Judges Write in Opposition To Consolidating Circuits
Judges Write in Opposition To Consolidating Circuits
Judges Write in Opposition To Consolidating Circuits
County Judge
Thirteenth Judicial Circuit
Tampa, Florida 33602
Thank you for considering input from our branch as clearly the reverberation of
such a drastic change would impact not only those of us who work within the
system, but the millions of citizens in contact with the system seeking a legal
resolution in their personal lives.
1 of 5
8 of 78
Currently the Thirteenth Circuit shares a simultaneous border with Hillsborough
County. Looking at the Hillsborough County Civil Court, as of April 30, 2023,
141,058 cases stood pending. The United States Census Bureau reports an
estimated population of 1,513,301 residents in Hillsborough County as of July
1, 2022. At quick glance, a simple calculation would estimate approximately
9.3% of Hillsborough’s population has contact with the county civil system.
Considering Circuit Civil, Family, Probate, Circuit Criminal, County Criminal,
Mental Health and the other thousands of pending cases before the Thirteenth
Circuit and Hillsborough County Courts1, a sizeable portion of our population
has court interaction.
A consolidation of circuits where civil cases are blindly rotated, could potentially
require extensive travel for live hearings by all parties involved. Though Zoom
and other technology work to create efficiencies for brief hearings, lengthier
hearings still proceed more smoothly with live court appearances. Florida’s
roads do not accommodate our ever-growing population. Travel to neighboring
areas, for instance Tampa to St. Petersburg or Tampa to Orlando, takes twice as
1
The Florida Office of the State Courts Administrator Statistical Reference Guide reflects a combined total
of 208, 417 circuit and county court filings for FY 2021-22.
2 of 5
9 of 78
long as the same route just ten years ago. This inefficiency burdens the parties
and does not serve to improve confidence in our system of justice.
Looking further from the perspective of solo practitioners and small firms,
competing with large firms would prove even more difficult in a super-sized
circuit in terms of advertising and connecting with the “local” court community
which would expand through circuit consolidation. Local, solo practitioners or
small firms who develop trusting, personal relationships with their clients create
an extended goodwill and trust in the court system. Larger circuit boundaries
and expanded use of technology may very well put small firms out of business
and eliminate the personal contact which translates to trust in the system.
The Thirteenth Circuit and Hillsborough County occupy one main courthouse
and one, smaller, satellite courthouse in Plant City. In addition to state funds,
the Court enjoys and appreciates funding from our local, county government.
Should the circuit no longer remain within the boundaries of Hillsborough
County, our circuit and possibly similarly situated circuits, may lose precious,
supplemental funding from the local county governments.
The Clerks of Court are elected per county and serve the county and circuit
courts. A consolidation of circuits would greatly impact these institutions
causing filings to vary based on the changed circuit jurisdictions. As noted above
regarding choice of courthouse vs. blind rotation, the Clerks could face
exponentially greater filings or reductions depending on the guidelines and the
response of members of the Bar.
The elected State Attorneys and Public Defenders along with their staff have
established practices, relationships and even terminology. Small matters such
as colloquial terms like a criminal clerk record referred to as a “court ticket” in
one jurisdiction, versus a “tear sheet” in another, and other various, local names
for the same document would create initial confusion among practitioners forced
3 of 5
10 of 78
to adapt to a merged, expanded circuit. For elections, State Attorneys and Public
Defenders would also face the challenges of running a larger, more expansive
office balanced with an election over a broader area of the state.
Further, consolidating the circuits would require each elected State Attorney and
Public Defender to develop and build new relationships with a greater number
of law enforcement agencies and personnel. The working relationships and
institutional knowledge established in the current circuits would face disruption
by the expansion of current circuit lines. These disruptions and need to build
trusting relationships would further challenge the public’s confidence in the
court system.
Another aspect of the court system which would face challenges from circuit
expansion is the network of voluntary bar associations. Existing, local, voluntary
bar associations which enjoy membership from the local community, could
happily expand and welcome new members from an expanded circuit. However,
the realistic ability to attend a lunch or function at a great distance would make
membership impractical. These organizations foster strong relationships,
professionalism and trust among lawyers and between the bench and bar. A
disruption to these organizations could also weaken those relationships and,
long-term, create a less effective system for our citizens.
The Florida Bar Board of Governors sit in their current seats as elected members
from each judicial circuit. While the number of seats could realign with a shift
in circuit boundaries, the connection between the representatives and the
population each of them serve would certainly not benefit from a larger area of
representative coverage.
