Search results

The California Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) has adopted a formal advisory opinion providing guidance to judges and judicial candidates to assist them in determining the types of activities they may engage in...

Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye responded to a jury-service summons today and eventually was not selected. In the past, she has served on juries throughout her public service career in the judicial branch.

Can a presiding judge disqualify an entire bench? The answer is a decisive “no”, according to the Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions, the ethical rule is that no judge may decide if another judge is disqualified. But they also gave...

The Judicial Council has revised rules of court and forms to help implement a statute that expands the use of expedited jury trials in California, effective July 1.

Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye this week called for the creation of a Judicial Council Budget Committee to review recommendations on statewide budget changes, the use of statewide reserves, and proposals for grant funding for judicial branch ...

May 9-13 is Juror Appreciation Week, but courts are making the jury system better all year with check-in kiosks, text reminders, and web-based services.

See how new and renovated courthouses are making jury service a more comfortable experience.

Public comment helps the Supreme Court of California’s Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions draft advisory opinions on ethics issues of importance to California’s judges—it also helps them decide whether to publish an opinion or redraft based on the comments received.

Recent U.S. Supreme Court's Williams v. Pennsylvania case applies a disqualification standard for former prosecutors similar to earlier California Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) advice—CJEO extends its advice to service in a prior conviction.

SAN FRANCISCO—At its public meeting on July 29, the Judicial Council approved funding allocations for general court operations and specific costs of the trial courts for fiscal year 2016-17.

The Court Facilities Advisory Committee today voted to recommend to the Judicial Council that all 23 current judicial branch projects continue based on the general criteria of working with available funding, not incurring additional costs, or wasting funds. Projects would be grouped into four broad categories that would determine how far an individual project can proceed until adequate funding is restored.

At its meeting today, the Judicial Council adopted a process to award $25 million in grant funding to promote innovative and efficient programs in the courts.