ATTACHMENT A

REQUEST OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE MANDATORY CRIMINAL

E-FILING DEADLINE IN PINELLAS COUNTY On September 27, 2013, in In re: Electronic Filing of Criminal Cases in the

Trial Courts of Florida via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, AOSC13-48,

Pinellas County was provided an extension of the October 1, 2013 mandatory e-

filing deadline. In accordance with paragraph 2.e. of that Administrative Order, J.

Thomas McGrady, Chief Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, (“Sixth Judicial

Circuit”), submits this request for an extension of the mandatory criminal e-filing

deadline in Pinellas County. However, the Sixth Judicial Circuit requests that

voluntary e-filing by the private bar be permitted in Pinellas County in certain case

types.

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT Because Pinellas County is in the final stages of implementing a

comprehensive digital system, the Sixth Judicial Circuit requests that the February

3, 2014 mandatory e-filing deadline be delayed. Pinellas County is currently in the

process of implementing an electronic records case management system. In

addition, it is installing a bench viewer and automated calendaring system. These

technologies are essential to a fully electronic system. While the Sixth Judicial

Circuit is eager to begin e-filing in the criminal division and the Clerk of the

Circuit Court for Pinellas County, (“Clerk”), is ready to accept e-filings, the Sixth

Judicial Circuit believes that its migration to a comprehensive digital system will

be achieved more expediently and efficiently by delaying mandatory criminal e-

filing. Thus, the Sixth Judicial Circuit requests that mandatory e-filing begin 90

days after the implementation of its new case management system, or

approximately July 1, 2014. Despite the request for the delay in mandatory e-

filing, the Sixth Judicial Circuit believes that limited voluntary e-filing would be

beneficial to test the Clerk’s systems. Thus, it requests immediate voluntary e-

filing for the private bar in certain case types.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY On October 18, 2012, the Supreme Court of Florida issued revised opinion

No. SC11-399. In that opinion, the Court set April 1, 2013 as the date e-filing

would become mandatory in the civil division, probate division, small claims

division, family law division, and certain circuit appeals, (hereinafter “the civil

cases”). In addition, the Court set October 1, 2013 as the date that e-filing would

become mandatory in the criminal, traffic, and juvenile divisions, as well as in

certain circuit appeals, proceedings brought under the Florida Mental Health Act,

and proceedings brought under the Involuntary Commitment of Sexually Violent

Predators Act, (hereinafter “the criminal cases”). See In Re: Amendments to the

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, the

Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Florida Probate Rules, the Florida Small

Page 2 of 29

Claims Rules, the Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, the Florida Rules of

Appellate Procedure, and the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure—Electronic

Filing, 102 So. 3d 451, 461-62 (Fla. 2012). On April 1, 2013, mandatory e-filing

began in the civil cases in Pinellas County. Because of technological initiatives

currently ongoing in the criminal division, however, the Sixth Judicial Circuit

requested a deferral of the October 1, 2013 e-filing deadline in the criminal cases.

This request was made in conjunction with similar requests of the Public Defender

of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, (“Public Defender’s Office”), and the State Attorney

of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, (“State Attorney’s Office”). (Ex. A: Letter of Chief

Judge J. Thomas McGrady dated September 23, 2013; Letter of Public Defender

Bob Dillinger dated September 9, 2013; Letter of State Attorney Bernie McCabe

dated September 10, 2013.) As a result, the Florida Supreme Court extended the

deadline. See In re: Electronic Filing of Criminal Cases in the Trial Courts of

Florida via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, AOSC13-48 at 4.

In accordance with section 2.d. of that Administrative Order, the Sixth

Judicial Circuit together with the Clerk submitted a joint report on November 15,

2013 setting forth the status of criminal e-filing in Pinellas County. In that joint

report, which is incorporated by reference, the Sixth Judicial Circuit and the Clerk

requested a delay in mandatory e-filing until 90 days after the implementation of

Page 3 of 29

the new case management system. This request reiterates and further supports that

previous request.

ARGUMENT A comprehensive digital system includes e-filing, electronic records

management, automated scheduling, and electronic records access. See In re:

Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, AOSC09-30 at 2-3. E-

filing is only one component of a comprehensive digital system. Therefore, e-

filing cannot be the sole focus of the courts.

[E-filing] is only one part of a mature, full blown electronic documents process. Focusing only upon the initial filing aspect runs the risk of losing most of the potential benefits of electronic filing. At the extreme, the failure to look at electronic filing as part of a much larger process can result in an expensive system that is of little utility to the court users such as judges, lawyers, litigants, and court staff.

Id. at 17 of Attachment. Beginning mandatory e-filing on February 3, 2014 in

Pinellas County would hinder the significant work being done by the Sixth Judicial

Circuit to transition to a comprehensive digital system. This would result in an

expensive system of little utility to the Court, Public Defender’s Office, State

Attorney’s Office, the public, and most litigants.

A. Mandatory E-Filing in the Criminal Cases Should Be Delayed Until the Implementation of the New Case Management System Electronic records management is the core of a comprehensive digital

system. However, “[t]he transition…from paper-based information management

Page 4 of 29

to systems that rely primarily on digital records represents a fundamental change in

the internal operations of the courts.” Id. at 1. Given the extent and nature of the

changes being made to implement this system, the Sixth Judicial Circuit

respectfully requests that mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases be delayed until

90 days after the new case management system is implemented.

1. Pinellas County’s Transition from a Paper-Based Case Management System to a Digital Records Based Case Management System

Pinellas County is transitioning from a legacy paper-based case management

system, Consolidated Justice Information System, (“CJIS”), to a digital records

based case management system, Odyssey. CJIS was in continuous operation for

more than 30 years in Pinellas County. As a result, as of 2010, it managed over 7.5

million cases with over half a billion records in the juvenile, criminal, traffic,

probate, and civil divisions. Over that time, however, CJIS grew increasingly

complex while at the same time becoming technologically out-of-date. As a result,

updates to the program and integrating it with other, newer programs became

exceedingly costly and challenging, if not impossible. By early 2004, after an

analysis of the CJIS deficiencies and available off-the-shelf case management

systems, the decision was made to replace CJIS with a custom case management

system developed in-house. After more than four years and 9.9 million dollars

were invested, however, work on the in-house product was halted in June of 2008.

Page 5 of 29

Numerous delays and unexpected resource demands, in combination with

advancements in off-the-shelf products, reopened the discussion regarding the best

replacement for the legacy system.

In November of 2008, Pinellas County began the solicitation process for an

off-the-shelf case management system. After a thorough evaluation process,

Odyssey was selected in December of 2010. In addition to providing multi-agency

management and access to electronic court records, Odyssey was selected on the

belief that it would provide, among other things, improved data quality, faster

processing of cases, the ability to monitor key indicators effectively, new

automated work flow and processes, remote access, self-service, and the ability to

search case information and data.

2. Implementing Odyssey Since Odyssey’s selection, significant work has been performed configuring

the program for use in Pinellas County. On September 17, 2012, Odyssey was

implemented in the civil division (excluding juvenile dependency). On that same

date, Odyssey was implemented in the family division. Probate and mental health

case types were implemented the following year on approximately September 3,

2013. Currently, the criminal case types (including traffic, juvenile delinquency,

and dependency) are on track for a March 31, 2014 implementation date. As the

Page 6 of 29

largest and most complex case types, implementation of Odyssey in the criminal

division has required a significant amount of work.

Implementation involves three considerations: modification, integration, and

conversion. As stated above, Odyssey in Pinellas County is a multi-agency case

management system. Not only will the Courts be using Odyssey to manage and

access cases, but in the criminal cases, so will the Clerk, the State Attorney’s

Office, the Public Defender’s Office, and local law enforcement. While this

unique shared case management system has many benefits, including more

efficient communication between the criminal justice partners, it requires more

front-end implementation work. For example, in order to optimize workflow and

business processes, Odyssey must integrate and exchange data with multiple

external applications, such as: Jail Information Management System, FDLE/FCIC,

FDLE FCIC II, DJJ, DHSMV, Warrant 24x7, Calendars for Public View, Pitney

Bowes Subpoena System, Jury System, OSCA, TCATS, FACC, Driver School,

Traffic Kiosk/Web/IVR, Global 360, TCindexer, and Drug Court. The failure to

properly integrate and exchange data with these applications can have a serious

impact on the criminal justice system. For instance, the Pinellas County Sheriff’s

Office utilizes the Jail Information Management System, (“JIMS”). Because JIMS

and Odyssey are being integrated, the information entered into JIMS will be

immediately available in Odyssey. As a result, the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Clerk,

Page 7 of 29

State Attorney’s Office, and Public Defender’s Office will have access to the most

up-to-the-minute information in vital areas such as booking, warrants, bond, and

release. Without this integration, hundreds of Odyssey fields would not

prepopulate. Costly and time-consuming manual entry would be required. More

significantly, the delay in the dissemination of information would slow operations

and potentially result in the use of inaccurate information.

