THE ALABAMA UMFIED JTTDICIAL SYSTEM March 6,2013
As authorized by $ 151, Alabama Constitution, Article VI, which states, "The supreme court shall establish criteria for determining the number and boundaries of judicial circuits and districts, and the number ofjudges needed in each circuit and district," the Supreme Court has sfudied the current judgeships across the state. Furthermore, the section advises that, "If the supreme court finds that a need exists for increasing or decreasing the number of circuit or distict judges . . . it shall, at the begiruring of any session of the legislature, certiff its findings and recommendations to the legislature." The Supreme Court finds that a need does exist in the State of Alabama and therefore mafes the following recommendations regarding the ranking and subsequent transfer of Judgeships for the Alabama Legislature to consider.
The statewide need for judgeships is as follows:

Circuit Court
Circuit Judgeships Needed in the Following Circuit: 13th Circuit Mobile #T 23'd Circuit Madison #2 28th Circuit Baldwin #3 6th Circuit Tuscaloosa #4 19th Circuit AutauEZ, Chilton & Elmore #s
4.9 3.5

2.4 2.0
1.8

Recommendation

Using the Circuit Court weighted Caseload Implied Need from FY 2011, it is recommended that three circuit judgeships be decreased in the 10th Judicial Circuit in Jefferson County, and it is firther recommended that there should be two circuit judgeships increased in the 13th Judicial Circuit in Mobile and one circuit court judgeship increased in the 23'd Judicial Circuit in Madison County.

District Court
District Judgeships Needed in the Following Counties #l Madison County #2 Mobile County #3 Shelby County #4 Baldwin County #5 Marshall County
1
:

2.0
1.8

1.4
1.3

1.2

ofz

Recommendation Using the District Court weighted Caseload Implied Need from FY 2011, it is recommended that one district court judgeship should be decreased from Jefferson County and increased in the Madison County Diskict Court and one district court judgeship should be decreased from Walker County and increased in the Mobile County District Court.

About the Weighted Caseload Study

The Alabama Supreme Court adopted the Weighted Caseload System as the benchmark tool to determine judgeship needs in 1987. The measurement system has been updated since that time to include the most recent update in2007, which was approved in 2008. The process was initiated by resolutions from both the Circuit Judges' Association and the District Judges' Association. A Weighted Caseload Advisory Committee was created and a contract was entered into with the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) to formulate the correct and appropriate variables for the study. The result was an agreed upon set of 20 types of cases and an established judge-year value (the amount of time ajudge has to work on cases, accounting for administrative time, fravel time for multi-county circuits, and vacation time). All judicial officers and active referees were asked to participate by recording all of their case-related and non-caserelated activities. Over a 4-week period, the participation rate was75o/o. The results were then discussed by the committee and the completed project was unanimously approved.

2 of 2

JUDGESMP REPORT Sixth Judicial Circuit March 1,2013

This Report is prepared by the Alabama Administrative Office of Courts in response to the filing of House Bill 29 thatprovides for the creation of one additional circuit judgeship for the Sixth Judicial Circuit. This judgeship would be filled by election atthe 2014 general election after pre-clearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The judgeship created would be frlled on the condition that the Tuscaloosa County Commission passes a resolution to fund the new judgeship, a judicial assistant and a court reporter for the fnst}4 months.

The Sixth Judicial Circuit is a single county circuit composed of Tuscaloosa County. Currently the circuit is served by six circuit judges and two district judges. The following statistics are set forth in accordance with the criteria for determining additional judgeship needs established by the Supreme Court of Alabama in its order of May 26,1975, and the supplemental weighted caseload system which was established by the
Supreme Court on February 19,1987, and updated on March 19, 2008.

Demographic Information: Table I illustrates the population, square miles, and number of attorneys per judge. Population and population density per judge data are important in determining judgeships because filings increase with population. Square miles per judge is important in those circuits composed of two or more counties, as travel time from county to county is a factor in the judges' workload. Attorneys per judge indicate the legal climate and may be used to assess the competitive nature of the legal environment in the jurisdiction. Table I Demographic Statistics Population per Judge based on the 2010 US Average Population per Judge (statewide) Rank (out of 41 circuits)
Square Miles per Judge Average Square Miles per Judge (statewide) Rank (out of 41 circuits)
32,443

32,738
22"d

223 348

3lrt
t23
88
1

Population per Square MiIe Average Population per Square Mile (statewide) Rank (out of 4l circuits) Attorneys per Judge Average Attorneys per Judge (statewide) Rank (out of 41 circuits)

lth

93

98
6th

Population perJudge: The circuithas32443 inpopulationperjudge, ranking 22"d inthe state.

