CHAMBERS OF

County Judge
Thirteenth Judicial Circuit
Tampa, Florida 33602

Frances Maria Perrone

July 28, 2023

The Honorable Robert W. Lee

County Court Judge, Broward County
Judicial Circuit Assessment Committee Appointee

Sent via email

Re: Comments for consideration by the

Judicial Circuit Assessment Committee
convened pursuant to Florida Supreme Court AOSC23-25

Dear Judge Lee,

We write to you in response to Florida Supreme Court’s AOSC23-25. As stated
in the Order, Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.241
requires the Florida Supreme Court to “balance the potential impact and
disruption caused by changes in judicial circuits ... against the need to address
circumstances that limit the quality and efficiency of, and public confidence in,
the judicial process.”

Thank you for considering input from our branch as clearly the reverberation of
such a drastic change would impact not only those of us who work within the
system, but the millions of citizens in contact with the system seeking a legal
resolution in their personal lives.

The vast impact of massively overhauling Florida’s judicial circuits stands as a

staggering proposition when considering the impact on: the citizens of the State
of Florida, legal practitioners, court personnel, clerks of court, the Offices of the
State Attorneys, the Offices of the Public Defenders, sheriffs, workloads of all
stakeholders, elections, court buildings, court budgets, county funds, travel
requirements, state roads and traffic, the Florida Bar Board of Governors, local,
voluntary bar associations, and so many other factors associated with circuit
jurisdictions.

1 of 5
8 of 78
Currently the Thirteenth Circuit shares a simultaneous border with Hillsborough
County. Looking at the Hillsborough County Civil Court, as of April 30, 2023,
141,058 cases stood pending. The United States Census Bureau reports an
estimated population of 1,513,301 residents in Hillsborough County as of July
1, 2022. At quick glance, a simple calculation would estimate approximately
9.3% of Hillsborough’s population has contact with the county civil system.
Considering Circuit Civil, Family, Probate, Circuit Criminal, County Criminal,
Mental Health and the other thousands of pending cases before the Thirteenth
Circuit and Hillsborough County Courts1, a sizeable portion of our population
has court interaction.

The State courthouses and communities have longstanding traditions, policies,

procedures, and norms. To upend these local foundations of the justice system
would certainly cause the citizens grave concerns.

Legal practitioners, particularly small firms, would inevitably experience

negative effects from a circuit realignment. On the civil side, consider the solo
practitioners who practice in their home circuit and refer out cases arising in
neighboring circuits. If a circuit expansion were to occur, if the solo practitioner
takes a civil case in his home circuit, files pleadings in home circuit court and
the case gets randomly assigned to a neighboring circuit’s courthouse, the solo
practitioner now faces the dilemma of keeping the case and traveling for live
court appearances or referring the case out to a colleague. If the circuit
realignment allows for the solo practitioner to choose the courthouse where the
case is filed and the case would remain in the courthouse of choice, the courts
will find themselves facing forum shopping and potentially inflated dockets in
certain courthouses with other courthouses seeing dwindling caseloads. This
system would put an undue strain on the judges in the more frequently selected
areas.

Similarly, a consolidation of circuits allowing for choice of specific courthouse or

venue would cause misalignment for current court personnel. Busier
courthouses would need additional clerks, bailiffs and support staff.
Courthouses could face a lack of space requiring additional brick and mortar
space to house a heavily chosen courthouse.

A consolidation of circuits where civil cases are blindly rotated, could potentially
require extensive travel for live hearings by all parties involved. Though Zoom
and other technology work to create efficiencies for brief hearings, lengthier
hearings still proceed more smoothly with live court appearances. Florida’s
roads do not accommodate our ever-growing population. Travel to neighboring
areas, for instance Tampa to St. Petersburg or Tampa to Orlando, takes twice as

1
The Florida Office of the State Courts Administrator Statistical Reference Guide reflects a combined total
of 208, 417 circuit and county court filings for FY 2021-22.

2 of 5
9 of 78
long as the same route just ten years ago. This inefficiency burdens the parties
and does not serve to improve confidence in our system of justice.

