2021 Judicial Conference Program

• Aaron Arnold, Director of Technical Assistance for the Center for Court Innovation provided Constitutional and Legal Issues in Problem-Solving Courts in August 2020. This presentation went over recent case law on topics important to problem-solving courts. • Denise Beagley, M.Sc., Manager of Clinical Initiatives & Training for Arizona State University’s Center for Applied Behavioral Health Policy, presented Trauma-Informed Courts: How Being Trauma-Informed Improves Judicial Decision Making in September.

SUBCOMMITTEES AND WORK GROUPS

Business and Technology Subcommittee The work group on Business and Technology Litigation formulated six recommendations which were presented to the Conference of Circuit Judges. The recommendations included: • Appointment of a statewide program coordinator (a majority of the members agreed that the coordinator should be an active or senior Business and Technology Case Management Program (BTCMP) judge) • Creation of an advisory body within the Judiciary structure • Elevation of the BTCMP Subcommittee to its own committee • Establishment of more specific criteria for case assignment to the BTCMP • Encouragement of the issuance and easy availability of written opinions on nonroutine mattes in BTCMP • Increased availability of appropriate educational opportunities for all BTCMP judges The conference agreed to recommend to the council the creation of a on Complex Litigation Committee under the Conference of Circuit Judges with an initial focus on business and technology. The conference also agreed that a Business and Technology Work Group be formed to address initially dissemination of opinions, improved data, and annual education on business and technology under the umbrella of the Judicial College. In addition, the conference agreed to recommend the creation of a Statewide Business and Technology Coordinator position. The council accepted the conference’s recommendation, which then was approved by Chief Judge Barbera. Behavioral Health Subcommittee The Behavioral Health Subcommittee (formerly the Mental Health, Alcoholism and Addiction) explores pre-trial and sentencing alternatives for the treatment and rehabilitation of the developmentally disabled, serious mentally ill, and substance use disordered defendants involved in the criminal justice system. This subcommittee will work closely with the Maryland Department of Health and other governmental agencies to monitor and provide information regarding both community and residential based treatment. The subcommittee emphasizes reducing the delays in the placement of incompetent, NCR, DDA, and substance dependent defendants. This subcommittee strives to ensure resources are readily available for more compliant probation supervision for the mentally ill and substance-addicted defendants. This subcommittee will work with the Education Committee to provide training in these areas. Mental Health Court Performance Measures In 2019, the Judiciary contracted with the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) to create Mental Health Court Performance Measures. Throughout the past year, NCSC visited mental health courts in Maryland to gather data and engage mental health court programs in the creation of performance measures. Implementing performance measurement is important because mental health courts compete for resources with other facets of the criminal justice system. Therefore, mental health courts must demonstrate that the limited resources provided to them are used efficiently and that the expenditure of resources produces the desired outcomes for participants. To this end, mental health court performance measures permit stakeholders to demonstrate that (1) participants are identified and linked to services in a timely manner, (2) that participation improves their capability to function effectively in society, (3) to reduce criminal activity, and (4) that participants have access to resources in the community to maintain their mental health stability after their program participation ends.

Performance measures are used to gauge the efficacy of current polices and highlight any areas that

| 94 |