Bill would take criminal rulemaking ability from the court.

The House Criminal Justice Committee on March 16 moved legislation that would send to voters a constitutional amendment to strip the Supreme Court of its ability to write procedural rules relating to violations of criminal law--including those committed by juveniles--and postconviction proceedings.

Instead, Rep. Dick Kravitz, R-Orange Park, the committee's chair, said HJR 1007 would create a judicial conference to propose rules of procedure governing those areas of law, similar to the process used to create procedural rules in the federal courts. The joint resolution also provides that a court may not require or authorize collateral or postconviction judicial review of a criminal judgment or sentence except as provided by general law or rule of procedure adopted in accordance with the amendment. The bill would not alter the court's authority to adopt procedural rules in other areas of law.

The committee moved the resolution on a 5-3 vote.

"The basic premise of this joint resolution is the promulgation of court rules of procedure should not erode the ability of this legislature to determine matters of public policy," said Kravitz an insurance/business consultant. "The current system is inadequate to protect the legislature's ability to set public policy."

As an example, Kravitz cited the court's finding that the Death Penalty Reform Act of 2000 was an unconstitutional encroachment on the court's exclusive power to adopt rules for practice and procedure, thus impairing the legislature's ability to address the time delays in death penalty cases. Now, he said, the legislature has no authority to limit how many postconviction motions can be filed in a capital case and cannot limit the amount of time that a defendant has to file a motion.

"I think a logical interpretation of the constitution is that court rules are to simply implement statutory law and constitutional rights," Kravitz said. "We, of course, may repeal a role by a two-thirds vote, but the Supreme Court can readopt the same rule almost immediately. The court did this very thing in Allen v. Butterworth when it threw out the Death Penalty Reform Act of 2000."

By doing that, Kravitz said, the court prevented the legislature from making "much needed reforms" to the death penalty post conviction appeal process.

Kravitz said that authority has empowered the court to unilaterally decide which issues are procedural and therefore beyond the legislature's control.

(The committee also voted 8-0...