By Hon. Rudolph E. “Rick” Carnaroli

Fifty years have passed since the State of Idaho’s first Magistrate Judges took the bench. The creation of the Magistrate Division of the District Court was the product of in excess of a decade of work throughout the 1960’s on statewide court reform. In 1960, the Idaho State Bar formally recommended court reform.  In 1962, the voters of Idaho passed an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Idaho to enable legislative efforts to implement statewide court reform. Finally, in 1969, the Idaho Legislature completed its legislation to make the work of many become a reality. Among the advocates for court reform were members and leaders from the Idaho Judicial Branch, the Idaho Legislature, and the Idaho State Bar, as well as the residents of the State of Idaho who all wanted a better system of local justice.[i]

On January 11, 1971, the first Magistrate Judges took office.  The Magistrate Divisions of the District Courts replaced the local “people’s courts,” which were the justice of the peace courts, the municipal courts, and the probate courts.  A new lower court system under a more centralized management structure administered by the Idaho Supreme Court was open for business with the promise that it would better meet the needs of the times and Idaho citizens.

Serving Communities Better

            One has to wonder if those who championed court reform could see beyond what they were working to create: a statewide lower court system better suited to serve all communities throughout Idaho.  Did they foresee that the Magistrate Judges would become such an integral piece of the fabric of the Idaho Judiciary?  After all, the Idaho Legislature created the Magistrate Division under its constitutional authority to create “inferior courts.”  A better choice of words might have been “lower courts.”

Did they envision that the Magistrate Division would be much more than a division of “inferior courts” and that it would eventually receive the assignment to resolve approximately ninety percent of all Idaho’s case filings annually? Did they foresee that the Magistrate Division would eventually become the trial court to handle all of Idaho’s family law cases? The Magistrate Judges handle not only divorce and related proceedings, but also Child Protective Act cases, terminations of parental rights, adoptions, guardianship, and conservatorship proceedings.

Did they realize that someday, the Magistrate Division would be the gateway for almost all criminal cases filed in Idaho? With the exception of those cases that involve felony indictments handed down by a grand jury, every felony, misdemeanor, and infraction case commences in the Magistrate Division.  The jurisdiction of the Magistrate Division has grown and Magistrate Judges are part of a well-trained corps of Idaho judges deciding significant issues on a daily basis.

            One has to wonder if the champions of court reform viewed the newly created position of Magistrate Judge as a profession for many of the judges appointed to serve in the Magistrate Division.  Service in the Magistrate Division has become a final career choice for many talented jurists, some of whom remained in office for decades and eventually retired as Magistrate Judges.  It is fair to say that the majority have made the position of Magistrate Judge the final stop in their legal careers.  In fact, some Magistrate Judges have served in excess of 30 years on the bench, including the Honorable Mark Riddoch who continues to serve Bonneville County after 37 years.  Many Magistrate Judges have said that they truly believe they would not enjoy another judicial position as well or as much and most have found great satisfaction in service to their local communities.

Notable Idaho Magistrates

The Magistrate Division also boasts an impressive list of alumni. Five Idaho Supreme Court Justices and former Justices served their local communities as Magistrate Judges.  Two Idaho Court of Appeals Judges have also served as Magistrate Judges. In addition, dozens of Magistrate Judges have transitioned from the Magistrate Division to positions as District Judges[TF1] .

            Our outgoing Chief Justice Roger J. Burdick started his long and successful judicial career in 1981 as a Magistrate Judge in Jerome County.  The first woman appointed to serve on the Idaho Supreme Court, former Chief Justice Linda Copple Trout began her judicial career as a Magistrate Judge in Nez Perce County.  One of the first magistrate judges, former Chief Justice Gerald Schroeder, began his long judicial career in 1971 when his position as a probate court judge was absorbed into the Magistrate Division by court reform.  His long judicial career as a Magistrate Judge, District Judge, and as a Justice has spanned five decades as he continues to serve as a Senior Judge for the Idaho Supreme Court.