With the addition of a oircuit judge, the court would drop to a statewide ranking of 27h in population perjudge.
Land Area: The Sixth Judicial Circuit includes 1,336 square miles and is ranked 3l't in the state for square miles per judge. With the addition of a circuit judge, the court would drop to a statewide ranking of 34ft in square miles per judge. This factor does not weigh heavily here with a single county circuit.

Population: Between 1980 and 2010, population increased by 41.5 percent in the Sixth Judicial Circuit. Based on the 2010 US Census, the Sixth Judicial Circuit ranked 22d in population per judge and 1lft in population density. See Table II.
Table II Population Data 1980 - 2015

1980

1990

2000

2010

1980-2010 2000-2010
22.70
41 .5%
7 .5o/o

Statewide

3,894,025 4,040,389 4,447,100 4,779,736

1.37,54r 150,500
164,87 5

Sixth

Circuit

194,656

18.loh

Caseload Information: The workload of a court is measured in tenns of filings and dispositions. Table Itr illustrates a breakdown of the circuit court caseload in the Sixth Judicial Circuit for the past five fiscal years.

Filings and Dispositions: Case filings in the Sixth Judicial Circuit have ranged from a low of L0,702 in FY 20ll ta a high of 11,340 in FY 2UlZ.Filngs have increased by 2.3Yo over the five year period. Case dispositions ranged from a low of 10,66 1 in FY 20L2 to a high of 12,354 in FY 2010. Over the five yearperiod, dispositions have decreased.6.T0/o.
Table m Circuit Court Caseload Statistics

FY 2008
Filings
Dispositions
1

F'Y 2009
1 1 ,165

F'Y 2010
11,236

FY 2011
10,702 10,942

FY 2012
11,340
10,661

1,084

11,426

TT,268

I2,354

Caseload per Judge: Table [V sets forth the caseload per judge for the Sixth Judicial Circuit during FY 2011, as well as the ranking and the statewide average.

Table fV
Caseload per Judge

Filines Der Judse 1,890 Rankins (out of 4l circuits) 4ttt Average 1.409
Based on the FY 2011 caseload, the Sixth Judicial Circuit ranks well above the statewide average in frlings per judge. Filings per judge currently rank 4ft and are 34.1% above the
statewide average. Weighted Caseload: In addition to the above criteria, which assign equal value to all cases, the weighted caseload system was developed to recognize various factors ffierent in hearing different kinds of cases. The weighted caseload quotient was adopted by the Supreme Court as an additional criterion for determining judgeship needs on February L9,1987, and updated

on March 19, 2008. The weighted caseload system is based on estimates of the amount of judge-time needed to handle a given caseload. The formula calculates the number of hours needed to handle the caseload in the circuit. Based on the number ofjudges currently serving and the number ofjudges needed according to the formula, the need for new judgeships is quantified and the circuits are then ranked by need. Using the weighted caseload formula, the Sixth Judicial Circuit ranks 4ft in the state in needing 2.0 additional circuit judges. The circuit judge implied need for the circuit court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit is shown on Table V.

Table V Weighted Caseload

Circuit Court Weighted Caseload 2.0 Rank(out of 4l circuits) 4th

Average 0.3

Conclusion: Based on the criteria established by the Supreme Court of Alabama and the weighted caseload analysis, an additional circuitjudge is needed in the Sixth Judicial Circuit; however, the Sixth Judicial Circuit is ranked 4d in need according to the weighted caseload analysis with the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit (Mobile County), the Twenty-Third Judicial Circuit (Madison County), and the Twenty-Eighth Judicial Circuit (Baldwin County) ranking above the Sixth Judicial Circuit in need for additional judges in circuit and distict courts. We recommend that circuit judgeships in those areas be filled before creating an additional judgeship in the Sixth Circuit, but due to severe budget constraints our response assumes long-term funding for any new judgeship created in the state.