Authors: Matt Bickel (IL) and Joel Dunning (MN). Matt Bickel, AIA, LEED AP, and Joel Dunning, AIA, LEED AP, are Government Practice Leaders at Wold Architects & Engineers. They help municipal, county, state and federal clients plan justice and civic facilities that improve safety, operations and public service delivery.
Three-zone circulation is a cornerstone of modern courthouse design, intended to reduce unnecessary contact and improve safety throughout the building by separating the movement of the public, court staff and individuals in custody. In a traditional courtroom, those three circulation zones converge when an in-custody defendant enters the courtroom from the secure zone, creating a point of vulnerability. In many jurisdictions, justice facility planning teams are addressing that risk through a different model.
Rather than transporting individuals from detention areas into traditional courtroom space, an increasing number of facilities are incorporating fully secured areas for in-custody appearances. Defendants move directly from detention circulation into these areas, remaining physically separated from staff and public circulation throughout the proceeding. This allows judges, attorneys and other participants to conduct face-to-face pretrial hearings while improving security, staffing, operational efficiency and access to justice.
Reducing movement reduces risk
Every individual who enters a detention facility will likely appear before a judge, often within the first 24 to 48 hours following arrest. Historically, that meant transporting detainees from a jail to a courthouse, or through secure tunnels, elevators and corridors connecting the two facilities.
While these systems have long been designed around secure circulation, every movement introduces another opportunity for complications. Transportation requires additional staff. Responsibility for an individual often transfers between corrections officers and court security personnel. Vehicles, loading areas and public streets introduce variables that are difficult to eliminate. By locating an in-custody courtroom immediately adjacent to or within a detention facility, jurisdictions can maintain face-to-face proceedings without requiring defendants to leave secure circulation. Defendants move directly from detention areas into a secure presentation space within the courtroom, eliminating the point at which they would traditionally enter a shared courtroom environment. For counties handling dozens of first appearances each day, minimizing transportation improves both security and operations.
Connected, secure spaces support faster court operations
Early hearings determine whether individuals remain in custody, are released on bond or participate in diversion programs. Resolving those decisions efficiently benefits the entire justice system by reducing unnecessary detention and freeing valuable bed space for those who must remain incarcerated.
Keeping court operations physically connected to detention operations streamlines that process. Staff spend less time coordinating transportation. Court schedules become more predictable. Corrections personnel can focus on supervision rather than movement.
Some jurisdictions have gone even further by redesigning the workflow around these spaces. Criminal court staff organize cases before proceedings begin, allowing hearings to move continuously rather than pausing between defendants. The result is a more efficient process that benefits judges, attorneys, corrections staff and defendants alike.
One concept, many design solutions
Although the operational goals are consistent, there is no single model for an in-custody courtroom. Some jurisdictions use individual secure enclosures adjacent to counsel tables. Others incorporate larger holding areas serving multiple courtrooms, allowing several detainees to await hearings before moving individually into secure presentation spaces. The common threads are that each solution reflects local operations and design continues to evolve after occupancy. Realistic workflow dictates facility design, not the other way around.
For our clients, early projects featured relatively low separation walls. Later facilities introduced taller glass enclosures after operational experience identified a need for additional security. More recent projects have refined the concept further with nearly invisible security features, such as concealed mesh ceilings that preserve courtroom decorum while preventing escape attempts.
Group holding models have also emerged, where operational needs support them. Rather than separating every individual, some jurisdictions have found value in secure shared holding areas adjacent to courtrooms that improve staff efficiency while maintaining appropriate supervision.
Security and dignity are not competing priorities
One misconception is that greater security creates a more punitive courtroom environment. In practice, successful designs work to achieve the opposite. These courtrooms are used only for first appearances and other pretrial proceedings, not jury trials, where defendants must appear before jurors without visual indicators suggesting guilt. During pretrial hearings, the priority shifts toward safely bringing all necessary participants together while preserving professional courtroom decorum and ensuring due process.
Design plays an important role in striking that balance, where security can help elevate it. Secure enclosures are carefully integrated into the courtroom rather than appearing as jail cells inserted into civic space. Materials, sightlines and transparency all contribute to an environment that supports fair and efficient judicial proceedings while protecting everyone present.
Designing for evolving justice systems
As counties continue needing to minimize staffing, operational demands and increasing expectations around safety, in-custody courtrooms are likely to become an increasingly important planning consideration. Many of the strategies discussed here have been shaped through years of work with Wold’s justice partners across the country, where counties have refined operational models based on real-world experience. As more jurisdictions reconsider how detention and court functions intersect, those lessons offer a roadmap for communities nationwide seeking to improve safety, efficiency and access to justice.
Well-designed in-custody courtrooms preserve the efficiency of minimizing movement while maintaining the benefits of in-person proceedings. They represent the next evolution of three-zone circulation, allowing defendants to participate in person without ever leaving the secure circulation zone. Ultimately, the most successful justice facilities are those that recognize security, operational efficiency and access to justice are not competing objectives. When planned together, thoughtful design can strengthen all three.