In addition, the valuable and substantial data contained in CJIS and other

document storage systems must be converted to form the foundation of Odyssey.

As stated above, in 2010, CJIS contained over 7.5 million cases with over half a

billion records, the majority of which were in the juvenile, criminal, and traffic

divisions. These numbers have grown significantly since then. For example,

traffic cases now comprise over 7.85 million images. In addition, documents from

over 220,000 criminal cases have been imaged and stored. This does not include

the records of the State Attorney, Public Defender, or local law enforcement,

which also must be converted. In order for this data to be converted, it must be

located, extracted, and bundled. It must then be separated, mapped, and converted

into Odyssey. Then finally, the data must be verified and the system tested.

Attached is a chart that tracks the Odyssey implementation progress in the criminal

division during the last six months. (Ex. B: Go Live Planned for March 31.) In

addition to the ongoing work, a multi-agency supervisory board has been meeting

Page 8 of 29

weekly for more than two years to ensure the timely and coordinated

implementation of Odyssey.

The 90 days following the implementation of Odyssey will be crucial to

resolve post-implementation issues. Despite the hard-work and diligence of those

involved in the implementation of Odyssey, the Sixth Judicial Circuit anticipates

that numerous issues will arise after Odyssey is implemented on March 31, 2014.

When Odyssey was implemented in the civil division, more than 100 issues arose

after implementation. While some issues such as image corruption or minor

mapping errors took only days to resolve, other issues such as coding and

migration errors took weeks to resolve. Given the number of documents,

modifications, and interfaces in the criminal division, the Sixth Judicial Circuit

expects significantly more defects will be identified after the implementation in the

criminal division. Thus, the 90-day post-implementation period is a vital step in

the transition to a digital records based case management system.

3. Risks of Beginning Mandatory E-filing in the Criminal Cases on February 3, 2014

As made clear in the Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, e-filing

must go hand in hand with electronic case files. The Sixth Judicial Circuit is on

the precipice of implementing Odyssey, a case management system that manages

and provides access to electronic case files. Requiring mandatory e-filing on

Page 9 of 29

February 3, 2014, will result in unintended costs, delays to the implementation of

Odyssey, and, ultimately, the poor administration of justice.

Requiring mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases prior to the

implementation of Odyssey will waste resources. CJIS is a paper-based case

management system; it does not store or provide access to filed documents. Thus,

any documents that are e-filed in Pinellas County prior to the implementation of

Odyssey cannot be stored or viewed in CJIS. Instead, these documents must be

converted, migrated, and stored in another application. Importantly, this

application does not provide court users with sufficient electronic access to the

documents. As a result, these users must continue to rely on hard copy court files.

It is only when Odyssey is implemented that these users will begin to access

documents electronically. However, in order to be accessible in Odyssey, these e-

filed documents must be copied, removed from the other application, and migrated

into Odyssey. In addition, as discussed further in section B.2. below, these

documents must be converted to searchable PDFs. Pinellas County receives

approximately 115,037 filings per month in the criminal cases. Assuming that

these numbers are not altered by e-filing and that mandatory e-filing in the criminal

cases begins February 3, 2014, over half a million filings will be received prior to

July 1, 2014. These filings, which represent approximately one and a half million

pages, will all have to be handled multiple times before they are electronically

Page 10 of 29

available in July. Not only is this process time consuming and expensive, but the

conversions and migrations may degrade the quality of the e-filings and increase

the chances that data is lost. By delaying mandatory e-filing until 90 days after the

implementation of Odyssey, this complicated process will be avoided because e-

filings would be accepted directly into Odyssey.

The resources of Pinellas County are finite and the diversion of these funds

to mandatory e-filing will delay the implementation of Odyssey. As outlined

above, the Sixth Judicial Circuit and its partners have been working diligently to

implement Odyssey. The resources to complete this work have been carefully

scrutinized and delegated. As the anticipated implementation date of Odyssey has

grown closer, the resources for this project have become more limited while the

work demands have increased. Thus, resources must be more prudently allocated.

Diverting these resources to implement mandatory e-filing will make the March

31, 2014 Odyssey deadline unattainable. Further, as the Odyssey implementation

date is pushed back, the number of filings that will require multiple conversion or

migration grow, requiring more financial and human resources. By beginning

mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases after Odyssey has been implemented,

Pinellas County will more quickly and cost effectively achieve a comprehensive

digital system.

Page 11 of 29

In addition to the diversion of limited resources, there is a substantial risk

that beginning mandatory e-filing on February 3, 2014 in the criminal cases will

result in the poor administration of justice. Both the Public Defender’s Office and

the State Attorney’s Office requested that mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases

be delayed. Of particular concern to these offices was the fact that the existing

legacy CJIS system is not capable of performing batch filing, a function they

indicated is indispensable to their ability to e-file. It is anticipated that the attorney

module in Odyssey will be able to integrate with the E-filing Portal batch filing

application. If mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases begins February 3, 2014,

the State Attorney’s Office and Public Defender’s Office will be forced to single

session file. In a slow week, these offices file approximately 2,800 documents in

their cases. This number does not include automatically generated documents or

any civil traffic cases. Therefore, from the beginning of mandatory e-filing until

batch filing is anticipated to be fully operational, these offices would have to single

session file, at a minimum, 58,800 filings. Given this substantial number of filings

and their limited resources, both the State Attorney’s Office and the Public

Defender’s Office assert that they will be unable to meet the e-filing demands if

forced to single session file. Thus, though the number of cases will remain the

same, fewer items will be filed. This may result in months in which fewer cases

are being instituted, hard copy filings are languishing on desks, and pending cases

Page 12 of 29

present speedy trial concerns. Subsequently, when batch filing is available under

Odyssey, the opposite is likely to occur. Filings will substantially increase when

months of delayed documents are e-filed. This will put a strain on the judicial

resources of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, as each filing likely will require proceedings

in front of a judicial officer in court facilities. This, in turn, will result in the

delays and errors attributable to an overloaded system.

Given the above, the Sixth Judicial Circuit suggests that mandatory criminal

e-filing in Pinellas County begin 90 days after Odyssey has been implemented.

Due to the number of personnel and operations impacted by this fundamental

transition, the Sixth Judicial Circuit anticipates that multiple issues will arise after

the implementation of Odyssey. This start date would provide sufficient time to

test the Odyssey program and its interfaces, resolve project defects, train staff

members, and test single session and batch criminal e-filing. Odyssey is currently

on track to be implemented by March 31, 2014. Thus, the Sixth Judicial Circuit

requests that mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases begin July 1, 2014.

B. Delaying Mandatory E-filing in the Criminal Cases Will Provide Pinellas County the Opportunity to Avoid the Costs of Long-term Dual Record Keeping Systems The progression to a paperless system is a multifaceted endeavor. It is made

up of many intricate pieces, each of which is necessary to realize the bigger

picture. Unlike a conventional puzzle, however, each piece of the comprehensive

Page 13 of 29

digital system represents a radical rewrite of the existing landscape. Having fully

searchable documents is one of these complex pieces that require the courts and the

clerks to replace existing operations and systems in order to achieve a paperless

system.

If mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases is delayed until July 1, 2014, the

Clerk, once convinced of its obligation to provide documents in the searchable

Portable Document Format, (“PDF”), will start to update its systems to deliver

searchable PDFs. It also would provide the Sixth Judicial Circuit additional time

to develop and install its recently acquired bench viewer and automated

calendaring application. Without these pieces, the efficiencies of a paperless

system are not being realized by Pinellas County. Instead, Pinellas County is

supporting both a digital records system and a paper records system.

1. Searchable Documents Are Vital to Court Operations

Fully searchable documents are necessary to a comprehensive digital

system. In 2013, approximately 200,000 cases were initiated in Pinellas County in

the criminal cases. Many of these cases will end up containing hundreds, if not

thousands, of pages. In this mass of paper, the process of finding certain

documents in case files or specific words in documents is time consuming.