Looking further from the perspective of solo practitioners and small firms,
competing with large firms would prove even more difficult in a super-sized
circuit in terms of advertising and connecting with the “local” court community
which would expand through circuit consolidation. Local, solo practitioners or
small firms who develop trusting, personal relationships with their clients create
an extended goodwill and trust in the court system. Larger circuit boundaries
and expanded use of technology may very well put small firms out of business
and eliminate the personal contact which translates to trust in the system.

With circuit trial judges facing election in Florida, a consolidation of circuits

would impose tremendous hardships on an individual running for judge. While
state representatives campaign across various counties, a circuit judge carries a
responsibility of working throughout a work week and avoiding unnecessary time
away from his or her office and court obligations. Judicial candidates are non-
partisan and pursue a role on the bench based on experience and reputation.
By facing election in an enlarged circuit, a circuit trial judge candidate from a
smaller county with an established reputation in such a county, would face a
Goliath opponent from a candidate in a larger county with a reputation in a
broader, more densely populated community. Elections would look and feel
different and certain candidates would face a great disadvantage. Judges
running for reelection would face hardships balancing daily tasks with a
campaign over a broader area. This disparity would not only impact the
individual running for judge, but the constituents from smaller areas who may
experience decreased representation on the circuit trial bench.

The Thirteenth Circuit and Hillsborough County occupy one main courthouse
and one, smaller, satellite courthouse in Plant City. In addition to state funds,
the Court enjoys and appreciates funding from our local, county government.
Should the circuit no longer remain within the boundaries of Hillsborough
County, our circuit and possibly similarly situated circuits, may lose precious,
supplemental funding from the local county governments.

The Clerks of Court are elected per county and serve the county and circuit
courts. A consolidation of circuits would greatly impact these institutions
causing filings to vary based on the changed circuit jurisdictions. As noted above
regarding choice of courthouse vs. blind rotation, the Clerks could face
exponentially greater filings or reductions depending on the guidelines and the
response of members of the Bar.

The elected State Attorneys and Public Defenders along with their staff have
established practices, relationships and even terminology. Small matters such
as colloquial terms like a criminal clerk record referred to as a “court ticket” in
one jurisdiction, versus a “tear sheet” in another, and other various, local names
for the same document would create initial confusion among practitioners forced

3 of 5
10 of 78
to adapt to a merged, expanded circuit. For elections, State Attorneys and Public
Defenders would also face the challenges of running a larger, more expansive
office balanced with an election over a broader area of the state.

Further, consolidating the circuits would require each elected State Attorney and
Public Defender to develop and build new relationships with a greater number
of law enforcement agencies and personnel. The working relationships and
institutional knowledge established in the current circuits would face disruption
by the expansion of current circuit lines. These disruptions and need to build
trusting relationships would further challenge the public’s confidence in the
court system.

Another aspect of the court system which would face challenges from circuit
expansion is the network of voluntary bar associations. Existing, local, voluntary
bar associations which enjoy membership from the local community, could
happily expand and welcome new members from an expanded circuit. However,
the realistic ability to attend a lunch or function at a great distance would make
membership impractical. These organizations foster strong relationships,
professionalism and trust among lawyers and between the bench and bar. A
disruption to these organizations could also weaken those relationships and,
long-term, create a less effective system for our citizens.

The Florida Bar Board of Governors sit in their current seats as elected members
from each judicial circuit. While the number of seats could realign with a shift
in circuit boundaries, the connection between the representatives and the
population each of them serve would certainly not benefit from a larger area of
representative coverage.

The Judicial Circuit Assessment Committee July 14, 2023 meeting materials
include, “A Report of the Judicial Circuits of Florida,” prepared by House
Committee on Judiciary in September of 1991. The report includes maps with
an evolution of Florida’s Judicial Circuits dating back to 1838. The data reflects
the state divided into seven (7) judicial circuits in 1903 when the population of
Florida stood at 587,000. The judicial circuits increased to eleven (11) in 1911
when the population had grown to 773,0002. Additional circuits were
implemented throughout the twentieth century as the population grew, of course
taking other factors into account3. In 2022, Florida had 20 judicial circuits with
an estimated population of 22, 244,823. Though we enjoy advanced technology
and other factors make life different in 2023, consolidating judicial circuits
certainly contradicts the historical expansion of the same branch of government.

