My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/25/1980
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1980
>
6/25/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:48:53 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 12:08:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/25/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
108
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
�T. _ <br />W <br />�Shty of 7luriba <br />CHARLES E. SMITH R <br />r.1F)Cu1r JU[.[IE wiileteelltii Jubiciill Tirruit <br />.Tuna 19, 1980 <br />MEMORANDUM <br />To: Hercules Kontulas <br />Re: Circuit Courtrooms <br />224 COUNTY COURTHOUSE <br />VERO DrACH, PLA. 37760 <br />PHONE: 1305) 562.7871 <br />In reviewing the layout and design of the new circuit <br />courtrooms with the other Circuit Judges and a committee of the <br />County Bar Association, it appears there are some changes which <br />must be made. <br />1. At present, both circuit courtrooms are designed for <br />twelve man juries. Twelve man juries are only required in capital. <br />criminal cases and condemnation cases, and we feel that only one <br />courtroom would need.to be designed to accomodate a twelve man <br />jury. The proposed circuit courtrooms are just not large enough <br />to accomodate a twelve man jury. Therefore, both of these should <br />bc.- designed to accomodate seven man Juries, in a single row. <br />In order that we might have one courtroom for a twelve man <br />jury on the occasions when this is necessary, we are proposing <br />that the county courtroom at the north end be designed to accomodate <br />a twelve man jury. To accomplish this, the ,jury box rail would <br />have to be moved forward to give room to add an additional row <br />of seven chairs. The platform would have to be cularged for this <br />second row of chairs, and the back row elevated six or seven inches <br />higher than the front row. <br />2. The east circuit courtroom should have the north wall <br />extended eight or tett'-feet into the proposed lobby area to provide <br />a larger courtroom. !.' ?" <br />3. In both circuit courtrooms, there is insufficient room <br />between the attorneys' tabes and the railing. The trend in liti- <br />gation at present is multiple party actions with multiple attorneys. <br />Since the courtrooms are each only 20 feet wide, this; does not give <br />adequate work area. We would like to have the rail moved back (north) <br />2'8" in each courtroom, and benches placed inside the rail, adjacent to <br />the rail for additional seating in the attorneys' area. <br />4. If at all possible, we would like to retain one window <br />In e:)ch circuit courtroom, at the southernmost end, to prevent <br />claustrophobia and to eliminate the necessity for emergency battery <br />lighting. <br />S. The present plan calls for individual window or wall <br />air conditioning units, for the four circuit judges' office at the <br />south end of the building. It appears that a new central air con- <br />ditioni.nb system Is to be installed for the reception room, circuit <br />hearing rooms and secretarial area. It is my understanding that <br />window units costs at least twice as much to operate as a central <br />system. Window units are noisy and it is difficult to conduct <br />conferences or to concentrate with this noise. I understand that <br />the original idea was that the Judges would be iii other counties <br />part of the time and thus, the units would not be in use. As our <br />county continues to grow, there will be less traveling by the <br />circuit judges and more use of the offices here. <br />JUN 2 51980 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.