Modern technology provides a quicker and more accurate approach to this once

arduous process. As a result, with a simple click, judges can search through

Page 14 of 29

thousands of pages and courts can gain some control over their increasing

caseloads without any sacrifice to the administration of justice. Without fully

searchable documents, however, electronic court records lose this utility. Instead

of a simple click, court users would be forced to load page after page of images,

staring at the monitor until the desired item is found. This would be more time-

consuming and laborious than handling paper files. Thus, paper case files would

still need to be maintained and the efficiencies of a paperless system are lost.

Until the judiciary has access to fully searchable documents in the

courtroom, paper files must continue to be maintained. Currently, paper files for

all calendared cases are transported to the courtroom on a daily basis. These files

are regularly used by the judiciary to review recent case filings and resolve issues

arising in court. As part of its goal of moving toward a paperless system, the Sixth

Judicial Circuit acquired the Judicial Automated Workflow System Software

Application, (“JAWS”). The application will be available to all Pinellas civil

judicial officers on or about January 13, 2014. It will be available to all Pinellas

criminal judicial officers shortly after the implementation of Odyssey on March 31,

2014. JAWS is a bench viewer and automated calendaring tool. Significantly, the

bench viewer component has a search feature that allows judges to quickly search

for items and retrieve court records while sitting on the bench. This search feature

is only functional, however, if the court records are fully searchable. It is not the

Page 15 of 29

purpose of a viewer application to convert files to a fully searchable format. In

fact, there is no viewer application currently on the market in Florida that converts

documents to a searchable format without a third party application. Rather, these

bench viewers were meant to utilize the searchable court records maintained by the

Clerk. As discussed above, operating a digital records system without the ability to

electronically search for items would be more burdensome than flipping through

the paper files. Thus, until searchable court records are available, the bench viewer

component of the JAWS application will not eliminate the necessity of hard copy

court records.

2. The Clerk Has an Obligation to Provide Searchable PDFs

The Clerk has taken the position that it is not required to provide searchable

documents. The Florida Supreme Court, however, has required the trial court

clerks to provide searchable PDFs. Since the adoption of the first Statewide

Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, the Florida Supreme Court has

recognized the importance of searchable documents by requiring that the document

format of e-filed documents be searchable. It also required that electronic case

files “meet or exceed the capabilities and ease of use currently provided by paper

files.” Specifically, it required “a method to search for and select specific

documents for viewing.” See In re: Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to

the Courts, AOSC09-30 at 16 of Attachment. The Florida Supreme Court further

Page 16 of 29

acknowledged the importance of searchable documents when it required trial court

clerks to convert all court records to searchable PDFs:

Nothing in this order is intended to impact upon the judicial processing of cases at the trial court level. Trial court clerks must continue to provide paper to the judiciary until the circuit court chief judge authorizes the elimination of paper files. At such time, the clerk of court must convert all documents to searchable PDFs.

See In re: Interim Policy on Electronic Appellate Court Records, AOSC10-32 at 3.

This obligation was reiterated to the Clerk when its plan for electronic filing was

approved. (Ex. C: Letter of the Florida State Courts Technology Commission to

the Clerk dated January 7, 2011 at 3 (“[t]he Pinellas County Clerk of Court must

convert all documents, beginning on the date of Supreme Court or Florida Courts

Technology Commission (FCTC) approval, to a searchable document”.)

Further, searchable documents, including searchable PDFs, are preferred as

they can satisfy the requirements of Rule of Judicial Administration 2.526. The

rule requires that judicial branch records that are transmitted in an electronic form

“be formatted in a manner that complies with all state and federal laws requiring

that electronic judicial records be accessible to persons with disabilities.” Since

searchable documents can easily be made accessible to persons with disabilities,

electronic court records in a searchable PDF format meet both the requirements of

the Florida Supreme Court in AOSC10-32 and Rule of Judicial Administration

2.526.

Page 17 of 29

3. Though Working Toward this Goal, the Clerk Has Not Yet Provided Searchable PDFs in Any Division of the Court

A delay in mandatory e-filing would provide the Clerk additional time to

provide searchable PDFs while simultaneously reducing the number of digital files

that need to be converted to searchable PDFs. As mandated by the Supreme Court

of Florida, e-filings are formatted in PDF, Word, or Word Perfect file formats.

Currently, however, the Clerk receives and stores e-filings in a Tagged Image File

Format, (“TIFF”). TIFF images are not searchable and the Clerk has not yet

converted these TIFF images to searchable PDFs. Thus, paper files must be

maintained despite the existence of an electronic court file. For example, hard

copy court files are still being prepared in circuit civil cases even though Odyssey

was implemented more than fifteen months ago and e-filing was successfully

implemented more than nine months ago. Similar dual record keeping systems

also exist in the family division.

Diverting the Clerk’s resources to begin mandatory e-filing will reduce the

resources that can be allocated to providing PDF documents. The Clerk is working

to provide searchable documents on a going forward basis. However, there are a

significant number of hard copy court records in all divisions that have not been

converted to searchable PDF documents. In addition, as e-filing progresses, there

are also a growing number of e-filed TIFF images, which must be converted to

searchable PDF. Converting these court records requires human and financial

Page 18 of 29

resources, particularly if these conversions are to be made without degrading

image quality. The delay of mandatory e-filing in Pinellas County until 90 days

after the implementation of the new case management system would provide the

Clerk additional time and resources to meet its obligation to provide the judiciary

with fully searchable PDFs. Once this obligation has been met, together with the

implementation of Odyssey and JAWS, Pinellas County will be operating a

comprehensive digital system.

C. Voluntary E-filing by the Private Bar in Certain Criminal Cases Will Allow Pinellas County to Test New Technology at a Minimal Cost In In re: Electronic Filing of Criminal Cases in the Trial Courts of Florida

via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, AOSC13-48, Pinellas County was

prohibited from accepting e-filings in the criminal cases. While the Sixth Judicial

Circuit believes that mandatory e-filing will interfere with its implementation of a

comprehensive digital system, it believes that small scale voluntary e-filing will

allow it to test its newly implemented technologies.

In the November Report, the Sixth Judicial Circuit requested that the Florida

Supreme Court approve immediate voluntary e-filing for the private bar in criminal

traffic and county criminal cases. The Sixth Judicial Circuit now requests that

voluntary e-filing begin immediately in criminal traffic, county criminal, and

circuit criminal. This request does not include juvenile, circuit appeals, or

proceedings brought under the Florida Mental Health Act or the Involuntary

Page 19 of 29

Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act. Despite the arguments outlined

above, the Sixth Judicial Circuit believes more benefit than harm will result from

these voluntary filings. First, the number of filings by the private bar in these cases

is minimal. Further, it is unlikely that all private attorneys will chose to

electronically file prior to mandatory e-filing. Thus, the Sixth Judicial Circuit

anticipates that the work related to these early filings will be negligible. Second,

these early filers will allow the Clerk to test its criminal e-filing processes. This

will lead to the early identification of potential issues, which will save time and

money once mandatory e-filing begins. In addition, when Odyssey is implemented

on March 31, 2014, the Sixth Judicial Circuit will be able to more exhaustively test

Odyssey and its interfaces with other applications, including the E-Portal. For

these reasons, the Sixth Judicial Circuit respectfully requests that voluntary e-filing

begin immediately for the private bar in criminal traffic, county criminal, and

circuit criminal.

CONCLUSION For the reasons outlined above, the Sixth Judicial Circuit respectfully

requests that (i) mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases begin on July 1, 2014,

which is 90 days after the implementation of the new case management system,

and (ii) voluntary e-filing by the private bar begin immediately in criminal traffic,

county criminal, and circuit criminal.

Page 20 of 29

EXHIBIT A Page 21 of 29

Page 22 of 29

Page 23 of 29

Page 24 of 29

© Tyler Technologies 2012

Go-Live planned for March 31

9/30

10/7

10/1

4

10/2

1

10/2

8

11/4

11/1

1

11/1

8

11/2

5

12/2

12/9

12/1

6

12/2

3

12/3

0

1/6

1/13

1/20

1/27

2/3

2/10

2/17

2/24

3/3

3/10

3/17

3/24

3/31

Configuration

Complete Configuration

Complete Code Mapping

ConversionPush 5

BTS ExtractCode PushEnd User Review

Tyler Development

Criminal Enhancement Del iveryPinellas Development

Project Del ivery

Unit TestingOdyssey Deployment

Current Production (13.0.15)

Production Criminal Release to Test Civil/Probate Regression TestingProduction Criminal Release to Prod

Testing

Solution Val idation (SV) PreparationSV Odyssey Core

Porta l TestingSV ECR / Tokens

SV Pinel las Led Integrations

SV Re-Test w/Additional Projects

TrainingGo-Live

Convers ionGo-Live

1

Includes major Criminal Enhancements delivered in April and September

2 63 4 5

EXHIBIT B Page 25 of 29

Judge Judith L. Kreeger, Chair Florida Courts Technology Commission

clo Office of the State Courts Administrator 500 S. Duval Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399·1900

The Honorable Ken Burke Pinellas County Clerk of Court 315 Court Street Clearwater, Florida 33756

January 7, 2011

RE: request for implementation of electronic filings in all court divisions in Pinellas County, Sixth Judicial Circuit

Dear Mr. Burke:

Supreme Court Opinion No.SClO-241 , In re: Amendments to the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration - Rule 2.236 (July 1,2010) provides that the Florida Courts Technology Commission "evaluate all such applications to determine whether they comply with the technology policies established by the supreme court and the procedures and standards created pursuant to this rule, and approve those applications deemed to be effective and found to be in compliance."

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that on January 6, 2011 the Electronic Filing Committee (EFC) reviewed and recommended approval of your request to implement electronic filing in Pinellas County.

As Chair of the Florida Courts Technology Commission I hereby approve your request to implement electronic filing in all ten court divisions in Pinellas County.

Approval of this electronic initiative is contingent upon compliance with the policy considerations and directives regarding the development and application of new technological standardization and enhancements as set forth by the Supreme Court and is subject to the following terms and conditions, as well as compliance with the chief judge's conditions outlined in his approval letter, dated October 13, 2010. Violation of any of the following conditions shall constitute grounds for revocation of the approval to implement electronic filing in Pinellas County.

EXHIBIT C Page 26 of 29

The Honorable Ken Burke Pinellas County E-Filing Request Page 2 of 4

a. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court may implement the aforementioned technology procedures in accordance with the approved plan effective on the date of this letter and must adhere to the statewide standards for electronic access to the courts as outlined in In re: Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, AOSC09-30 (Fla. July I, 2009).

b. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court shall ensure that there is no possibility for vendors to release or distribute court data to third parties and that the clerk of court retains the designation as custodian of the court records.

c. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court shall ensure that contract provisions prohibit any vendor from extracting, data mining, or engaging in similar activities with regard to information from original court filings and other court records or any associated databases containing court records in the circuit for commercial or other non-court related uses.

d. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court shall ensure that no fees other than statutorily required fees are assessed or collected by the clerk of court.

e. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court shall ensure that the data is backed up and is recoverable. The clerk of court will ensure that remote data backups are stored in a protected environment a minimum of 50 miles from the primary production location of the court record or at a certified hardened facility, and that the circuit complies with established data backup standards as they are revised and updated.

f. This approval does not constitute an approval of any electronic forms that may be used in this process.

g. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court shall submit monthly progress reports to the court system during the 90-day pilot test. Copies of the monthly progress reports shall be provided to the Chief Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit and the State Courts Technology Officer in the Office of the State Courts Administrator.

h. Any attorney, party, or other person who files a document by electronic transmission with the Pinellas County Clerk of Court shall immediately thereafter file the identical document in paper form with an original signature of the attorney, party, or other person if a signature is otherwise required by the Rules of Judicial Administration (hereinafter referred to as the follow-up filing). The follow-up filing of any document that has been previously filed by electronic transmission may be discontinued if, after a 90-day period of accepting electronically filed documents, the Pinellas County Clerk of Court and chief judge certify to the Florida Courts Technology Commission that the electronic filing system is efficient, reliable, and meets the demands of all parties and this Commission has authorized the elimination of the follow-up filing.

Page 27 of 29

The Honorable Ken Burke Pinellas County E-Filing Request Page 3 of 4

i. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court shall abide by In re: Revised Interim Policy on Electronic Release of Court Records, AOSC07-49 (Fla. Sept. 7, 2007).

j. The E-Filing Court Records Portal, developed by the Florida Association of Court Clerks Services Group (FACCSG), has been identified as the statewide e-filing portal. To ensure equal access to electronic filing across the state, the Supreme Court has directed that the Florida Courts Technology Commission make implementation of the statewide system a priority of the judicial branch. All local electronic filing systems must be compatible with the statewide e-filing portal and approval of each of the above electronic filing systems is contingent on the system's compatibility with the statewide portal.

k. At the present time, the Supreme Court is considering enhancements to current electronic filing practices throughout the State. There is a possibility that these enhancements may include the development and application of new business practices and technology standardization. Because these enhancements may occur in the near future, it will be the responsibility of the clerk of court for the respective county to ensure that functionality of the proposed system related to electronic court records will also be made compliant with these new technological enhancements.

1. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court must continue to provide paper to the judiciary until the chief judge authorizes the elimination of paper files. At such time, the Pinellas County Clerk of Court must convert all documents, beginning on the date of Supreme Court or Florida Courts Technology Commission (FCTC) approval, to a searchable document.

m. The Pinellas County Clerk of Court shall continue to accept paper filings at no charge, other than statutorily required fees.

In addition to the foregoing enumerated terms and conditions, the chief judge may, pursuant to the chief judge's constitutional and statutory responsibility for administrative supervision of the courts within the circuit, impose electronic filing system or related requirements by local administrative order that are consistent with the terms and conditions of this approval letter.

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Page 28 of 29

The Honorable Ken Burke Pinellas County E-Filing Request Page4of4

JLK: js

cc: The Honorable Manuel Menendez, Jr., Chair, Electronic Filing Committee The Honorable J. Thomas McGrady, Chief Judge, Sixth Judicial Circuit Gay Inskeep, Trial Court Administrator, Sixth Judicial Circuit Ken Nelson, Court Technology Officer, Sixth Judicial Circuit Christina Blakeslee, Office of the State Courts Administrator

Page 29 of 29

ATTACHMENT A

REQUEST OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE MANDATORY CRIMINAL

E-FILING DEADLINE IN PASCO COUNTY

On September 27, 2013, in In re: Electronic Filing of Criminal Cases in the

Trial Courts of Florida via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, AOSC13-48, Pasco

County was provided an extension of the October 1, 2013 mandatory e-filing

deadline. In accordance with paragraph 2.e. of that Administrative Order, J.

Thomas McGrady, Chief Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, (“Sixth Judicial

Circuit”), submits this request for an extension of the mandatory criminal e-filing

deadline in Pasco County. However, the Sixth Judicial Circuit requests that

voluntary e-filing by the private bar be permitted in Pasco County in certain case

types.

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT Because Pasco County is in the final stages of implementing a

comprehensive digital system, the Sixth Judicial Circuit requests that the February

3, 2014 mandatory e-filing deadline be delayed. Pasco County is currently in the

process of implementing an electronic records case maintenance system. In

addition, it is installing a bench viewer and automated calendaring system. These

technologies are essential to a fully electronic system. While the Sixth Judicial

Circuit is eager to begin e-filing in the criminal division and the Clerk of the

Circuit Court of Pasco County, (“Clerk”), is ready to accept e-filings, the Sixth

Judicial Circuit believes that its migration to a comprehensive digital system will

be achieved more expediently and efficiently by delaying mandatory criminal e-

filing. Thus, the Sixth Judicial Circuit requests that mandatory e-filing begin 90

days after the implementation of its new case maintenance system, or

approximately July 1, 2014. The Clerk, the Public Defender of the Sixth Judicial

Circuit, (“Public Defender’s Office”), and the State Attorney of the Sixth Judicial

Circuit, (“State Attorney’s Office”), support this request. Despite the request for

the delay in mandatory e-filing, the Sixth Judicial Circuit believes that limited

voluntary e-filing would be beneficial to test the Clerk’s systems. Thus, it requests

immediate voluntary e-filing for the private bar in certain case types.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY On October 18, 2012, the Supreme Court of Florida issued revised opinion

No. SC11-399. In that opinion, the Court set April 1, 2013 as the date e-filing

would become mandatory in the civil division, probate division, small claims

division, family law division, and certain circuit appeals, (hereinafter “the civil

cases”). In addition, the Court set October 1, 2013 as the date that e-filing would

become mandatory in the criminal, traffic, and juvenile divisions, as well as in

certain circuit appeals, proceedings brought under the Florida Mental Health Act,

and proceedings brought under the Involuntary Commitment of Sexually Violent

Page 2 of 28

Predators Act, (hereinafter “the criminal cases”). See In Re: Amendments to the

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, the

Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Florida Probate Rules, the Florida Small

Claims Rules, the Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, the Florida Rules of

Appellate Procedure, and the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure—Electronic

Filing, 102 So. 3d 451, 461-62 (Fla. 2012). On April 1, 2013, mandatory e-filing

began in the civil cases in Pasco County. Because of technological initiatives

currently ongoing in the criminal division, however, the Sixth Judicial Circuit

requested a deferral of the October 1, 2013 e-filing deadline in the criminal cases.