Former Chief Justice Daniel T. Eismann started a nine-year appointment as a Magistrate Judge in Owyhee County in 1986.  He transitioned to a District Judge position in 1995 and in 2000 he was elected to the Idaho Supreme Court where he served 17 years.  The latest appointee to the Idaho Supreme Court who served as a Magistrate Judge was recently retired Justice Joel Horton.  Justice Horton served as a Magistrate Judge in Ada County from 1994 to 1996 and served on the Idaho Supreme Court for 11 years until he retired in 2018.

            In 1982, the Idaho Court of Appeals was born of legislative enactment.  Our two former Magistrate Judges who served on the Idaho Court of Appeals are the Honorable Roger Swanstrom and the Honorable John Melanson.  Judge Swanstrom served as one of the original Magistrate Judges from 1971 to 1973 after which he was appointed as a district judge for the Second District.  Judge Swanstrom again took part in opening a new branch of the Idaho judiciary serving as one of the first three appointed members of the Court of Appeals from 1982 to1993. Judge Melanson served as a Magistrate Judge in Minidoka County from 2000 to 2009 and served the Court of Appeals from 2009 to 2017 serving as chief judge from 2015 to 2017.

Helping Modernize Idaho’s Justice System

As the Idaho court system has grown and evolved Magistrate Judges have contributed at almost all levels to assist the Idaho Supreme Court’s mission to administer a more modern justice throughout the state.  The drug courts, or treatment courts are a prime example of a more modern justice. 

In 1999, Idaho’s first drug court was started by former Chief Justice Eismann while he was serving as a District Judge in Ada County.  In the years that followed, all seven of Idaho’s judicial districts established their own treatment courts.  Idaho has since come to rely on treatment courts as an economic alternative to incarceration and a means by which the courts hold mentally ill and chemically dependent Defendants accountable for their crimes while providing them treatment in the community. While felony offenders most often comprise the treatment court rosters, many Magistrate Judges have served and continue to serve as treatment court judges delivering team-based drug, alcohol, and mental health treatment and services to criminal justice involved persons in their communities.

Magistrate Judges have taken seats at the table in both the administration of the Court and on the Idaho Judicial Council.  Three of the four elected officers of the Magistrate Judges’ Association regularly participate as voting members of the Administrative Conference of the Courts.  The Administrative Conference generally meets four times a year with “the responsibility [as members of] the Administrative Conference collectively, and … individually to make decisions in such a manner as to promote the effective administration of justice throughout the state of Idaho…”[ii]  One Magistrate Judge serves as a non-voting member of the Idaho Judicial Council.  The Idaho Judicial Council’s mission among other things, is to act pursuant to Constitutional and statutory authority to safeguard the integrity of Idaho’s entire judicial system, and to “administer the judicial vacancy, judicial discipline, and judicial incapacity system” pursuant to its rules.[iii]

Magistrate Judges also continue to serve in concert with the Idaho Legislature and departments of state government. For the past several years the Magistrate Judges’ Association has delivered informational presentations to the Idaho Senate Judiciary and Rules and the Idaho House of Representatives’ Judiciary and Rules Committees early in the Legislative Session.  Magistrate Judges interface almost daily with the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare in matters involving child protection.  Magistrate Judges like the Honorable Bryan Murray and the Honorable John Varin have help shaped more modern legislation in juvenile law and juvenile corrections working closely with the Idaho Legislature and the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections. 

Magistrate Judges have been and are deeply involved in judicial education and work tirelessly as members of numerous committees for the Administrative Office of the Courts. Magistrate Judges participate fully in helping the Court develop better rules of procedure.  For example, the Idaho Family Law Rules of Procedure were the product of the hands of many persons, Magistrate Judges, lawyers, and others, but at the point of the spear of this effort were two recently retired Magistrate Judges, the Honorable Russ Comstock and the Honorable David Day. 

The Idaho State Bar also enjoys the benefit of volunteer service from many Magistrate Judges in various capacities, including but not limited to committee work and continuing legal education.  In fact, the Magistrate Division recently provided leadership to the Idaho State Bar as the Honorable Michael Oths served three years as the first Magistrate Judge elected as an Idaho State Bar Commissioner.

