Insights from a Courtroom Observation: a Reflective Analysis

I attended Judge Donald Canava’s motion calendar in CHC 2019 in the Lawson E. Thomas courthouse in Downtown Miami. His courtroom is a domestic violence drug court, and one of the most unique in the country, it deals in both criminal cases and civil cases He has been a judge for Miami-Dade county for about eight to nine years. I attended his courtroom on March 22nd, and the date is significant because there was a camera crew there to film 30 years of drug court and, when I spoke to some of the camera crew, they stated that they were filming a documentary or marketing video of sorts to show to other states to kind of adopt a DV drug court as well as to show off how “ahead” Miami and Florida is when it comes to drug court. Out of respect for the defendants I never wrote down any of their names since most if not all are recovering from drug issues and are going through private issues with their families as well as any from the court. However that being said I did write down numerous interesting events that happened during the motion calendar. To establish context, Judge Canava requires that before they go into the courtroom, before he hears each case, each and every single person set to appear before the judge must perform a drug test free of charge to them. Throughout the day, many people had come out to be positive, but one def. came out positive for cocaine, meth, alcohol, and marijuana, after apparently being weeks clean and after promising to be clean for the rest of his life.

As soon as Judge Canava (who generally is in a good mood and source of inspiration) read the results aloud to the court he took off his glasses in anger and shifted completely. He went from being polite and helpful, to demanding that the def. be placed in the jury box to be dealt with later and see what his consequences would be. Another such case was that this def. was constantly testing positive and Judge Canava I’m assuming reached his breaking point with him (this aforementioned def. had a history of being rude and violent with staff of The Advocate Program) decided to take him into custody, and going ahead and referring him to residential treatment to where he would be put inside of a rehab to get him clean and to better his life. On a more positive note, for the cases that finish their term, that finish all their conditions, Judge Canava, asks the court to give the def. a round of applause, asks the def. to come up to the bench, and Judge Canava personally hands them a certificate of completing the program along with a handshake, and a hug to one of the def. I saw that day, when I spoke to staff from Advocate, (since they monitor each case), they told me that the case had been going on since 2016 but that they constantly kept relapsing and going back until finally she admitted herself to residential treatment (after the court requested her too) and changed her life around.

As for the attorneys present, the state was there only for the criminal calendar, while private attorneys/public defenders were popping in and out, only if one of their cases was being called. Very different from other courtrooms I have seen in where the def. is always present throughout the motion calendar. It must be noted however, that neither side was really involved in the whole courtroom, the only time I ever saw any of the state attorneys speak was to nolle prosse cases or to dismiss them. And I only saw one defense attorney speak to her client, then advocate program, and then the judge when her client was called. But soon after she left, presumably to another courtroom. Contrary to what was said in Tarr and in class, in where most civil cases are settled, almost all if not all, of the civil cases are completely going through the court process. Granted they aren’t going to trial, but the suit brought against them is only dismissed once the program has been completed. As for the criminal side of the court, it goes hand in hand with what the book said, about 90% of cases go to a plead deal, the plead deal in these cases being if they do the program, the state will drop the charges and there won’t be a trial.

Judge Canava all in all was extremely interested in his defendants lives, betterment, and overall well being. It’s as if he was the judge solely to each def., as if he had no other cases to see. He remembered almost all of their stories, faces, etc. He was for the most part a very lenient person who was kind and supportive of each def. but in no way does that mean he was weak. Judge Canava had a way of turning the courtroom upside down in terms of it’s mood and atmosphere when he needed to. He could turn to be very strict and harsh if he needed to, although he very rarely became hostile, only when def. were not complying with the court, being hostile themselves, or testing positive. I truly believe that Judge Canava cares about his def., he only consulted The Advocate Program to see how and if they were complying with the conditions, not what the conditions were. Perhaps he didn’t need to remember each case’s conditions because they were each the same, each case or type of a case having the same conditions and expectations. If this is the case, then it would go with what the book tells us, that the law must be applied uniformly and the same for everyone.

Or maybe he sets those conditions off of precedent that the judges who sat in his seat before him have set. In reality I think it’s a mixture of all, as when I asked with staff members for The Advocate Program, they told me that for the most part each has similar conditions but some def. have conditions that others don’t, for example one def. may have to do a substance abuse course along with their random drug testing etc. while another will have to do AA meetings. Basically, the expectations and conditions that the court sets out vary from case to case. I’ve mentioned the Advocate Program multiple times throughout the essay, and I leave it until now since I’ve been talking about the agents of the courtroom (the attorneys and Judge Canava). In truth the courtroom completely depends on The Advocate Program, a non profit pre-trial diversion clinic, to monitor each and everyone of the court’s cases, criminal and civil.

The Advocate Program makes sure the def./respondent is complying with all the conditions of the court, conditions such as random drug testing, batterers intervention program, anger management, so on and so forth. What is interesting though is that instead of relying on an agency like the department of corrections, the court system uses a third party. They aren’t a litigant per say, as they don’t have their own interests in the case, rather they are a sort of enforcement agency, as in the book and in class we discussed the idea that the court system doesn’t really have the ability to make sure people follow what they say. I learned a great deal from this observation, not just about the court system or how it functions, but also about myself. I learned that this is truly what I want to do with my life. It reinforced the notion of me becoming a prosecutor and one day becoming a judge. The impact that the courtroom has on bettering so many peoples lives and their families lives. The mix between domestic violence and drug court is such a unique concept that should be adopted in other states and counties.

Staff from The Advocate Program and the court system, are all committed to helping these people overcome their issues. My observation showed me that the legal system is the one described in the books and is the one we discussed in class. It’s a system that reaches so many people and makes a difference in all of our lives. This is not to say that the system we have isn’t perfect, it’s not, by a long shot. As we discussed in class there are judges who are not as caring and compassionate as Judge Canava is with his def., there are lawyers and prosecutors who don’t offer second chances to def. like the ones I saw, and there can’t always be such a helpful and beneficial enforcer to both the def. and the courts like The Advocate Program is. However the courtroom I visited is one of thousands, and even if a fraction of those thousands of courtrooms are committed to bettering the nation and society as a whole by interpreting the law, then this nation is on a great track.