Doing Better by Themselves

The U.S. court in downtown Detroit has the familiar grey Government air. Lawyers match wits in somber courtrooms, jurors try to understand, defendants try to look innocent. But there is one big difference. Detroit's federal district (trial) court handles 90% of its criminal business without the help of a single U.S. commissioner--the federal magistrates who man the front line of federal criminal justice. Despite this fact, the Detroit court is among the best run in the U.S.

Elsewhere, 700 U.S. commissioners issue warrants, set bail; and determine whether there is probable cause to hold an accused person pending grand-jury action. Most of them can try petty cases and mete out sentences up to six months. Yet 30% of the commissioners are not lawyers; all are paid only by fees (annual maximum: $10,500) that impoverish the able, particularly among fulltime commissioners, and tempt the greedy to issue shaky warrants. The system is now under fire in Congress.

25-c- to Freedom. Perhaps the best argument against the commissioners is that the eight pioneering judges of the U.S. District Court of Eastern Michigan have done so well without them. Twenty years ago, the Michigan court's Detroit branch banished commissioners because they had become too chummy with bail bondsmen; worse, they often went easier on the clients of crony lawyers, while hiking bail astronomically in response to public pressure whenever grisly crimes hit the headlines.

As a result, despite an increasing flood of federal cases, the Detroit judges themselves took over the commissioners' jobs, a move that has notably improved and speeded up justice. In setting bail, the judges now seek to release as many defendants as possible before trial--regardless of their ability to satisfy the tough requirements of security-minded bondsmen. The practice is not only in line with the law's presumption of innocence until a guilty verdict, it also enables defendants to hire better lawyers and help prepare their own cases, to say nothing of saving taxpayers the cost of keeping them in jail.

In the Detroit court, if relatives or friends agree to pay the amount set as bail should the defendant take it on the lam, the defendant may be released in the custody of those relatives or friends --or even of himself. No cash is lodged with the court.

Idealistic as it may seem, the system is eminently practical. In 1964, the last year for which records are available, 84% of all the court's criminal defendants were released on personal recognizance. Although they were charged with everything from bank robbery to narcotics offenses, only 1% of that group failed to show up in court. What makes those figures all the more spectacular is that the Detroit court is a mere ten-minute, 25-c- bus ride away from the tempting possibility of sanctuary across the Canadian border.

Co-Op Sentencing. The Detroit court has also proved its enlightenment in one of the law's darkest areas: the wildly disparate sentences that different judges hand out for the same offense (TIME, Dec. 31, 1965). Chief Judge Theodore Levin organized "a sentencing council" five years ago. Made up of three judges and three probation officers, the council meets weekly to review every trial judge's forthcoming sentences. Each judge proposes his sentence, and the others suggest increases or decreases or shifts in emphasis. No judge is required to accept any of the advice. But all act together, and they have achieved what they call "uniform philosophy" if not uniform sentences. One result is that Detroit now leads all federal district courts in the use of indeterminate sentences that give well-behaved prisoners an earlier crack at parole. Impressed, district courts in Illinois and New York are trying similar systems.

Key to Eastern Michigan's progress is the cooperation among the eight judges. Led by Chief Judge Levin, who is Jewish, the court is a diverse group that includes four Roman Catholics, two Protestants and a Unitarian Universalist--Judge Wade McCree Jr., a Negro whom many consider to be the most likely of his race, after Thurgood Marshall, to reach the Supreme Court. If he does, he will take with him some exceptional experience in the art of keeping cases moving. So efficient is the Eastern Michigan court that the backlog on its docket is just about the smallest of any major federal district court.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.