Conclusion

The idea of celebrating the 50^th anniversary of the Magistrate Division has been about four years in the making.  We first vetted the idea of celebrating our 50^th anniversary with the members of the Magistrate Judges Association and received nothing but positive response and support.  We shared the idea with the Administrative Conference, the Administrative Office of the Court, and the Justices and received equally positive responses and offers of support. The next three years passed quickly and some of the original ideas we kicked around are no longer possible due to the outbreak of COVID-19 in our country and our state.  However, a big push forward happened during the last several months with new ideas and renewed enthusiasm and now, we celebrate.

I would like to thank all who encouraged the Magistrate Judges Association to bring this celebration forward and all of those who contributed their support time and effort to mark this anniversary.  Idaho Magistrate Judges, past and present, are a proud bunch.  They should be.  I would also like to thank all of the Magistrate Judges who mentored me along the way while I spent a truly enjoyable 13 years as a Magistrate Judge.  Happy Anniversary to my friends and colleagues.  The legacy you have built and continue to build deserves commemoration.

---

---

[i] Condensed from Justice for the Times, A Centennial History of the Idaho Courts, edited by Carl F. Bianci, Chapters 5, 6 and 7.

[ii] Rule 43a.(c) I.C.A.R. Administrative Conference.

[iii] Rule 1(a) and (b), Idaho Judicial Council Rules of Procedure.

By Kristin Bjorkman Dunn

At times it felt like it would never end.  The year that seemed to span a decade.  Yet here we are at the start of 2021.  Is that a worldwide collective sigh of relief I hear?

Turning the calendar to a fresh page and a new year reminds us of the infinite possibilities that lie ahead.  It brings with it the delight of untapped possibility.  Like the brisk air on a cold winter morning, the newness is invigorating.  What is around the corner for us in 2021?  Hopefully an effective vaccine, gatherings with those we hold dear, and an end to Zoom meetings.

How do you approach the new year?  Do you take stock of where your life journey has led?  Do you sit with pen and paper and jot down a trajectory for the year (and years) ahead?  Do you question if this will be the year you finally grow your own vegetables, take that French class, learn to paint, or explore topics you are passionate about?    Whatever your approach, there is something about a new year that brings energy and a sense of hope.

In this moment of renewal, maybe you will find a unique way to find space for a daily ritual in your life.  Perhaps you will connect with nature.  Idaho is filled with breathtaking scenery where you can treat yourself to the view or go on a hike.  Maybe you will carve out space to pause and to breathe and to be.  Perhaps you look for ways to expand your perspective or commit to slowing down and savoring each moment.  Maybe you will nurture your creative soul.  It could be the year that you decide to be a mentor, check up on someone, and bring encouragement. 

If you are in search for a way to stop work, change gears and connect with others and recharge, you might take inspiration from the Swedes.  The Swedes practice Fika.  Fika is a cake and coffee break which natives insist is something of an art.  Fika refers to the pause – not just to enjoy the food and drink but to savor the moment itself.  It is a social phenomenon, a legitimate reason to set aside a moment for quality time.  Fika can happen at any time, morning as well as evening. And it happens not just once, but twice a day.  It can be savored at home, at work, or in a café.  It can be with colleagues, family, friends, or someone you are trying to get to know.  

Despite all its hardships, 2020 was the year we slowed down, took a breath, and found good in the little moments.  Moving into 2021, I will carry forward some of the moments from 2020 that seemed small, but made us feel big. I am referring to the feel good moments such as a walk in the park, reading more books, playing more board games, and the outpourings of empathy and generosity.  Perhaps one of the dearest of all these moments for me is the time I had with my two teens.  The pandemic brought me, my husband, and our son and daughter to the dining room table. It became our office and schoolroom.  The kids completed their school instruction and my husband and I worked our respective jobs.

When the opportunity came to take a break from this work at the dining room table, our family shared laughs and watched the occasional TikTok from which the inspiration came for a family Olympics that included bowling with toilet paper rolls and slurping food without using our hands.  Sometimes we took the dog for a walk around the neighborhood.  This precious time and connection was a silver lining of living in a pandemic world.  In 2021, I will continue to cherish however many more days the pandemic gifts to me with my two teens.

In addition to this gratitude that I carry forward into 2021, the words of Mahatma Gandhi, speak to me as I greet the new year.  He said, “It’s the action, not the fruit of the action, that’s important. You have to do the right thing. It may not be in your power, may not be in your time, that there’ll be any fruit. But that doesn’t mean you stop doing the right thing. You may never know what results come from your action. But if you do nothing, there will be no result.” However you welcome 2021, I hope you find your own space.  May you feel encouraged in the new year even if the landscape looks different than it ever has before.

---

By Hon. Jennifer L.K. Haemmerle

The phone rings at about 2:00 a.m. In response to the groggy, “Hello?,” comes one word… “Judge….” That’s all she needs to know; this is not a personal call but a request for a search warrant. Throughout the wee hours of the morning on any given day, weekend, or holiday, somewhere in Idaho a magistrate judge is up and awake conducting business as usual. In that regard, most parties don’t even know that a judge is already exercising judicial review and discretion over some issue that will affect his or her life.

“Got up, rolled out of bed, dragged a comb across my head”[i]

Any day can start with that call, which launches the Idaho magistrate judge into a day that will require her to respond to a vast variety of legal issues, civil and criminal, urgent and benign, that present themselves across the 44 counties and 95 benches that are the world of the judges of the Idaho Magistrate Division.

The Elephant in the Courtroom

The Idaho magistrate judge is the proverbial elephant encountered by the six blind men. As retold in the poem “The Blind Men and The Elephant” by John Godfrey Saxe,[ii] each man touched a different part of the elephant – the side, tail, trunk, tusk, ear, and knee. Based upon individual perception, each man determined that the elephant was a wall, rope, snake, spear, fan, or tree. The story illustrates that each person perceives his own truth based upon his own experience. In the same way, the party appearing before the magisterial elephant on one day may only perceive one facet of the magistrate bench, but the day holds many different encounters for the judge. To mix metaphors, the magistrate judge is a work horse, not a one trick pony.

First, consider that the blind men have never encountered an elephant before. So is the case with most people who find themselves in a courtroom. For many litigants, a case before the magistrate will be the first and often the only time that they are present in a courtroom. Even when the magistrate is hearing a matter in which the parties are represented by counsel who are well familiar with the courtroom, it is a new, challenging, and even intimidating experience for the party. The atmosphere is formal, the proceeding adversarial and unfamiliar, and there is an individual in a black robe (usually) who will render a decision that may affect how often a father sees his children, how much jail time a mother convicted of DUI must serve, or whether the decedent’s will was validly executed.

For each of these individuals, the magistrate judge is just that part of the elephant – the decider of custody, imposer of the sentence, and interpreter of the will. But these parts, and many more, are combined to make up the magistrate bench.

“Forget everything you have seen in television and the movies.”[iii]

During the week, the judge could start her daily docket with arraignments – the first appearance for dozens of defendants with misdemeanor charges arising from alleged violations of Idaho statutes or county and municipal code. Charges of every nature from misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter to a dog nuisance complaint must proceed through the same arraignment process.  Encounter any magistrate in the state, and she will be able to recite the penalty for dozens of criminal offenses.

 The rote recitation of rights and penalties is a far cry from the exciting pace of the TV crime drama. But this process, day after day, is critical to confirming constitutional rights – appointment of counsel for the indigent and setting of bond and pre-trial release.[iv] Hopefully, it is the thoughtful exercise of discretion on pre-trial release that prevents further crimes and protects people, including the defendant, from potential harm.

That same morning, the magistrate will also be the first judge to preside over the most serious of offenses in the state. Most citizens associate felony trials with district court but overlook that the majority of persons charged with felonies first appear before the magistrate. Sometimes that felon appears in court based on the very search warrant authorized by the magistrate in the middle of the night. It is not unusual that the only evidentiary hearing in a felony case is the preliminary hearing before the magistrate. A well heard preliminary hearing by a magistrate judge may help counsel focus on issues for resolution before the district court.

For many individuals, these appearances on infractions, misdemeanors, and felonies may be the first time they have been in a courtroom. It is often the first time they have encountered the protections of due process that are afforded to all of us under the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Idaho. For those who come before the magistrate for criminal proceedings, the judge starts out as the solid side of the elephant – the wall that stands firm to ensure constitutional rights are afforded to them.