2
All population data taken from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates
3
In 1934, Florida had 14 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 1,585,000.
In 1951, Florida had 16 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 2,980,000
In 1963, Florida had 17 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 5,628,000
In 1967, Florida had 19 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 6,242,000
In 1969, Florida had 20 judicial circuits with an estimated population of 6,641,000

4 of 5
11 of 78
The foregoing comments only serve as a glimpse into the confusion, breakdown
in the confidence of the system of justice, strain on our branch of government
and other myriad of problems bound to occur by the upheaval of the current
judicial boundaries.

Thank you for your consideration, Judge Lee. I trust the committee’s thorough,
objective analysis will lead to a finding supporting maintaining, Florida’s current
judicial circuit boundaries.

Sincerely,
Frances M. Perrone
Hillsborough County Court Judge
Administrative Judge, County Civil

Lisa A. Allen
Hillsborough County Court Judge

Melissa C. Black
Hillsborough County Court Judge

Emily Peacock
Thirteenth Circuit Judge

Miriam V. Valkenburg
Hillsborough County Court Judge

5 of 5
12 of 78
Maggie Lewis

From: Robert Lee

Sent: Friday, July 28, 2023 11:01 AM
To: Maggie Lewis
Subject: Fwd: Circuit Assessment

CAUTION 
This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the 
sender and know the content is safe. 

FYI . . . 

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Erika Quartermaine   
Date: Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 5:44 PM 
Subject: Circuit Assessment 
To:   
 

Hello Judge Lee, 

  

Thank you for the invitation to provide feedback regarding the judicial circuit assessment.  In his June 15th 
correspondence to Chief Justice Muniz, Speaker Renner suggests the consolidation of circuits.  He does note that the 
Supreme Court may analyze the need to increase, decrease, or redefine the judicial circuits; however, he specifically 
suggests consolidation because he believes it will create efficiencies and better uniformity.   He references the disparate 
populations of the Eleventh Circuit (Miami) and the Sixteenth Circuit (the Keys).  Having lived and worked in Miami and 
spent a great deal of time in the Keys, they are worlds apart.  Clumping them together is simply wrong.  Other than a 
border and a tropical breeze, those geographic territories have very little in common.  Treating them as the unique 
places they are is integral in maintaining the integrity of the legal process and creating public confidence.    

  

I am troubled by Speaker Renner’s suggestion.   I’m unaware of the inefficiencies and lack of uniformity to which he 
refers.  The judiciary and related offices are already rather centralized in terms of employment issues.  The number of 
judges in a given circuit is dependent on an extensive analysis that OSCA does each year so that has been tailored 
specifically to each Circuit.  OSCA, the Conference of County Judges (and its committees), the County of Circuit Judges 
(and its committees), the Supreme Court (and its task forces and other committees) are well developed organizations 
that serve as a unifying force in terms of judicial education and communication amongst judges.   Having served as a 
prosecutor, it was my impression that the state‐wide communication and education of the State Attorneys was also well 
developed.   

  

The innumerable organizations within each judicial circuit have achieved well‐developed internal systems and systems of 
communication between the interested parties.  To expand these systems will prove to be extremely difficult given the 
number of interested parties, the complexity of legal issues, and the available resources.  I am not saying that we should 
do something a certain way because it is hard to change.  I am saying that these systems have been continually 
1 13 of 78
improved over the last fifty plus years and there is no need to change for the sake of changing.  If there are problems in 
specific offices, fix those problems.  As demonstrated with other “consolidated” agencies in Florida, consolidation can 
lead to more bureaucracy and many unforeseen problems.   

  

I am further troubled about the possibility of a decrease in the number of elected officials in Florida.  If we consolidate 
circuits, it would necessarily consolidate power in the hands of fewer people.  A connection to the community is one of 
the greatest attributes a judge, state attorney, a public defender, or other public sector representative can have.  The 
decentralization of power provides a check on abuses of power and that is crucial when the rights and liberties of our 
fellow citizens are at issue.    

  

Again, thank you for the opportunity to be heard.  I hope you will consider my concerns during the course of your 
committee assignment.   

Erika Nikla Quartermaine 

  

  

2 14 of 78