Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

We Are Afraid to Name and Shame

Hous­ton DWI lawyer Paul B. Kennedy (The Defense Rests) com­plains about Car­pet bag­ging [vis­it­ing] judges:

In the mean­time, those who were tossed out of office by the pub­lic con­tinue to pre­side over tri­als because their bud­dies and for­mer col­leagues keep using them as vis­it­ing judges. It’s a process that needs to stop.

While it is true that the drafters of Texas’s con­sti­tu­tion wanted judges to be sub­ject to the will of the peo­ple, I don’t agree with Paul that judges whom vot­ers have rejected should not be able to sit as vis­it­ing judges. The drafters of the Texas Con­sti­tu­tion got it wrong. As a result of our par­ti­san judi­cial elec­tions, the vot­ers hire many incom­pe­tents (see, for exam­ple, Ruben Guer­rero) and fire many great judges (see, for exam­ple, Caprice Cosper).

The point, in my view, is that our sit­ting judges—the “bud­dies and for­mer col­leagues” that Kennedy refers tocon­tinue allow­ing lousy for­mer judges (whether retired or fired) to pre­side over trials.

Why?

In his post, Paul doesn’t name the vis­it­ing judge.

He doesn’t name the sit­ting judge.

He doesn’t even give the num­ber of the court.

That’s why.

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

8 Responses to “We Are Afraid to Name and Shame”

  1. Mike Paar says:

    Pat Shel­ton?

    • I just looked it up. It was Mike Wilkin­son, who I always found to be a fine judge. The vot­ers fired him in favor of Randy Roll—a good exam­ple of the dis­cern­ment of vot­ing pub­lic. Unless Wilkin­son has changed, I would choose him over Roll any day. In Paul’s case, Wilkin­son was sit­ting in the 185th; I might choose Wilkin­son over Judge Susan Brown. That’s a much closer call, though.

      In any case, “Judge Wilkin­son was sit­ting in the 185th” wouldn’t make much of a com­plaint. Maybe Paul was just look­ing for a hook so that he could brag about his acquit­tal. Noth­ing wrong with that.

  2. Mark, you seem to have more cojones than most other men com­bined. (That’s def­i­nitely meant as a com­pli­ment.) Proud to con­sider you a role model.

  3. Mike Paar says:

    While I cer­tainly agree that there are some real doozies float­ing around as vis­it­ing judges, I don’t think we can deny that many are ben­e­fi­cial. How many times have we nego­ti­ated a deal only to have the judge balk at it, then had to wait until a vis­it­ing judge sat-in and approved the deal? We all know it hap­pens and it’s usu­ally because the judge fears voter back­lash if his oppo­nent finds out and uses it against him in a cam­paign com­mer­cial. Vis­it­ing judges don’t have this prob­lem and maybe instead of bash­ing them we should be thank­ful. Many defen­dants owe their free­dom to the rov­ing robes…

  4. Rich Lawrence says:

    I’ve noticed a sim­i­lar con­tempt for “vis­it­ing judges” by defense attor­neys in the Fort Laud­erdale– Broward County area as well. The local cour­t­house blog dishes dirt on judges, the elec­toral process, and the pen­sion sys­tem which allows dou­ble and triple dipping.

    The local attor­neys, hid­den behind that mask of inter­net anonymity, scream foul ball when a retired judge comes in for a day of $$ while already col­lect­ing some of the fat­test pen­sions in the coun­try. That’s aside from their every­day bitch­ing about nearly
    every sub­ject you can think of — from park­ing to the build­ings leaky plumbing.

    As much as I like the inter­net and infor­ma­tion I get from sites like yours, the anony­mous
    com­ment sys­tem is one of the worst devel­op­ments I have seen in a soci­ety that val­ues civ­i­lized dis­course. And the online behav­ior you get from peo­ple, even attor­neys, makes me sick.

    You have my utmost respect for stand­ing up pub­licly against injus­tice and requir­ing those who par­tic­i­pate to iden­tify them­selves as well.

  5. Joe Carson says:

    So how does this get fixed? Inform an unin­formed vot­ing pub­lic? While it is uncalled for, where does the solu­tion lie? I’m more involved with the attor­ney side and my firm, so I want to hear from edu­cated peo­ple on this topic.

  6. Jimmy Iaccobucci says:

    Do judges have to have some sort of min­i­mal legal train­ing in order to become judges in TX? Here in NY I was hor­ri­fied to learn that the guy who came in to fix the print­ers was a judge. The guy’s for­mal areas of exper­tise never extended out­side of fix­ing print­ers and yet he was elected a judge, I can’t imag­ine any well thought out deci­sions com­ing from this guy. He was a Repub­li­can lock-them-all-up-and-throw-away-the-key type of guy.

Leave a non-anonymous Reply