It’s the end of July and the Rhode Island Supreme Court has not published an opinion since July 3. The hiatus likely means the Court is done for term 2017-2018 and will not issue another published opinion until the 2018-2019 term starts in September 2018 (the Supreme Court’s circadian rhythms are explained here). With term ’17-’18 in the books, let’s review the types of cases the Supreme Court decided, the division of labor of the individual Justices, and how criminal defendants and pro se litigants fared.
Overall, the Supreme Court published 94 full opinions during term ’17-’18. This is in line with the last few terms, which saw 97 opinions (’16-’17 term), 98 opinions (’15-’16 term), and 89 opinions (’14-’15 term). The homogeneity is not surprising because the Supreme Court has control over when it hears cases. Typically it decides cases in the same term it schedules oral argument.
The split between civil and criminal for the 94 cases is roughly two-thirds to one-third: the Supreme Court issued 61 full opinions in civil cases and 33 full opinions in criminal cases (the definition of criminal cases includes proceedings like post-conviction reviews, which are technically civil but are really criminal law cases). Overall, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court in 68 cases, affirmed in part and vacated in part in 7 cases, and vacated the lower court ruling 18 times (in one other case, the Court dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds).
How did civil litigants fare? Overall, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court in 40 cases, affirmed in part and vacated in part in 6 cases, vacated the lower court’s decision in 14 cases, and dismissed one case without reviewing the lower court’s decision. For those keeping score at home, this translates into the person who appealed (also known as the “appellant”) achieving partial or total success in roughly 33% of civil cases before the Supreme Court.
Criminal defendants did not fare nearly as well. Of the 33 criminal opinions, the Supreme Court issued rulings in favor of the State in 30 cases, decided in favor of the criminal defendant in 2 cases, and issued a split decision (partially in favor of the State and the Defendant) in one case. Criminal defendants achieved some level of success in 9% of criminal cases, much lower than the 33% success rate in civil cases.
Pro Se litigants did not do any better than criminal defendants. Pro Se litigants are parties that represent themselves without the benefit of a lawyer. Combining the Supreme Court’s full opinions with the shorter orders for cases that it decides summarily (access the full opinions here and the summary orders here), the Supreme Court reviewed 12 cases involving Pro Se parties. One Pro Se party achieved partial success in one case and that was it; in the other 11 cases, the Supreme Court ruled for the party that had legal representation. Pro Se litigants achieved success in 8% of cases for term ’17-’18, about the same as criminal defendants.
Here’s a look at the division of labor for each Justice during the ’17-’18 term. 73 cases were unanimous and 21 had some form of disagreement between the Justices. In most instances, each Justice joined the majority opinion. (Also, note that the majority opinions listed below add up to 93, not 94, because the Supreme Court issued one unsigned per curiam opinion in a bar admission case).
Chief Justice Suttell
- Wrote Majority Opinion – 21 times
- Dissented in Full or in Part and wrote Concurring or Dissenting Opinion – 3 times
- Joined another Justice who wrote a Dissent – 2 times
Justice Goldberg
- Wrote Majority Opinion – 18 times
- Dissented in Full or in Part and wrote Concurring or Dissenting Opinion – 3 times
- Joined another Justice who wrote a Dissent – 1 times
Justice Flaherty
- Wrote Majority Opinion – 17 times
- Dissented in Full or in Part and wrote Concurring or Dissenting Opinion – 5 times
- Joined another Justice who wrote a Dissent – 1 time
Justice Indeglia
- Wrote Majority Opinion – 22 times
- Dissented in Full or in Part and wrote Concurring or Dissenting Opinion – 3 times
- Joined another Justice who wrote a Dissent – 0 times
Justice Robinson
- Wrote Majority Opinion – 15 times
- Dissented in Full or in Part and wrote Concurring or Dissenting Opinion – 8 times
- Joined another Justice who wrote a Dissent – 2 times
Last year, RICourtBlog pondered whether Justice Robinson is the new Great Dissenter. The answer is still yes. Justice Robinson dissented or wrote separately in 10 cases for the ’17-’18 term. The next closest Justice did this 6 times.