Code of Judicial Administration – Comment Period Closes January 10, 2025

CJA 4-202.08. Fees for records, information, and services. Amend. The proposed amendments: 1) set the fee waiver limit for government entities at $10.00 per transaction to ensure consistent application across the state; 2) set the fee for access to audio records of court proceedings via the FTR Cloud at $10.00 per transaction; 3) allow the State Court Administrator and Clerks of Court to waive the one free copy limit; and 4) identify individuals and entities that qualify for bulk data fee waivers.

CJA 4-403. Electronic signature and signature stamp use. Amend. The proposed amendments grant district, juvenile, and justice courts the discretion to authorize clerks to electronically sign or stamp additional document types without judicial review by issuing a standing order signed by the presiding judge of the district, or for justice courts, a local standing order pre-approved by the presiding justice court judge of the district. The amendments also specify when such authorization must be documented in writing in the case.

Utah Courts

View more posts from this author
One thought on “Code of Judicial Administration – Comment Period Closes January 10, 2025
  1. Sean Hullinger

    Please consider adding:
    4-403(1)(1M) Orders for criminal histories pursuant to URCrP 16(a)(5)(C).

    Subsection (5)(C) is a procedural nod to the fact that the subscription agreements to both the Federal and State government record repositories that allows Law Enforcement agencies to participate have a clause prohibiting further dissemination of records without a Judicial Order. This is basic criminal discovery, completely consistent with the intention of the 2021 revisions of Rule 16. Making this change could greatly reduce the motion practice that the Courts must currently deal with to realize compliance with this rule.

    To the extent that there are concerns about safeguards, the requirement for a Motion from the defense places ethical responsibility on the attorney for the defendant, and prevents ‘automatic’ or ‘bulk’ requests consistent with the other types of permissible orders in -403(1).

     
    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *