The Minnesota criminal justice system was created in 1857. There were 42 attorneys in the State. Lawyers just practiced “law” — every kind of law. Today, the Minnesota Bar recognizes 11 specialties. A lawyer can be good at two, three, maybe four different kinds of law; however, the one thing I can guarantee you is: If a lawyer says they practice all kinds of law, they engage in malpractice every day.
78% of Minnesota cases are criminal cases. We have 283 trial judges in the state. 39% had experience only as a prosecutor before they became a judge. Imagine being an innocent defendant facing such a judge. 34% never tried a criminal case before they became judges.
Imagine if you are an innocent defendant, or the victim of a terrible crime. 18% were only defense counsel before they became judges. Imagine facing this if you were the victim of a terrible crime. Only 14% of judges are highly experienced, and had the appearance of being neutral and detached. Only 1% had any appellate experience. Only .003% had legal education above the basic J.D.
This is not just a Minnesota problem. States are realizing their systems were built for 150 years ago. They are splitting their civil and criminal courts; their intermediate appellate courts; and ensuring their supreme courts have a mix of civil and criminal experience.
It is time for Minnesota to move into the 21st century. We need a constitutional amendment and statutory changes that bring experience into both the criminal bar and bench. We need advancement based on merit and the choices of the People’s legislators rather than the appointment of governors’ friends.
The People deserve the best protectors. The accused deserve the best defense. The accused, the victim, and the People deserve highly experienced, impartial referees.
You can read the full article at Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder.