Judge-Elect Tjuana Byrd
Circuit Court District 6.1 Division 8 Candidate
Candidate introduction at February 9th Indivisible Judicial Forum at UALR Bowen School of Law
Age: 52
Law School and Graduation Year: UALR (BOWEN) SCHOOL OF LAW- 1996
Occupation: Attorney
Previous Elected Office: N/A
Community Service: Women’s Foundation of Arkansas; Pulaski County Council for Youth Services Advisory Board; W. Harold Flowers Law Society; AR Kids Read Volunteer; Susan G. Komen for the Cure Board; Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Incorporated; Ivy Foundation of LIttle Rock Board President
1. What experience, knowledge, and attributes of yours make you believe you will be a good judge?
I have legal experience in all matters coming before the juvenile court. I have nearly 15 years of experience in dependency neglect cases an Attorney ad Litem, nearly 14 years handling truancy cases, which are FINS (Families In Need of Services) cases. I was a Public Defender in juvenile court, and handle delinquency cases in my practice. I have served as special judge dozens of times hearing and making rulings in each of these types of cases. I serve with and understand the communities most adversely affected by negative outcomes of the court, and that knowledge and perspective make me uniquely qualified to serve.
2. What are the three most important areas where the administration of justice can be improved at the circuit court level, and how would you implement improvement?
Overuse of detention – Arkansas leads the country in incarceration. We must work to discontinue the use of detention prior to adjudication for low risk, non-violent offenders. I would utilize the evidence based SAVRY (Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth) and other assessment tools as a basis to divert juveniles from detention, and when appropriate, from court intervention altogether.
Lack of public trust – I would work to educate the public about navigating the court process, work to streamline case management processes, and ensure representation to eligible litigants by appointment of counsel or assessing minimal attorney fees when families are not indigent. I would also work to ensure fair, impartial, and respectful treatment of all persons coming before the court.
Unjust racial disparities and practices – Much of this systemic problem stems from the policing and pretrial factors, as judge, I would be aware of the issue, require standardized data collection to monitor the numbers, and require use of “race-neutral” risk assessments for screening for detention, diversion, sentencing (or disposition) and appropriate, individualized services.
3. What changes if any can the court system make to reduce the numbers of juvenile and criminal offenders?
I believe this will take cooperation of multiple stakeholders, such as court staff, police, and school districts. Too often, certain typical adolescent behaviors that violate school policies are subjected to zero tolerance policies and criminalized, and instead of only being subjected to school discipline, juveniles get arrested and are subjected to court sanctions. These policies and practices need to be reexamined and reconsidered to avoid the unnecessary exposure of juveniles to the court. In the meantime, courts can create procedures for addressing these cases, and by utilizing the evidence based assessments, determine the specific needs of each juvenile and provide appropriate interventions and services to keep juveniles out of the court system, when possible.
4. Do you believe in leveling the playing field between pro se parties (parties without lawyers) and parties represented by counsel, and if so, how would your court do this?
Yes. The court has a responsibility to ensure the fair treatment of all litigants, and I would continue to provide as much leeway and information as legally possible, to pro se parties as possible to allow them to be heard and present their case. When possible and appropriate (lawful) in certain cases, if parties are eligible for counsel, I would appoint an attorney.
5. Do you believe that alternate dispute resolution (mediation and arbitration) should play a greater role in disputes that come to the circuit courts, and if so, how should that happen?
I believe alternate dispute resolution can play a greater role in some types of circuit court cases, such as domestic relations and civil matters. If parties are not initially interested in ADR, the court can order that the parties engage in alternative dispute resolution. I have not found that it is especially beneficial in juvenile dependency/neglect cases, and could have the unintended consequence of delaying progress that could be made by parents because the timeline for reunification is not extended in consideration of ordered mediation efforts.