‘Alternative’ Judge’s Group Gaining Momentum?

March 25, 2014 By
 
A judicial group that has been critical of the current court management seems to be gaining some momentum after successfully supporting a legislative audit of the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), drawing a crowd to its second annual conference in Los Angeles, partnering with a major university for that conference and gaining strong coverage in The Courthouse News.
 
The CN reported last week that “… the 500-member Alliance of California Judges conference was enlivened with at-times feverish energy, bolstered by a legislative committee’s recent approval of a financial audit examining the Administrative Office of the Courts and how it spends public money. Alliance members had lobbied for the audit, a campaign born out of the AOC’s ability to insulate a large staff and give the staff raises while trial courts were making draconian budget cuts, laying off workers and closing courtrooms.”
 
The CN quoted judges who called the event a “milestone” and it also reported that some out-of-state speakers were surprised to find out how difficult the courts situation has become in California. The conference included participation from George Mason University, and you can check out the CN coverage here. 
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , ,

Fighting Over Those Three Little Words

March 12, 2014 By
 
In the non-campaign yawn-fest that is the usual Los Angeles Superior Court judicial election, the most vital strategy doesn’t involve talking points or focus groups. Instead, the big deal is how candidates are identified on the ballot. It seems “prosecutor” is a coveted title. 

Or even a “Deputy City Prosecutor.” The MetNews is reporting that B. Otis Felder, who is running for the judgeship being vacated by Michael Nash, is arguing that he can use that delegation because he was a full-time prosecutor in the “Volunteer Attorney Training Program” run by the L.A. City Attorney’s office. Responding to critics, he said that volunteer work is prosecutor enough. Critics say there may be a formal complaint to change the designation.

Another interesting candidate is Pamala F. Matsumoto, who is self-identified as an “Administrative Law Judge,” and is one of the former Superior Court referees dismissed during the 2012 budget cuts.

Here’s the MetNews report.

Here’s the new Los Angeles Times election coverage page, which offers a broad election story and mentions the Superior Court election only once, and then to dismiss it.

 
Filed Under: Community Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Some DA’s Will Become Judges Unopposed

March 11, 2014 By
 
At least three deputy district attorneys will run virtually unopposed for Los Angeles Superior Court judicial seats after last Friday’s filing deadline. It was uncertain who among those seeking seats might face competition, reports the MetNews, which added that one candidate clearly created some options.
 
According to MetNews, Deputy District Attorney Helen Kim eventually returned papers to seek the same judgeship being sought by fellow Deputy District Attorney Alison Matsumoto Estrada. The report noted that Kim’s campaign consultant, Fred Huebscher, “declined to comment for publication on the reason for targeting Estrada, after filing declarations for seven other seats. Kim paid a filing fee of $1,812.29 for each of the eight contests.”
The three district attorneys escaping serious challenges were Ann Park, Serena Murillo, and Chris Frisco, and the MetNews full story is here.
Filed Under: Community Tagged With: , , , , ,

Judicial Election Intimidation On Display in San Diego

March 6, 2014 By
 
Imagine living with a justice system where powerful judges intimidate would-be challengers, threatening careers and clients if anyone dares run against a seated judge. Well, there are those who say (quietly, very quietly of course) that California has just that system, and they point to a San Diego race as the latest example.
 
It’s unusual for mainstream media outlets to give more than passing coverage to superior court judicial races, but The San Diego Times Union recently broke the story: “A candidate challenging a longtime Superior Court judge in the June primary election says she is being pressured to drop out by a legal organization she belongs to and by some judges.”

 

The newspaper, perhaps oddly sidestepping the larger story of judicial electoral intimidation, still reports that federal prosecutor Carla Keehn “… is one of five people who have filed to run against judges on the local bench — an unusually high number of challenges to incumbent jurists. Typically judges are re-elected without opposition, as few lawyers will take on a sitting judge for fear of judicial enmity.”

 

To make matters even more interesting, Keehn is openly gay and some of the pressure comes from a group she belongs to, with the leadership writing here that “… openly challenging a sitting judge can be seen by some as undermining the support and relationship we have worked so hard to build.” Keehn said she understood it to be pressure to drop out, but will not do so. Read the report here.
Filed Under: Community Tagged With: , , ,

Race Is On For Sohigian Judicial Seat

February 26, 2014 By
 
By L.A. Superior Court judicial election standards, we have a barn-burner of an election shaping up for the seat currently held by Judge Ronald Sohigian, who is retiring. The latest report is that four people may be running in the June primary, including former state lawmaker Charles M. Claderon.
 
Calderon’s brothers, state Sen. Ronald Calderon and former Assemblyman Thomas Calderon, are under indictment on federal corruption charges did nothing to change his mind, he told the MetNews website, which also cited newswire reports that Tom Calderon pled not guilty Friday and posted bail. Ron Calderon surrendered yesterday, pled not guilty, and was released on $50,000 bail.
 
