Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Overstretching the bounds with judicial admonitions

By SUE CARLTON
Published March 27, 2006

Two hypothetical scenes from your local courthouse:

A convicted burglar stands before a judge to hear the rules of his probation, how much money he has to pay back, how many hours he'll spend picking up trash on the roadside.

And get your GED, the judge orders.

Hmmm, thinks the burglar. Get my high school diploma? Doesn't have anything to do with breaking into houses, but I guess it couldn't hurt.

Yes sir, your honor.

A woman who wrote bad checks goes to court for the same drill: this much restitution, that many community service hours. The judge notes the woman is a single mom with a bunch of kids, maybe why she got into money trouble in the first place.

And don't have any more children, the judge orders.

You can almost hear the sound of brakes screeching. We all know crossing the line when we hear it.

But sometimes the question is more subtle. In routine court cases, as judges try to find ways to keep people from coming back in front of them, what's appropriate, and what's a step too far?

Last week, a couple from Mexico stood before Pasco Circuit Judge William Webb. Their two little boys had been found wandering away from home and were put into foster care. The couple was in court to hear all the things they needed to do to get their kids back, like taking parenting classes.

The judge asked through an interpreter if they planned to become permanent residents. " "Si, " they said. Then he ordered them to learn English, too.

No, this probably wasn't some "America, love it or leave it" moment. Though the mother's attorney Mark Goettel didn't like the English class requirement, he also said he thought the judge's heart was in the right place.

The couple, accused of domestic violence and alcohol abuse, have a tough road ahead in their fight to get their children back. "I thought their future success was going to be very much influenced by whether or not they were able to speak English," the judge told Times reporter Colleen Jenkins.

Yes, life would probably be easier. But does learning the language have anything to do with their ability to be decent parents?

Think of all the things judges could order people to do that you might like to hear. Get a haircut. Call your mother. Just stop being such a jerk in general.

To baseball great turned serial arrestee Dwight Gooden? Apparently it's too late to order him to quit blowing all his chances.

To the woman who got house arrest and probation last week after she burned down a block of historic Plant City with a lit cigarette? Get the patch.

Then the not-so-funny. In Panama City, Circuit Judge Richard Albritton is accused of an array of bad-judge behavior, including telling a woman in court to close her legs and stop having babies. Notably, he's also accused of ordering a defendant to go to church as part of his probation. (Separation of church and state, anyone?)

Told this was unconstitutional, the judge allegedly said that he knew that, but the defendant didn't know that.

Which is precisely the problem. Defendants, especially those avoiding jail or just generally hoping to make the judge happy, aren't inclined to protest, even when requirements poke too far into their private affairs.

Judges like Webb, who deal with abused and neglected kids in court, have a formidable job. But whether mom and dad can speak English has nothing to do with what kind of parents they will be.

Suggesting that learning the language will help them is one thing. Ordering it from the bench is another.

And stepping that far into their lives was probably one step too far.

--Sue Carlton can be reached at carlton@sptimes.com

[Last modified March 27, 2006, 00:31:13]