“Court Can Happen Anywhere”: Courtroom Workgroup Members’ Perceptions of the Challenges and Opportunities of a Transformed Workplace

• Published date: 01 November 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231196574
• Author: Elizabeth Webster,Beth m. Huebner,Alessandra Milagros Early,Luis C. Torres
• Date: 01 November 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2023, Vol. 50, No. 11, November 2023, 1737 –1756.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231196574

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2023 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

1737

“COURT CAN HAPPEN ANYWHERE”

Courtroom Workgroup Members’ Perceptions of the

Challenges and Opportunities of a Transformed

Workplace

ELIZABETH WEBSTER

Loyola University Chicago

BETH M. HUEBNER

Arizona State University

ALESSANDRA MILAGROS EARLY

John Jay College of Criminal Justice

LUIS C. TORRES

Temple University

The COVID-19 pandemic has initiated lasting changes in a traditionally staid and inert court system. This study employs a

courtroom communities perspective to examine how courtroom workgroup members perceived COVID-19’s impact on their

work, their workgroup relationships, and the future of criminal court procedures. It analyzes data from semi-structured inter-

views with 22 prosecutors, 17 defense attorneys, and 10 judges in Milwaukee, WI, and St. Louis, MO. We find that moving

to virtual proceedings limited opportunities for informal interaction. The immediate impact was to upend the courtroom

communities’ familiarity, proximity, and stability with implications for plea negotiations and case resolution. Nevertheless,

most participants supported using virtual proceedings for certain types of court hearings. Public defenders were more likely

than prosecutors, judges, or private defense attorneys to express concerns about technological difficulties for defendants. We

conclude by discussing policy and practice implications and identifying areas for future research.

Keywords: criminal justice; criminal justice system; decision-making; law; qualitative analysis

AUTHORS’ NOTE: This research was supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

through the Safety and Justice Challenge Research Consortium. The Consortium is managed by the CUNY

Institute for State and Local Governance. We thank our collaborators on this project Don Stemen and Marisa

Omori. Many others have provided valuable feedback in earlier stages of drafting this work including Mary

Nowlan, Lilianna Perez, the participants of the Criminal Justice Ethics Schmooze 2022, and the attendees of a

related Indigent Defense Research Association talk. We also wish to express our gratitude to the judges, pros-

ecutors, and defense attorneys who participated in this study. Correspondence concerning this article should

be addressed to Elizabeth Webster, Assistant Professor, Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology,

Loyola University Chicago, 1032 W. Sheridan Road, Mundelein Building, Suite 807A, Chicago, IL 60660;

e-mail: ewebster1@luc.edu

1196574CJBXXX10.1177/00938548231196574Criminal Justice and BehaviorWebster et al. / Court Can Happen Anywhere

research-article2023

1738 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

Courts are an ancient institution, and their conception of space and time revolved around

people coming to them. You went to the judge. You went to the building . . . and COVID

exploded the notion of a temporal location for court. Court can happen anywhere.”

—Judge 8

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic transformed the criminal legal system by closing criminal

courts, suspending speedy trial rights, and temporarily prohibiting or discouraging jury tri-

als. These changes rapidly compelled a historically stagnant and “tradition-laden” institu-

tion (Michigan Trial Courts, 2021) to adapt and modernize (Ariturk et al., 2020; Baldwin

et al., 2020; Bannon & Keith, 2021; Engstrom, 2020). Traditionally, criminal courts have

been resistant to technological advancements and prone to “institutional inertia,” preferring

to maintain the status quo of court operations (National Center for State Courts [NCSC],

2020, p. 1). However, studies suggest that many post-pandemic courts do not intend to

return to the pre-pandemic status quo (Arizona Supreme Court, 2021; Michigan Trial

Courts, 2021; Supreme Court of Ohio Task Force, 2021; Turner, 2020; Vavonese et al.,

2020). Although implemented as a temporary measure during the pandemic, virtual court

proceedings are now commonplace in many courtrooms across the country. As a result,

opportunities for in-person engagement among system actors are limited, with implications

for courtroom workgroup relationships, plea negotiations, and case resolution. A growing

body of scholarship has documented the unique challenges faced by courts during the early

months of the pandemic, including adapting to virtual proceedings (Engstrom, 2020; Nir &

Musial, 2022; Rossner et al., 2021; Rowen, 2023), contacting and communicating with

defendants (Daftary-Kapur et al., 2021), and confronting the trial backlog (Baldwin et al.,

2020; Engstrom, 2020; Johnson, 2020; Spillane, 2021). Scholars have examined how these

challenges will impact the future of the courts and have identified lingering issues such as

the lack of internet services for defendants and jurors, concerns about the voluntariness of

guilty pleas, and the increase in court caseload (Baldwin et al., 2020; Bannon & Keith,

2021; Engstrom, 2020; NCSC, 2021). Despite the prevalence of COVID-19 related research,

few empirical studies have considered the viewpoints of court actors. These perspectives

are essential to consider, since how court actors interpret and adapt to pandemic-driven

changes can significantly influence the courts’ future.

The current work aims to consider how courtroom workgroup members have adjusted to

virtual proceedings and socially distanced communication within the context of an unprece-

dented trial backlog. This work extends the existing research on this topic in several ways.

Using data from interviews with 49 court actors, including prosecutors, defense attorneys, and

judges, we document the changes in communication and case processing from the year fol-

lowing the court closures for COVID-19. Most research exploring COVID-19 criminal legal

system changes has relied on survey methodology (Bernhard et al., 2021; Mazzone et al.,

2022; Schwalbe & Koetzle, 2021; Turner, 2020). However, courtroom workgroup decision-

making is primarily hidden and informal (Kutateladze et al., 2016; Ulmer, 2019), and little is

known about the unique adaptations that court actors had to make to process cases.

This study provides insight into how and why court actors adapted to COVID-19 related

closures as well as a more nuanced understanding of the courtroom workgroup during times

of technological change. Many judges, prosecutors, and private defense attorneys were