The actual deadline for filing candidate papers is March 7 and the MetNews notes that none of the expected office-seekers had filed as of a few days ago. One of the anticipated candidates, Deputy District Attorney Efrain Aceves is now saying  he will not run. The judicial seat is formally Office No. 48 and you can follow the race at the MetNews.
Filed Under: Community Tagged With: , , , , ,

Great New Courthouse Threatened By Budget Woes

February 17, 2014 By
 
Up in Porterville, a San Joaquin Valley community of about 60,000, they have one of those great new courthouses that escaped state judicial budget cuts. It sounds great, described as a “… sparkling new 96,500 square-foot courthouse” with nine courtrooms, holding cells for 85 inmates, solar panels, natural lighting and drought-resistant landscaping. The $93-million facility replaced a much smaller courthouse that had only two courtrooms, making it an important addition to a town experiencing a population boom.”
Tulare County, Porterville Courthouse (photo: www.courts.ca.gov)

Tulare County, Porterville Courthouse (photo: www.courts.ca.gov)

 
One problem though. Local press is quoting the presiding judge saying that budget cuts actually threaten operation of the new facility.  “We are short-handed everywhere you look. We have cut and cut some more,” the presiding judge, Lloyd Hicks, told the local Visalia Times-Delta newspaper. “If we are [to] cut another $2 million, we would be faced with closing the new courthouse.”
 
The story is being reported in a Minneapolis-based news website, the The MintNews. In a story by Matt Heller, a California correspondent, the MintNews takes a good look at the statewide crisis and reports on specific problems, like “… waiting time for mediation in child custody disputes has risen in at least 19 counties, with parents in Stanislaus County having to wait up to 17 weeks, the report said. Some counties have eliminated hearings in small claims disputes and 11 counties told the committee they are no longer able to process domestic violence restraining orders the same day they are filed.”
 
Read the story here.
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

L.A. County Eyes Juvenile Justice Overhaul

February 15, 2014 By
 
The Los Angeles County supervisors have voted to study overhauling how juvenile suspects are defended in the county. They are responding to complaints that some juveniles are assigned public defenders while others are represented by contractors known as “panel attorneys” who are paid flat rates of $319 to $345 per case. A Loyola Law School report that looked at 3,000 Los Angeles juvenile cases last year found that people represented by panel attorneys got more severe punishment.
 
The Los Angeles Times story on the issue cited attorney Gary Farwell, who was head of the juvenile panel at Kenyon Juvenile Justice Center until it closed last year, saying that the county should review the resources allocated to juvenile representation, but defended the work of his colleagues. The Times quoted Farwell: “We have hardworking, devoted people who do far more than what they’re paid on many cases. It’s not the people who are the panel attorneys that are the problem. It’s the system of resources available to the panel attorneys that’s the problem.”
 
Read the story here. 
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , ,

Court Delays Hitting Mentally Ill Defendants

January 21, 2014 By
 
Nobody has to tell civil courts advocates that some court functions enjoy more political attention and funding priority than others. But there’s increasing concern that mentally incompetent defendants are being stuck in county jails because there are just not enough hospital beds available, at least not ones designed for treating the mentally ill. Of course, the system is creating a revolving door as the lack of treatment leads people right back to local jails.
 
The San Luis Obispo Tribune has one of the better local stories about the trend, which is shaping up as a key issue for the upcoming state budget battle. Recent federal court rulings have increased focus on mental health under Obamacare, and these cases are sure to gain priority. The Tribune explains the situation: “The problem is particularly notable for defendants declared incompetent to stand trial. Competent defendants understand the charges against them and can assist their attorneys in their defense. If an attorney doesn’t think a client can do that, he declares a doubt in court. At that point, psychiatric evaluations are ordered. If a judge deems the defendant incompetent, the case is suspended, and the defendant is ordered to undergo treatment until competency is restored.” Except backlogs and cutbacks make that process nearly impossible,
 
Read the report here.
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

New Divorce Documentary Is ‘Takedown’ Of System

January 13, 2014 By
Photo: www.divorcecorp.com

Photo: www.divorcecorp.com


Reviews are pouring in for the new “Divorce Corp.” documentary by Joseph Sorge, which opens this month and paints a very dark picture of family law courts. While the film is national in scope, it focuses on California and its most interesting character is a private investigator in the Golden State. Accounts are of a “system” with little oversight, complete with conflicts of interest and judges beyond belief. It should be noted that the longtime television producer got the idea for the film from his own divorce. 
 
You can find plenty of online info, but one of the better reviews is from Paste Magazine” “Narrated by Dr. Drew Pinsky, Divorce Corp.unfolds as a methodological case study, and a shrewd takedown of a legal system in which more money passes through family law court than all others combined. Using their increasingly dexterous talents to manipulate a system of at least partially manufactured dissent, lawyers have driven up the national average in divorce fees to a bewildering $50,000, which is more money than a lot of folks make in a year. Litigants, we’re told and shown, are little more than grist for the mill.”
 
The movie’s website is here.
The Paste review is here.
Filed Under: National Tagged With: , , , ,

Court Budget Hike Tied To Pension, Other Changes

January 10, 2014 By
 
Gov. Brown’s new budget proposal includes $3.2 billion for the state’s courts, an increase of $105 million from last year, but also eliminates local trial court reserve funds in favor of a a large “rainy day” fund in control of the Judicial Council. It also takes aim at forcing court workers to contribute more to their pension funds, according to coverage in The Courthouse News Service.
 
“There is a longstanding disparity in trial court employees in terms of how much they pay into their pensions,” said Department of Finance Director Michael Cohen, as quoted in CNS. “There are some employees in the court system that still pay nothing into their pensions. We need to move toward employees paying into roughly half the cost of their pensions.”
 
The CNS also offered this: “Though pressed by reporters, Cohen declined to say whether the pension mandate will apply to employees of the Administrative Office of the Courts, the judiciary’s administrative agency based in San Francisco. The top 30 administrators in the AOC enjoyed a top-loaded pension perk where the taxpayers contributed 22 percent on top of salary to the administrators’ pension accounts without any matching contribution from the individual administrator.”
 
Filed Under: Community, Courts Budget Tagged With: , , , , , , ,
«Older Posts
Newer Posts»