“My object all sublime, I shall achieve in time – to let the punishment fit the crime”[v]

As part of the criminal docket morning, the magistrate judge moves to the tusk of the elephant. When considering the important task of imposing a criminal sentence, the judge must be keen in discernment and firm in conviction. Fortunately, the criminal sentencing and attendant interaction with the public gives the magistrate an opportunity to be more than just the judge who imposed a sentence. For many judges, the criminal sentencing docket is also the opportunity to provide tools, support, and encouragement as well as the sharp end of punishment when appropriate.

Whatever tools the magistrate judge choses, the ultimate goal at sentencing is to protect society and guide the defendant back onto the path of a law-abiding citizen.

“A hundred suspicions don’t make a proof”[vi]

On criminal law day, the magistrate will also preside over “motions to suppress.” Magistrates issue decisions that inform and shape the interpretation of search and seizure laws in the state, which have lasting and reverberating effect. The magistrate’s ruling on a suppression issue is often the rope that reigns in arbitrary police conduct or confirms that law enforcement’s detention of a defendant was supported by facts and the applicable constitutional standards. A cool and calculated ruling on a motion to suppress is essential for constitutional protections guaranteed to all citizens.

The docket of a magistrate judge, like the elephant’s trunk, is versatile and diverse. Administrative rules list an expansive case load assigned to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge.[vii] Jurisdiction spans every element of the human condition from mental health to housing and from divorce to death. Collections, custody, juvenile proceedings, jury trials, drinking and driving, probate, and paternity are all in the magistrate judge’s bench docket. During any given lunch break, the magistrate turns her attention to the ever-present Odyssey queue (the “Q”). A scroll through the Q may reveal orders for suspension of driving privileges in “refusal” hearings, default proceedings in collection actions, requests for scheduling conferences and trial settings,  orders and letters for the probate of wills, and reports to review in guardianship cases. Immediately after dealing with the Q, the magistrate is prepping for the next hearing, maybe an eviction trial, small claims case, or divorce. The judge often wonders if all will be accomplished by the end of the day.

“There is no such thing as an open and shut custody case.”[viii]

Family law can present the greatest of challenges for the magistrate. Most family law judges and attorneys concur with the opening lines of Anna Karenina, “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”[ix]  To be sure, most families in domestic relations cases, with guidance from court and counsel, resolve their differences and move forward amicably and with respect. It is a minority of cases that present the emotionally charged and legally challenging issues that require litigation. But those cases, when before the judge, demand full attention. The family law day for the judge will include temporary custody and support orders. Jurisdictional challenges under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) invite the intriguing prospect of a phone call to the judge in another state to discuss the merits of competing jurisdictional challenges.

Any family law day can also start with hearing civil protection orders. The protection of children and adults who have been victimized and controlled by domestic violence or stalking is a paramount concern to the court. But such protection must be within the scope of the law. The magistrate judge must be able to explain to a frustrated and agitated applicant why the law does not provide relief in his or her situation.

In the same day, the judge may hear a trial on separate property tracing from a comingled stock account, request for spousal maintenance, the determination of how to divide the family holiday decorations, or permission to relocate with a child to another state. For a brief and focused period of time, the magistrate becomes an expert on that family. The judge then digests the facts and applies those facts to law, which vests the judge with wide discretion. The Solomon-like approach to cut the baby in half is not available in practice when addressing custody or the division of property. When the judge leaves her office at the end of the day, she hopes she exercised her discretion well, discerning the best interests of the child and equitable division of the assets.

“To listen well is as powerful a means of communication and influence as to talk well.”[x]

Almost without exception, litigants believe that being listened to is as important or more important than the outcome of their litigation experience. This is particularly true for self-represented litigants. A party with an attorney can count on his attorney to explain the proceeding before, during, and after the hearing. A self-represented litigant must rely on his own exchange with the court at a hearing. Confirming that a judge understands, but disagrees, with the position of a party helps that party and the judge move through the process. People have a sort of ownership in the magistrate court; it is the people’s court.  The magistrate judge gives dignity and humanity to the people before her by taking the time to listen and explain the rule of law.