This request was made in conjunction with similar requests of the Public

Defender’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office. (Ex. A: Letter of Chief Judge

J. Thomas McGrady dated September 23, 2013; Letter of Public Defender Bob

Dillinger dated September 9, 2013; Letter of State Attorney Bernie McCabe dated

September 10, 2013.) As a result, the Florida Supreme Court extended the

deadline. See In re: Electronic Filing of Criminal Cases in the Trial Courts of

Florida via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, AOSC13-48 at 4.

In accordance with section 2.d. of that Administrative Order, the Sixth

Judicial Circuit together with the Clerk submitted a joint report on November 15,

2013 setting forth the status of criminal e-filing in Pasco County. In that joint

report, which is incorporated by reference, the Sixth Judicial Circuit and the Clerk

Page 3 of 28

requested a delay in mandatory e-filing until 90 days after the implementation of

the new case maintenance system. This request reiterates and further supports that

previous request.

ARGUMENT A comprehensive digital system includes e-filing, electronic records

management, automated scheduling, and electronic records access. See In re:

Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, AOSC09-30 at 2-3. E-

filing is only one component of a comprehensive digital system. Therefore, e-

filing cannot be the sole focus of the courts.

[E-filing] is only one part of a mature, full blown electronic documents process. Focusing only upon the initial filing aspect runs the risk of losing most of the potential benefits of electronic filing. At the extreme, the failure to look at electronic filing as part of a much larger process can result in an expensive system that is of little utility to the court users such as judges, lawyers, litigants, and court staff.

Id. at 17 of Attachment. Beginning mandatory e-filing on February 3, 2014 in

Pasco County would hinder the significant work being done by the Sixth Judicial

Circuit to transition to a comprehensive digital system. This would result in an

expensive system of little utility to the Court, Clerk, Public Defender’s Office,

State Attorney’s Office, the public, and most litigants.

Page 4 of 28

A. Mandatory E-Filing in the Criminal Cases Should Be Delayed Until the Implementation of the New Case Maintenance System Electronic records management is the core of a comprehensive digital

system. However, “[t]he transition…from paper-based information management

to systems that rely primarily on digital records represents a fundamental change in

the internal operations of the courts.” Id. at 1. Given the extent and nature of the

changes being made to implement this system, the Sixth Judicial Circuit

respectfully requests that mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases be delayed until

90 days after the new case maintenance system is implemented.

1. Pasco County’s Transition from a Paper-Based Case Maintenance System to a Digital Records Based Case Maintenance System

Pasco County is transitioning from a paper-based case maintenance system,

Criminal Justice Information System, (“CJIS”), to a digital records based case

maintenance system, CLERICUS. CJIS was in continuous operation for more than

35 years in Pasco County. As a result, it managed over eighty million records in

the juvenile, criminal, traffic, probate, and civil divisions. Over that time,

however, CJIS grew increasingly complex while at the same time becoming

technologically out-of-date. As a result, updates to the program became

exceedingly costly and challenging, particularly given the lack of personnel

familiar with its obsolete programming. Further, CJIS’s inability to handle image-

based work flows made integrating it with other, newer programs impossible. In

Page 5 of 28

2002, research and analysis of other off-the-shelf case maintenance systems began.

The former Chief Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit worked closely with the Clerk

in an effort to obtain a uniform case maintenance system in Pinellas and Pasco

Counties.

In April of 2009, facing a proposed legislative moratorium on hardware and

software acquisitions, the Clerk unilaterally entered into an agreement with Civitek

for CLERICUS. Civitek is a Florida based not-for-profit organization that

developed CLERICUS with full participation of clerks throughout the state. In

addition to providing some standardization between the state’s clerk’s offices,

CLERICUS was selected by the Clerk on the belief that it would provide, among

other things, electronic access to court records, improved data quality, faster

processing of cases, the ability to monitor key indicators effectively, new

automated work flow and processes, remote access, self-service, and the ability to

search case information and data.

2. Implementing CLERICUS

Since CLERICUS’s selection, significant work has been performed

configuring the program for use in Pasco County. On April 8, 2013, the transition

to CLERICUS was completed in the civil, family, probate, and guardianship cases.

Currently, the criminal case types (including traffic, juvenile delinquency, and

dependency) are on track for an April 1, 2014 implementation date. As the largest

Page 6 of 28

and most complex case types, implementation of CLERICUS in the criminal

division has required a significant amount of work.

Implementation involves three considerations: modification, integration, and

conversion. As stated above, CLERICUS in Pasco County is a multi-agency case

maintenance system. Not only will the Courts be using CLERICUS to manage and

access cases, but in the criminal cases, so will the Clerk, the State Attorney’s

Office, and the Public Defender’s Office. While this unique shared case

maintenance system has many benefits, including more efficient communication

between the criminal justice partners, it requires more front-end implementation

work. For example, attorney applications must be developed. These applications

are anticipated to be completed in May of 2014. Further, in order to optimize

workflow and business processes, CLERICUS must integrate and exchange data

with multiple external applications, such as: the Jail Management System,

DHSMV, Calendars for Public View, Pitney Bowes Subpoena System, CCIS,

OSCA, TCATS, FDLE via LOGAN website, MyFloridaCounty.com,

Pascoclerk.com, and Interactive Voice Response System. The failure to properly

integrate and exchange data with these applications can have a serious impact on

the criminal justice system. For instance, the Pasco County Sheriff’s Office

utilizes the Jail Management System. Because the Jail Management System and

CLERICUS are being integrated, the information entered into the Jail Management

Page 7 of 28

System will be immediately available in CLERICUS. As a result, the Sixth

Judicial Circuit, Clerk, State Attorney’s Office, and Public Defender’s Office will

have access to the most up-to-the-minute information in vital areas such as charge

and incident information, jail credit calculations, and custody information.

Without this integration, numerous CLERICUS fields would not prepopulate.

Costly and time-consuming manual entry would be required. More significantly,

the delay in the dissemination of information would slow operations and

potentially result in the use of inaccurate information.

In addition, the valuable and substantial data contained in CJIS and other

document storage systems must be converted to form the foundation of

CLERICUS. As stated above, CJIS contained more than 80 million records, the

majority of which were in the juvenile, criminal, and traffic divisions. This does

not include the records of the State Attorney or Public Defender, which are vital to

the attorney applications. In order for this data to be converted, it must be located,

extracted, and bundled. It must then be separated, mapped, and converted into

CLERICUS. Then finally, the data must be validated and the system tested. In an

effort to ensure a timely and coordinated conversion, weekly or biweekly multi-

agency meetings, teleconferences, or workshops have been held for the past six

months.

Page 8 of 28

The 90 days following the implementation of CLERICUS will be crucial to

resolve post-implementation issues. Despite the hard-work and diligence of those

involved in the implementation of CLERICUS, the Sixth Judicial Circuit

anticipates that numerous issues will arise after CLERICUS is implemented on

April 1, 2014. While some issues such as image corruption or minor mapping

errors may only take days to resolve, other issues such as coding and migration

errors may take weeks to resolve. Given the number of documents, modifications,

and interfaces in the criminal division, the Sixth Judicial Circuit expects that a

significant number of transitional issues will be identified after the implementation

in the criminal division. Thus, the 90-day period is a vital step in the transition to a

digital records based case maintenance system.

3. Risks of Beginning Mandatory E-filing in the Criminal Cases on February 3, 2014

As made clear in the Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, e-filing

must go hand in hand with electronic case files. The Sixth Judicial Circuit is on

the precipice of implementing CLERICUS, a case maintenance system that

manages and provides access to electronic case files. Requiring mandatory e-filing

on February 3, 2014, will result in unintended costs, delays to the implementation

of CLERICUS, and, ultimately, the poor administration of justice.

Requiring mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases prior to the

implementation of CLERICUS will waste resources. CJIS is a paper-based case

Page 9 of 28

maintenance system. Thus, any documents that are e-filed in Pasco County prior

to the implementation of CLERICUS cannot be stored or viewed in CJIS. Instead,

these documents must be converted, migrated, and stored in another application.

Importantly, this application does not provide court-users, litigants or the public

with electronic access to the documents. As a result, these users must continue to

rely on hard copy court files. It is only when CLERICUS is implemented that

these users will begin to access documents electronically. However, in order to be

accessible in CLERICUS, these e-filed documents must be copied, removed from

the other application, and migrated into CLERICUS. In addition, as discussed

further in section B.2. below, these documents must be converted to searchable

PDFs. In December of 2013, traditionally a month with fewer filings, Pasco

County received approximately 41,251 filings in the criminal cases. Assuming that

these numbers are not altered by e-filing and that mandatory e-filing in the criminal

cases begins February 3, 2014, more than 200,000 filings will be received prior to

July 1, 2014. These filings, which represent approximately 500,000 pages, will all

have to be handled multiple times before they are electronically available in July.

Not only is this process time consuming and expensive, but the conversions and

migrations may degrade the quality of the e-filings and increase the chances that

data is lost. By delaying mandatory e-filing until 90 days after the implementation

of CLERICUS, this complicated process will be avoided because e-filings would

Page 10 of 28

be accepted directly into CLERICUS. In addition, the Court and the litigants

would not be harmed by this delay as their ability to electronically access the e-

filed document is contingent upon CLERICUS implementation, not mandatory e-

filing.

The resources of Pasco County are finite and the diversion of these funds to

mandatory e-filing will delay the implementation of CLERICUS. As outlined

above, the Sixth Judicial Circuit and its partners have been working diligently to

implement CLERICUS. The resources to complete this work have been carefully

scrutinized and delegated. As the anticipated implementation date of CLERICUS

has grown closer, the resources for this project have become more limited while

the work demands have increased. Thus, resources must be more prudently

allocated. Diverting these resources to implement mandatory e-filing will make

the April 1, 2014 CLERICUS scheduled readiness date unattainable. Further, as

the CLERICUS implementation date is pushed back, the number of filings that will

require multiple conversion or migration grow, requiring more financial and

human resources. By beginning mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases after

CLERICUS has been implemented, Pasco County will more quickly and cost

effectively achieve a comprehensive digital system.

In addition to the diversion of limited resources, there is a substantial risk

that beginning mandatory e-filing on February 3, 2014 in the criminal cases will

Page 11 of 28

result in the poor administration of justice. Both the Public Defender’s Office and

the State Attorney’s Office requested that mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases

be delayed. Of particular concern to these offices was the fact that the existing

legacy CJIS system is not capable of performing batch filing, a function they

indicated is indispensable to their ability to e-file. It is anticipated that the attorney

application in CLERICUS will be able to integrate with the E-filing Portal batch

filing application. If mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases begins February 3,

2014, the State Attorney’s Office and Public Defender’s Office will be forced to

single session file. In a slow week, these offices file approximately 1,850

documents in their cases. This number does not include automatically generated

documents or any civil traffic cases. Therefore, from the beginning of mandatory

e-filing until batch filing is anticipated to be fully operational, these offices would

have to single session file, at a minimum, 38,850 filings. Given this substantial

number of filings and their limited resources, both the State Attorney’s Office and

the Public Defender’s Office assert that they will be unable to meet the e-filing

demands if forced to single session file. Thus, though the number of cases will

remain the same, fewer items will be filed. This may result in months in which

fewer cases are being instituted, hard copy filings are languishing on desks, and

pending cases present speedy trial concerns. Subsequently, when batch filing is

available under CLERICUS, the opposite is likely to occur. Filings will

Page 12 of 28

substantially increase when months of delayed documents are e-filed. This will put

a strain on the judicial resources of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, as each filing likely

will require proceedings in front of a judicial officer in court facilities. This, in

turn, will result in the delays and errors attributable to an overloaded system.

Given the above, the Sixth Judicial Circuit suggests that mandatory criminal

e-filing in Pasco County begin 90 days after CLERICUS has been implemented.

Due to the number of personnel and operations impacted by this fundamental

transition, the Sixth Judicial Circuit anticipates that multiple issues will arise after

the implementation of CLERICUS. This start date would provide sufficient time

to test the CLERICUS program and its interfaces, resolve project defects, train

staff members, and test single session and batch criminal e-filing. CLERICUS is

currently on track to be implemented by April 1, 2014. Thus, the Sixth Judicial

Circuit requests that mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases begin July 1, 2014.

B. Delaying Mandatory E-filing in the Criminal Cases Will Provide Pasco County the Opportunity to Avoid the Costs of Long-term Dual Record Keeping Systems The progression to a paperless system is a multifaceted endeavor. It is made

up of many intricate pieces, each of which is necessary to realize the bigger

picture. Unlike a conventional puzzle, however, each piece of the comprehensive

digital system represents a radical rewrite of the existing landscape. Having fully

searchable documents is one of these complex pieces that require the courts and the

Page 13 of 28

clerks to replace existing operations and systems in order to achieve a paperless

system.

If mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases is delayed until July 1, 2014, the

Clerk will be provided an opportunity to update its systems to deliver documents in

a searchable Portable Document Format, (“PDF”). It also would provide the Sixth

Judicial Circuit additional time to develop and install its recently acquired bench

viewer and automated calendaring application. Without these pieces, the

efficiencies of a paperless system are not being realized by Pasco County. Instead,

Pasco County is supporting both a digital records system and a paper records

system.

1. Searchable Documents Are Vital to Court Operations

Fully searchable documents are necessary to a comprehensive digital

system. Pasco County has approximately 90,000 active cases, not including civil

traffic infractions, with each case containing hundreds, if not thousands, of pages.

In this mass of paper, the process of finding certain documents in case files or

specific words in documents is time consuming. Modern technology provides a

quicker and more accurate approach to this once arduous process. As a result, with

a simple click, judges can search through thousands of pages and courts can gain

some control over their increasing caseloads without any sacrifice to the

administration of justice. Without fully searchable documents, however, electronic

Page 14 of 28

court records lose this utility. Instead of a simple click, court users would be

forced to load page after page of images, staring at the monitor until the desired

item is found. This would be more time-consuming and laborious than handling

paper files. Thus, paper case files would still need to be maintained and the

efficiencies of a paperless system are lost.

Until the judiciary has access to fully searchable documents in the

courtroom, paper files must continue to be maintained. Currently, paper files for

all calendared cases are transported to the courtroom on a daily basis. These files

are regularly used by the judiciary to review recent case filings and resolve issues

arising in court. As part of its goal of moving toward a paperless system, the Sixth

Judicial Circuit acquired the Judicial Automated Workflow System Software

Application, (“JAWS”). The application is anticipated to be available to all Pasco

judicial officers by July 1, 2014. JAWS is a bench viewer and automated

calendaring tool. Significantly, the bench viewer component has a search feature

that allows judges to quickly search for items and retrieve court records while

sitting on the bench. This search feature is only functional, however, if the court

records are fully searchable. It is not the purpose of a viewer application to

convert files to a fully searchable format. In fact, there is no viewer application

currently on the market in Florida that converts documents to a searchable format

without a third party application. Rather, these bench viewers were meant to

Page 15 of 28

utilize the searchable court records maintained, or converted and maintained, by

the Clerk. As discussed above, operating a digital records system without the

ability to electronically search for items would be more burdensome than flipping

through the paper files. Thus, until searchable court records are available, the

bench viewer component of the JAWS application will not eliminate the necessity

of hard copy court records.

2. The Clerk Has an Obligation to Provide Searchable PDFs

The Florida Supreme Court has required the trial court clerks to provide

searchable PDFs. Since the adoption of the first Statewide Standards for

Electronic Access to the Courts, the Florida Supreme Court has recognized the

importance of searchable documents by requiring that the document format of e-

filed documents be searchable. It also required that electronic case files “meet or

exceed the capabilities and ease of use currently provided by paper files.”

Specifically, it required “a method to search for and select specific documents for

viewing.” See In re: Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts,

AOSC09-30 at 16 of Attachment. The Florida Supreme Court further

acknowledged the importance of searchable documents when it required trial court

clerks to convert all court records to searchable PDFs:

Nothing in this order is intended to impact upon the judicial processing of cases at the trial court level. Trial court clerks must continue to provide paper to the judiciary until the circuit court chief judge authorizes the

Page 16 of 28

elimination of paper files. At such time, the clerk of court must convert all documents to searchable PDFs.

See In re: Interim Policy on Electronic Appellate Court Records, AOSC10-32 at 3.

