Mason Barber

Street Law

Ms. Lawliss

Court Project

a. On Tuesday, May 1st of 2018, I attended a court session at the new Peru Town

Court building in Peru, New York. I attended the court session from 2:15 to 3:15

on that Tuesday. The judge presiding over the court for that particular session was

Judge Larry Cabana. The court session’s purpose was to hear all the civil suits

that had been brought before the court. The court is located on 22 Davey Drive in

Peru, New York.

b. The court proceeded in what I’d say was “organized chaos.” I came into the court

at an awkward time, so I wasn’t able to see who called the court to session or how

the court session concluded. I can say that the judge called each case into order as

it appeared next on his docket. There were many cases that were settled during the

hour that I was at the court house. I would say that there were approximately eight

cases that were handled in that single hour. During all of the cases, the attorneys

and clients approached the judge’s bench. The court was very fast paced, and a

sense of urgency was spread throughout the room. There was an overall feeling of

continuous movement and that any stagnation would be detrimental. The process

was fairly simple and cyclical where each case was dealt in a similar manner.

c. At first, I was very confused on what was happening in the courtroom. My

confusion was derived from the fact that I came in during the middle of a case and
 had absolutely no idea what was happening. If you’re not paying attention and

listening closely, then confusion is bound to occur. After a while, I got the hang of

what was happening, and the confusion dwindled. As a member of the public, I

could understand what was happening.

d. Most of the court cases were traffic violations, but one particular case caught my

attention. It was a traffic violation, but the defendant wasn’t even there. The

attorney that represented the defendant asked for a postponement of the trial for

two weeks. The prosecutor attempted to change I to one week, but the defense

attorney argued that his client doesn’t have a record and would be his first time

appearing in court. The judge accepted this plea and that case was postponed for

two weeks.

e. I thought that the judge and attorneys handled the case in a very fair and even

way. Both attorneys had agreeable reasons to their arguments and I think that that

the judge made the best decision. The prosecutor made a great case for not

allowing a postponement of the case. He argued that it was the defendant’s

responsibility to be there, and that it wasn’t fair to postpone the case. The defense

attorney also made a great case stating how inexperienced his client was, how he

had no prior records with criminal history, and that he was at his job. The judge, I

believe, made a fair decision. If the defendant had no prior criminal history, and

the defendant could not get out of work, the judge made a fair decision. Nothing

about the case, or about other cases struck me s irrational or wrong. Everything

was dealt with careful consideration and deliberation. Both attorneys in the case

and the other attorneys through the court session acted very professionally and
 responsibly. There weren’t any times during the session that I felt the attorneys

acted too emotional or weren’t professional.

f. I think that the new courthouse is a great facility that serves the needs of the court

excellently. There is a room where attorneys can talk to their clients and a

bathroom. The room itself is beautiful and it’s surprising how different it looks

from when the Peru Federal Credit Union was there. I believe that the court was

run very smoothly. There seemed to be no confusion during the session. As in,

there weren’t any prolonged disruptions or breaks where nothing happened. The

transitions from each case to another case were smooth and quick. Another that

worked well at the court was the placement of seating in comparison to where the

judge’s bench is. Where the clerk’s office is also convenient. The office where

you can pay fines and such is in the back of the courtroom where you first walk

in. This is very convenient because it allows for easy transitions from case to case

without having to wait somewhere that could possibly block the bench. Overall

the courtroom ran very smoothly.

g. Although some aspects of the court session ran smoothly, there were times when

it didn’t run smoothly. The courtroom is very small. There are about 20 seats in

the entire courtroom so many people who came in late had to stand at the back of

the room. A way to amend this is to add more seating. There were many times

during the hour I was there that I was shoulder to shoulder with people. In the

courtroom, a couple of the attorneys treated the whole process quite informal and

talked the entire time or walked around talking to defendants. There were many

attorneys there. This wasn’t necessarily a problem until they all sat together and
communicated like they were old chums who hadn’t seen each other in a while. It

became very rowdy at some points when certain attorneys weren’t representing a

client and had the chance to sit together. A solution to this would be to ask the

attorneys to be respectful of the court. The parking lot at the courthouse is quite

small. There weren’t enough parking spots and in turn double parking and other

unsafe parking habits occurred. I had to park on the grass where the plow trucks

turnaround on Davey Drive. A solution to this would be to just add more parking

spots or to expand the parking lot from the current size. The parking lot as of now

is the same size it was when the Peru Federal Credit Union was still there. A final

issue that I encountered and discovered was that you couldn’t hear what was

being discussed. Every time a new case was presented, the attorneys and clients

approached the bench and the matters were settled up there. I was sitting towards

the back of the room and it was hard, very hard, to listen to what was happening.

It’s understandable for privacy sake and to save face for some of the defendants,

but if you were trying to do a Street Law project like I was, it was very hard to do

listen and understand what was happening. I wish that would’ve spoken and run

the case similar to how you see it on television from the courtroom desks. If that

were the case, it would prompt them to speak louder so that the rest of the court

could hear what was happening. That is all the grievances that I had with the

court. Overall, it was entertaining and educational.