In Idaho, the magistrate probate docket is truly the “cradle and grave” practice. TV shows aside, the terms “people’s court” and “family law” move into a different realm when the judge must address long simmering issues that probate can present. Decedent’s estates, wills, trusts, guardianships, and conservatorships fall under the probate code. Most people know only one thing of probate – it is something to avoid. But for magistrate judges, probate is a rich area of the bench full of human drama, surprise, and emotion.

“Death is not the end. There remains the litigation over the estate.”[xi]

A magistrate with a probate docket for the day may be required to assess testamentary capacity or address the validity of a handwritten will. The judge that hears a probate dispute one day will next decide whether grandparents are entitled to appointment of guardianship for their grandchild. There is satisfaction in helping parents of a young man with developmental disabilities attain guardianship for their son and in measuring the limitation appropriate for the exercise of that guardianship.

Attendant with the probate code and its dealings with our mortality are the adoption statues. In these rare moments, the court is part of the creation of a family. Adoptions are often the most rewarding part of a magistrate’s day.

On the other hand, the saddest and hardest of days come a few chapters apart in the same code book, as magistrates are also called upon to preside over the Child Protection Act cases. These cases may end in litigation over termination of parental rights, the weightiest of cases a magistrate may hear. There are also good days when a magistrate can dismiss a case after the parents have taken the steps in their case plan to learn skills for protection of their child.

The magistrate judge’s service in the protection of society does not end with the bench and the clock. Before or after regular court hours, many judges preside over treatment courts. Treatment courts, including DUI courts, drug courts, mental health courts, and domestic violence courts are designed to help identify, address, and improve or resolve the underlying social justice problems such as emotional trauma and mental health issues that bring a party into contact with the court system through criminal behavior. Some judges also have “attendance courts,” designed to help address social justice issues in families that may manifest when a child is not getting to school on a regular basis. In this regard, the judge and her court are like the tree that one blind man perceived the elephant to be. A strong trunk provides support and strength, and the branches reach out to cover many Idahoans who participate in such programs throughout the state.

The day for the magistrate ends with another visit to the Q. Many magistrates stay late into the evening working on decisions, preparing for the hearings in the day to come, reading briefs, confirming penalties, and reviewing affidavits. Once home, she makes sure her phone is by the bedside, waiting for the next call.

“I saw you from across the bar. Stay there.”[xii]

It would be remiss to not address the effect of coronavirus upon the day-to-day lives of the magistrate judges and the parties that appear before them.  Ask almost any judge, and she will tell you that she became a magistrate because she wanted to serve the people in the community. She will also tell you that interaction with the parties, counsel, and colleagues are the best part of the job.   The computer screen, while invaluable to move the court process forward during the pandemic, is simply no substitute for true interpersonal communication. We miss the attorneys, the parties, and the rich texture of the personal relationships in the Idaho bar.

But the magistrate judges are still here – stick around you may see one.

“I saw one once,” said Piglet.  “At least I think I did,” he said. “Only perhaps it wasn’t.”

“So did I,” said Pooh, wondering what a Heffalump was like.

“You don’t often see them,” said Christopher Robin, carelessly.

“Not now,” said Piglet. “Not at this time of year,” said Pooh.[xiii]

While the actual sighting in person of a magistrate judge may be a rare thing these days, there is no doubt that, like the heffalumps, we are around.

---

---

[i] The Beatles, Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, (Capitol Records 1990) (1967). 

[ii] John Godfrey Saxe, The Blind Men and the Elephant (1872).

[iii] Philadelphia (Clinica Estetico 1993).

[iv]  I.C.R 46, 46.2 (Bail or Release on Own Recognizance; No Contact Orders).

[v] Arthur Sullivan and W. S. Gilbert, The Mikado (1885).

[vi] Fyodor Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment (1866).

[vii] I.C.A.R 5, 5.1.

[viii] Kramer vs. Kramer (Columbia Pictures 1979).

[ix] Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina (1878).

[x] John Marshall, former Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

[xi] 8 The Collected Works of Ambrose Bierce 365 (1911).

[xii] Internet MEME, “#Social Distancing Pick Up Lines” (2020).

[xiii] A. A. Milne, Winne-the-Pooh (1926).