This obligation was reiterated to the Clerk when its plan for electronic filing was

approved. (Ex. B: Letter of the Florida State Courts Technology Commission to

the Clerk dated March 28, 2013 at 3 (“[t]he Pasco County Clerk of Court must

convert all documents, beginning on the date of Supreme Court or Florida Courts

Technology Commission (FCTC) approval, to a searchable electronic document”.)

Further, searchable documents, including searchable PDFs, can satisfy the

requirements of Rule of Judicial Administration 2.526. The rule requires that

judicial branch records that are transmitted in an electronic form “be formatted in a

manner that complies with all state and federal laws requiring that electronic

judicial records be accessible to persons with disabilities.” Since searchable

documents can easily be made accessible to persons with disabilities, electronic

court records in a searchable PDF format meet both the requirements of the Florida

Supreme Court in AOSC10-32 and Rule of Judicial Administration 2.526.

3. The Clerk Is Working to Provide Searchable PDFs

A delay in mandatory e-filing would provide the Clerk additional time to

provide searchable PDFs while simultaneously reducing the number of digital files

that need to be converted to searchable PDFs. As mandated by the Supreme Court

of Florida, e-filings are formatted in PDF, Word, or Word Perfect file formats.

Page 17 of 28

Currently, the Clerk receives and stores e-filings in a Tagged Image File Format,

(“TIFF”). TIFF images are not searchable. Thus, paper files must be maintained

despite the existence of an electronic court file. For example, hard copy court files

are still being prepared in circuit civil cases even though CLERICUS and e-filing

were implemented more than nine months ago. Similar dual record keeping

systems also exist in the family division.

Diverting the Clerk’s resources to begin mandatory e-filing will reduce the

resources that can be allocated to providing PDF documents. The Clerk has been

working with its vendors to accommodate searchable documents. In February, the

Clerk anticipates that it will begin accepting and storing e-filed documents in a

searchable format. Despite this progress, there remain a significant number of hard

copy court records in all divisions that have not been converted to searchable PDF

documents. In addition, there are also a number of e-filed TIFF images that must

be converted to searchable PDF. Converting these court records requires human

and financial resources, particularly if these conversions are to be made without

degrading image quality. The delay of mandatory e-filing in Pasco County until 90

days after the implementation of the new case maintenance system would provide

the Clerk additional time and resources to meet its obligation to provide the

judiciary with fully searchable PDFs. Once this obligation has been met, together

Page 18 of 28

with the implementation of CLERICUS and JAWS, Pasco County will be

operating a comprehensive digital system.

C. Voluntary E-filing by the Private Bar in Certain Criminal Cases Will Allow Pasco County to Test New Technology at a Minimal Cost In In re: Electronic Filing of Criminal Cases in the Trial Courts of Florida

via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, AOSC13-48, Pasco County was prohibited

from accepting e-filings in the criminal cases. While the Sixth Judicial Circuit

believes that mandatory e-filing will interfere with its implementation of a

comprehensive digital system, it believes that small scale voluntary e-filing will

allow it to exercise new workflows and technologies.

In the November Report, the Sixth Judicial Circuit requested that the Florida

Supreme Court approve immediate voluntary e-filing for the private bar in criminal

traffic and county criminal cases. The Sixth Judicial Circuit now requests that

voluntary e-filing begin immediately in criminal traffic, county criminal, and

circuit criminal. This request does not include civil traffic, juvenile, circuit

appeals, or proceedings brought under the Florida Mental Health Act or the

Involuntary Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act. Despite the

arguments outlined above, the Sixth Judicial Circuit believes more benefit than

harm will result from these voluntary filings. First, the number of filings by the

private bar in these cases is minimal. Further, it is unlikely that all private

attorneys will chose to electronically file prior to mandatory e-filing. Thus, the

Page 19 of 28

Sixth Judicial Circuit anticipates that the work related to these early filings will be

negligible. Second, these early filers will allow the Clerk to test its criminal e-

filing processes. This will lead to the early identification of potential issues, which

will save time and money once mandatory e-filing begins. In addition, when

CLERICUS is ready for full implementation in the Clerk’s Office on April 1, 2014,

the Sixth Judicial Circuit will be able to more exhaustively test CLERICUS and its

interfaces with other applications, including the E-Portal. For these reasons, the

Sixth Judicial Circuit requests that voluntary e-filing begin immediately for the

private bar in criminal traffic, county criminal, and circuit criminal.

CONCLUSION For the reasons outlined above, the Sixth Judicial Circuit respectfully

requests that (i) mandatory e-filing in the criminal cases begin on July 1, 2014,

which is 90 days after the implementation of the new case maintenance system,

and (ii) voluntary e-filing by the private bar begin immediately in criminal traffic,

county criminal, and circuit criminal.

Page 20 of 28

EXHIBIT APage 21 of 28

Page 22 of 28

Page 23 of 28

Page 24 of 28

Judge Lisa Taylor Munyon, Chair

Florida Courts Technology Commission c/o Office of the State Courts Administrator

500 S. Duval Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1900

March 28, 2013

The Honorable Paula S. O’Neil

Pasco County Clerk of Court

Pasco County Courthouse

7530 Little Road, Suite 220 New Port Richey, Florida 34654

RE: request for implementation of electronic filings in remaining court (Circuit

Civil, County Civil, and Family Law) divisions in Pasco County, Sixth Judicial

Circuit

Dear Dr. O’Neil:

Supreme Court Opinion No.SC10-241, In re: Amendments to the Florida Rules of Judicial

Administration – Rule 2.236 (July 1, 2010) provides that the Florida Courts Technology

Commission “evaluate all such applications to determine whether they comply with the

technology policies established by the Supreme Court and the procedures and standards created

pursuant to this rule, and approve those applications deemed to be effective and found to be in

compliance.”

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that on April 27, 2005 the Electronic Filing

Committee (EFC) reviewed and recommended approval of your request to implement electronic

filing in Pasco County in the probate division which was granted by the Supreme Count via

AOSC05-15.

As Chair of the Florida Courts Technology Commission I hereby approve your request to

implement electronic filing in the Circuit Civil, County Civil and Family Law divisions in

Pasco County.

Approval of this electronic initiative is contingent upon compliance with the policy

considerations and directives regarding the development and application of new technological

standardization and enhancements as set forth by the Supreme Court and is subject to the

EXHIBIT BPage 25 of 28

The Honorable Paula S. O’Neil Pasco County E-Filing Request Page

2 of 4

following terms and conditions. Violation of any of the following conditions shall

constitute grounds for revocation of the approval to implement electronic filing in Pasco

County.

a. The Pasco County Clerk of Court may implement the aforementioned technology

procedures in accordance with the approved plan effective on the date of this letter

and must adhere to the statewide standards for electronic access to the courts as

outlined in In re: Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, AOSC09-

30 (Fla. July 1, 2009).

b. The Pasco County Clerk of Court shall ensure that there is no possibility for

vendors to release or distribute court data to third parties and that the clerk of

court retains the designation as custodian of the court records.

c. The Pasco County Clerk of Court shall ensure that contract provisions prohibit any

vendor from extracting, data mining, or engaging in similar activities with regard to

information from original court filings and other court records or any associated

databases containing court records in the circuit for commercial or other non-court

related uses.

d. The Pasco County Clerk of Court shall ensure that no fees other than statutorily

required fees are assessed or collected by the clerk of court.

e. The Pasco County Clerk of Court shall ensure that the data is backed up and is

recoverable. The clerk of court will ensure that remote data backups are stored in a

protected environment a minimum of 50 miles from the primary production

location of the court record or at a certified hardened facility, and that the circuit

complies with established data backup standards as they are revised and updated.

f. This approval does not constitute an approval of any electronic forms that may be

used in this process.

g. The Pasco County Clerk of Court shall submit monthly progress reports to the court

system during the 90-day pilot test. Copies of the monthly progress reports shall be

provided to the Chief Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit and the State Courts

Technology Officer in the Office of the State Courts Administrator.

h. The Pasco County Clerk of Court shall abide by In re: Revised Interim Policy on

Electronic Release of Court Records, AOSC07-49 (Fla. Sept. 7, 2007).

i. The E-Filing Court Records Portal, developed by the Florida Association of Court

Clerks Services Group (FACCSG), has been identified as the statewide e-filing

portal. To ensure equal access to electronic filing across the state, the Supreme Court

has directed that the Florida Courts Technology Commission make implementation

of the statewide system a priority of the judicial branch. All local electronic filing

systems must be compatible with the statewide e-filing portal and approval of each of

the above electronic filing systems is contingent on the system’s compatibility with

the statewide portal. The Pasco County Clerk of Court must now migrate to the

statewide e-filing portal.

Page 26 of 28

The Honorable Paula S. O’Neil Pasco County E-Filing Request Page

3 of 4

j. The Pasco County Clerk of Court must continue to provide paper to the judiciary

until the chief judge authorizes the elimination of paper files. At such time, the

Pasco County Clerk of Court must convert all documents, beginning on the date of

Supreme Court or Florida Courts Technology Commission (FCTC) approval, to a

searchable electronic document.

k. The Pasco County Clerk of Court shall continue to accept paper filings at no

charge, other than statutorily required fees until such time as the Supreme Court

may require electronic filing.

In addition to the foregoing enumerated terms and conditions, the chief judge may,

pursuant to his constitutional and statutory responsibility for administrative supervision of

the courts within the circuit, imposed additional conditions that must be adhered by to

implement an electronic filing system.

1. Pasco County will comply with the E-Access Standards in accordance with

Supreme Court Administrative Order AOSC 09-30. The Florida Courts

Technology Commission last amended the Standards January 2013, version

8.0, and you must comply with this or any future revisions to the E-Access

Standards.

2. Pasco County will follow any implementation schedule developed by the

Florida Courts Technology Commission and coordinate implementation

with the Chief Judge.

3. Pasco County will continue to assemble and deliver paper case files and

documents until authorized by the Chief Judge to discontinue paper files.

4. The electronic file to be provided to the Court must meet or exceed the

capabilities and ease of use currently provided by paper case files, for both

in and out of court processing and use. Documents in an electronic court

file must be provided to the Court as a searchable PDF.

5. The Court must be provided and approve in advance any business process

that impacts Court operations.

6. Pasco County will provide the Court with direct unrestricted access to the

Pasco County court data, images and documents.

Page 27 of 28

The Honorable Paula S. O’Neil Pasco County E-Filing Request Page

4 of 4

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Sincerely,

LTM: jm

cc: The Honorable Manuel Menendez, Jr., Chair, Electronic Filing Committee

The Honorable J. Thomas McGrady, Chief Judge, Sixth Judicial Circuit

Gay Inskeep, Trial Court Administrator, Sixth Judicial Circuit

Ken Nelson, Court Technology Officer, Sixth Judicial Circuit

Christina Blakeslee, Office of the State Courts Administrator

Page 28 of 28

AMY HfAVlllN, CPA CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA

January 13, 2014

To: Chief Justice Ricky Polston, Florida Supreme Court

From: Amy Heavilin, Monroe County Clerk of Circuit Court & Comptroller

I hereby request an extension of time from the February 3, 2014 mandatory criminal

e-filing deadline pursuant to AOSC13-48, and as reason therefore state that the clerk's

office is currently upgrading our computer servers in order to accommodate the new e-

filing and the upgrades will not be completed by February 3. We request an extension

until April 30, 2014, to comply with the criminal e-filing requirement.

CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER, MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA

500 Whitehead Street Suite 101, PO Box 1980, Key West, FL 33040 Phone: 305-295-3130 Fax: 305-295-3663 3117 Overseas Highway, Marathon, FL 33050 Phone: 305-289-6027 Fax: 305-289-6025

88820 Overseas Highway, Plantation Key, FL 33070 Phone: 852-7145 Fax: 305-852-7146

OFFICE oF THE STATE ATTORNEYFoURTH JuDrcrAL CIRcutr oF FLoRIDA

wwYl/.sAo TH.COM

22O EAST BAY STREETJAcKsor.rvrLLE, FLoRIDA 32202-3 429

TEL] (9o4) 630-2400Fex: (9O4)630-1844

ANGELA B. COREYSTATE ATTORNEY

January 14,2014

Chief Justice Ricky PolstonFlorida Supreme CourtAttn: Clerk's Office500 South Duval StreetTallahassee, Florida 32399-1 927

RE: Request for Extension of Mandatory e-Filing Deadline

Please accept this letter as the Fourth Judicial Circuit's request for a time extension to begin our batche-Filing for Criminal cases untll April 1, 2014. ln the event that we are granted this request for anextension, our goal would be to "go live" as soon as possible and not wait until the new deadline.

The Fourth Judicial Circuit is requesting an extension due to the following two factors:

. We are not able to complete successful testing with Duval Clerk of Court, our largest county.We have tested with the Duval Clerk's Office numerous times since September and have not

been able to correct the problems. Our Case Management System vendor (ClP) and also theFACC are working with us to help resolve the problems. As of this week, we have receivednotice that the FACC believes that they have determined what the issue is and are working withtheir developers to fix it. However as of the date of this request, we are unsure that we will be

able to resolve the problem before the February 3,2014 deadline.. Our vendor has just released a new version of our software (111412013) that has important

upgrades to the eFiling process. We must test the new version before we can put it intoproduction. We will rush this and get it done as soon as possible, however we may find bugs in

the new version that will have to be fixed with a software patch.

lf we are able to resolve the technical problems with the Duval Clerk's system, and barring anyunforeseen problems with installing the new version of our Case Management System, the FourthJudicial Circuit's goal is to "go live" on January 27t .

Angela B. CoreyState Attorney

Deputy Director, Circuit CourtFourth Judicial Circuit

Bruce H. Colton State Attorney

Chief Justice Ricky Polston Florida Supreme Court Attn: Clerk's Office 500 South Duval Street Tallahassee, Fl. 32399-1927

OFFICE OF THE

~tat£ ~ttnrn£tr NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA

SERVING INDIAN RIVER, MARTIN, OKEECHOBEE

AND ST. LUCIE COUNTIES

February 13 , 2014

411 South Second Street Fort Pierce, Florida 34950

(772) 465-3000 Fax: (772) 462-1214

Re: Request forE-Filing Extension by the State Attorney of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida

Dear Chief Justice Polston:

Pursuant to Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC 13-48 (September 27, 2013), please accept this letter as a formal request for an extension of the Court's e-filing deadline as applied to the State Attorney's Office of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit. In support of this request, I will outline the individual circumstances confronting this office as well as the significant efforts we have put forth in our continuing efforts to comply with the court's deadlines.

As I indicated to you in our prior request for extension of September 27, 2013, this office has recently converted to a new case management system (CMS). I am pleased to report that over two weekends in November we were able to train all fifty-eight of our lawyers on the basics of our new CMS. Between October 28th and November 20th of last year, we successfully accomplished the herculean task of training all support staff during normal business hours. Due to the significant differences between the two CMS, it would be quite the understatement to say that the learning curve has been rather steep.

We went live on our new CMS (STAC web) on November 25, 2013. While STAC is a CMS utilized by several State Attorneys throughout the state, this office is the first office to be exclusively reliant on the recently developed web version of STAC. Unfortunately, this process has not gone smoothly. At present we are battling several significant issues which are severely hampering our ability to execute our core functions much less advance on thee-filing front. One of the most significant problems we have had to face is a yet to be diagnosed server issue which occasionally requires us to shut down all operations. eedless to say, this transition has prevented us from even testing, until very recently, our batch e-filing capabilities.

To complicate matters we are awaiting the latest update to STAC web. This particular patch is primarily intended to ensure the reliable functionality ofthe e-filing and e-service components of STAC web. Unfortunately, we have been advised by our programmers that this patch will not be

released until January 17, 2014. Of course, we will have to test anew once this patch is uploaded and more importantly we will need to train the attorneys and staff on the e-file/e-service process.

In spite of these challenges, we began to test batch e-filing in Saint Lucie County the week beginning January 131

h. Saint Lucie County is the largest county in our circuit, and at the present time we hope to go live withe-filing in our misdemeanor division within that office shortly after we have tested the aforementioned January 1 ih patch. From there we will move to the juvenile and felony divisions with the Saint Lucie office, and then on to the remaining three counties within the circuit.

I would be remiss ifl didn 't take this opportunity to point out that our circuit, while certainly not the smallest in the State, is relatively small. Our entire staff dedicated to the implementation and administration of our new CMS consists of two people. These employees have been working to exhaustion seven days a week and late into the night, and I simply cannot push them any harder.

With all of this in mind, it is apparent to me that while we are optimistic that we will bee-filing in at least one of our counties prior to the February 3rct deadline, we will not be able to meet the court's deadline circuit wide. Therefore, on behalf of this office I would respectfully request an extension. In consultation with staff, I feel extremely confident that we will be fully compliant with the court's e-file directives no later than April 1, 2013.

Thank you for your consideration of my request. Should you require any further information or clarification, I would be happy to provide the same.

cerelyt/~~ ruce H. Colton

State Attorney Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Florida