The Judicial Circuit Assessment Committee July 14, 2023 meeting materials
include, “A Report of the Judicial Circuits of Florida,” prepared by House
Committee on Judiciary in September of 1991. The report includes maps with
an evolution of Florida’s Judicial Circuits dating back to 1838. The data reflects
the state divided into seven (7) judicial circuits in 1903 when the population of
Florida stood at 587,000. The judicial circuits increased to eleven (11) in 1911
when the population had grown to 773,0002. Additional circuits were
implemented throughout the twentieth century as the population grew, of course
taking other factors into account3. In 2022, Florida had 20 judicial circuits with
an estimated population of 22, 244,823. Though we enjoy advanced technology
and other factors make life different in 2023, consolidating judicial circuits
certainly contradicts the historical expansion of the same branch of government.
2
All population data taken from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates
3
In 1934, Florida had 14 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 1,585,000.
In 1951, Florida had 16 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 2,980,000
In 1963, Florida had 17 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 5,628,000
In 1967, Florida had 19 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 6,242,000
In 1969, Florida had 20 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 6,641,000
4 of 5
11 of 78
The foregoing comments only serve as a glimpse into the confusion, breakdown
in the confidence of the system of justice, strain on our branch of government
and other myriad of problems bound to occur by the upheaval of the current
judicial boundaries.
Thank you for your consideration, Judge Lee. I trust the committee’s thorough,
objective analysis will lead to a finding supporting maintaining, Florida’s current
judicial circuit boundaries.
Sincerely,
Frances M. Perrone
Hillsborough County Court Judge
Administrative Judge, County Civil
Lisa A. Allen
Hillsborough County Court Judge
Melissa C. Black
Hillsborough County Court Judge
Emily Peacock
Thirteenth Circuit Judge
Miriam V. Valkenburg
Hillsborough County Court Judge
5 of 5
12 of 78
Maggie Lewis
CAUTION
This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
FYI . . .
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Erika Quartermaine
Date: Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:44 PM
Subject: Circuit Assessment
To:
Hello Judge Lee,
Thank you for the invitation to provide feedback regarding the judicial circuit assessment. In his June 15th
correspondence to Chief Justice Muniz, Speaker Renner suggests the consolidation of circuits. He does note that the
Supreme Court may analyze the need to increase, decrease, or redefine the judicial circuits; however, he specifically
suggests consolidation because he believes it will create efficiencies and better uniformity. He references the disparate
populations of the Eleventh Circuit (Miami) and the Sixteenth Circuit (the Keys). Having lived and worked in Miami and
spent a great deal of time in the Keys, they are worlds apart. Clumping them together is simply wrong. Other than a
border and a tropical breeze, those geographic territories have very little in common. Treating them as the unique
places they are is integral in maintaining the integrity of the legal process and creating public confidence.
I am troubled by Speaker Renner’s suggestion. I’m unaware of the inefficiencies and lack of uniformity to which he
refers. The judiciary and related offices are already rather centralized in terms of employment issues. The number of
judges in a given circuit is dependent on an extensive analysis that OSCA does each year so that has been tailored
specifically to each Circuit. OSCA, the Conference of County Judges (and its committees), the County of Circuit Judges
(and its committees), the Supreme Court (and its task forces and other committees) are well developed organizations
that serve as a unifying force in terms of judicial education and communication amongst judges. Having served as a
prosecutor, it was my impression that the state‐wide communication and education of the State Attorneys was also well
developed.
The innumerable organizations within each judicial circuit have achieved well‐developed internal systems and systems of
communication between the interested parties. To expand these systems will prove to be extremely difficult given the
number of interested parties, the complexity of legal issues, and the available resources. I am not saying that we should
do something a certain way because it is hard to change. I am saying that these systems have been continually
1 13 of 78
improved over the last fifty plus years and there is no need to change for the sake of changing. If there are problems in
specific offices, fix those problems. As demonstrated with other “consolidated” agencies in Florida, consolidation can
lead to more bureaucracy and many unforeseen problems.
I am further troubled about the possibility of a decrease in the number of elected officials in Florida. If we consolidate
circuits, it would necessarily consolidate power in the hands of fewer people. A connection to the community is one of
the greatest attributes a judge, state attorney, a public defender, or other public sector representative can have. The
decentralization of power provides a check on abuses of power and that is crucial when the rights and liberties of our
fellow citizens are at issue.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to be heard. I hope you will consider my concerns during the course of your
committee assignment.
Erika Nikla Quartermaine
2 14 of 78