Court Committees

Although the Florida State Courts System is administered by the chief justice and the other supreme court justices, the policy development strategy of the judicial branch is, in many regards, highly synergistic. Committees, whose membership generally comprises judges and court personnel and may also include justice partners and topic experts, are the means established by the supreme court for gathering input on judicial branch policies affecting the administration of justice.

The supreme court may appoint a committee when a specific issue or concern is brought to its attention or when it seeks to evaluate and improve the courts system’s performance in a particular area, for instance. Committees usually receive their authority and directive through an administrative order issued by the chief justice. While most committees have no direct policy-making authority, they do play an important advisory role and make recommendations for consideration by the supreme court.

Court committees serve a vital function in the judicial branch, and, through their appointment, the branch benefits from the rich intellectual, experiential, social, and personal background of each member.

Under the current court committee structure, the supreme court utilizes five different types of committees: councils, commissions, steering committees, workgroups/task forces, and other committees. Below is information about the supreme court committees that are staffed by the Office of the State Courts Administrator.

Councils

A council is responsible for addressing judicial administration issues that have statewide impact, affect multiple levels of the court system, or affect multiple constituencies in the court community. Council membership includes internal and external representation.

The Judicial Management Council serves as a focused advisory body to assist the chief justice and supreme court in identifying trends, potential crisis situations, and the means to address them. For more information, see Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.225, and AOSC20-66.

Commissions

A commission addresses high-level policy issues that span the divisions and/or levels of the court. Membership of court commissions primarily consists of judicial officers and court personnel.

The District Court of Appeal Budget Commission oversees the preparation and implementation of the district court component of the judicial branch budget; it is directly responsible for recommending budgeting and funding policies and procedures for the district court budgets so that the funding requirements of each of the district courts of appeal can be adequately addressed while promoting statewide operational consistency. For more information, see Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.235.

The Trial Court Budget Commission oversees the preparation and implementation of the trial court component of the judicial branch budget; it is directly responsible for recommending budgeting and funding policies and procedures for the trial court budgets in order to support a trial court system that will effectively carry out the administration of justice. For more information, see Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.230.

The Commission on District Court of Appeal Performance and Accountability proposes policies and procedures on matters related to the efficient and effective functioning of Florida’s district courts through the development of comprehensive resource management, performance measurement, and accountability programs. For more information, see AOSC20-55.

The Commission on Trial Court Performance and Accountability proposes policies and procedures on matters related to the efficient and effective functioning of Florida’s trial courts through the development of comprehensive resource management, performance measurement, and accountability programs. For more information, see AOSC20-56.

The Florida Courts Technology Commission oversees, manages, and directs the development and use of technology within the judicial branch under the direction of the Florida Supreme Court as specified in Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.236.

The Florida Court Education Council oversees the development and maintenance of a comprehensive educational program for Florida judges and certain court personnel. The council’s responsibilities include making budgetary, programmatic, and policy recommendations to the supreme court regarding continuing education for Florida judges and certain court professionals. For more information, see AOSC20-62 and section 25.384, Florida Statutes.

The Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules and Policy assists the supreme court in exercising its power and performing its duties to establish rules of practice and procedure for court-ordered mediation and arbitration. For more information, see AOSC20-59.

Steering Committees

A steering committee represents the interests of a particular court division or docket. Steering committees develop an aspirational vision of the ideal court division; recommend models, standards, and best practices; and conduct court improvement initiatives. Steering committees also address the impact on their topical assignment area of new legislation, case law, federal guidelines, and other changes.

The Steering Committee on Families and Children in the Court seeks to establish a fully integrated, comprehensive approach to handling all cases involving children and families; it works to encourage and facilitate improvements in efficiency and effectiveness of family court operations. For more information, see AOSC20-60.

The Steering Committee on Problem-Solving Courts seeks to address the needs of court-engaged individuals with mental illness and substance use disorders through differentiated case management principles and other evidence-based and emerging best practices. For more information, see AOSC20-79.

The Criminal Court Steering Committee develops consistent and expedited recommendations to the supreme court regarding changes required by legislative enactments, judicial decisions, or other
events or circumstances involving criminal law matters. For more information, see AOSC20-54.

Workgroups / Task Forces

A workgroup or task force is appointed for a specific period of time or to address a specific topic or targeted issue. Workgroups and task forces conduct studies, prepare reports, and take other appropriate action as directed by the court.

The Unified Committee on Judicial Compensation develops and recommends to the supreme court judicial pay and benefits priorities and advocates for judicial pay and benefits issues approved by the court for inclusion in the judicial branch’s annual legislative budget request. For more information, see Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.244.

The Workgroup on the Continuity of Court Operations and Proceedings During and After COVID-19 was established to develop recommendations on the continuation of all court operations and proceedings statewide in a manner that protects health and safety and that addresses the pandemic. For more information, see AOSC20- 28 and AOSC 20-51.

Other Committees

This category encompasses committees required by supreme court opinion, statutory provisions, or other requirements; by reason of their regulatory or other responsibilities, these entities may operate more independently from court oversight than the other kinds of committees.

The Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases makes changes that are required in jury instructions in criminal cases. These changes are in response to legislative enactments, judicial decisions, or other events or circumstances that affect the presentation of cases to trial juries. The committee also reviews the standard instructions for errors and inaccuracies and recommends amendments and revisions to the court that would be beneficial to the administration of justice. For more information, see Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.270 and AOSC21-20.

The Mediator Qualifications and Discipline Review Board is responsible for accepting grievances against certified mediators; determining probable cause with regard to grievances filed against certified mediators; conducting hearings in relation to grievance proceedings, if necessary; and sanctioning certified mediators,
if appropriate. The board includes judges, county, family, circuit, appellate, and dependency mediators, as well as attorneys. For more information, see Florida Rule for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators 10.730.

The Mediation Training Review Board is responsible for reviewing complaints filed against certified mediation training programs. Members include judges and county, family, circuit, appellate, and dependency mediators. For more information, see AOSC17-25.

The Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee provides written advisory opinions to mediators concerning interpretations of the rules and guidance on standards of conduct. For more information, see Florida Rule for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators 10.900(a).

The Parenting Coordinator Review Board considers complaints against qualified and court-appointed parenting coordinators. Membership includes judges, attorneys, and parenting coordinators from across the state. For more information, see AOSC20-10.

The Court Interpreter Certification Board assists the supreme court in overseeing the certification and regulation of court interpreters. For more information, see Florida Rule for Certification and Regulation of Spoken Language Court Interpreters 14.110.

The Local Rule Advisory Committee makes recommendations to the supreme court concerning local rules and administrative orders submitted pursuant to Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.140(h).

The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee assists the supreme court with upholding the standard of judicial ethics by providing advisory opinions and hosting Campaign Conduct Forums to educate candidates about the ethics of Canon Seven of the Code of Judicial Conduct. For more information, see Committee on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 327 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1976).