Arizona Court Judges

Comments: This Justice of the Peace has been known to rarely start court on time. Many of his Rulings have exceeded the 60 day maximum allowed time, and this has resulted in him being admonished by the Judicial Commission. He has been known to allow witnesses to testify telephonically at Trial (possibly in violation of the Confrontation Clause of the U.S. Constitution), as well as have other Rulings reversed on appeal. It is our opinion that it would be very helpful to have an Attorney assist a Defendant with explaining the nuances of the law to this particular Judge.

Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Per Rule 10.2 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, a Defendant, Defense Attorney or Prosecutor can file for a “Notice Change of Judge” within 10 days of Arraignment or being assigned a particular Judge. A Notice for Change of Judge is filed in order to be reassigned to a different Judge. This can be done by choice as long as the Notice is filed in good faith and not for the purposes of the following: Delay; to obtain severance; to interfere with the reasonable case management practice of a Judge; to remove a Judge for reasons of race, gender or religion. It is also unethical to use Rule 10.2 for these additional reasons: Using the Rule against a particular Judge in blanket fashion by a defender group or Law Firm; in order to obtain a more convenient geographical location; or to obtain an advantage (or avoid disadvantage) in connection with a plea bargain (or sentencing) except as permitted under Rule 17.4(G).

In the past, some of our Attorneys have, properly and in good faith, independently chosen to file a “Notice for Change of Judge” when assigned to this particular Judge in order to have a different Judge assigned to their case. It is our opinion that you should ask any Attorney you interview about whether they have ever appeared before your assigned Judge and whether they will, or will not, be filing a “Notice for Change of Judge”

This Judge received a Disciplinary Action from the Commission on Judicial Conduct in 2014. We have provided a link that will take you to the Commission’s website. Click This Link – to read all details of the Complaint and the Commission’s Ruling.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: Sometimes his court proceedings can be very slow. It is our opinion that having an Attorney appear on your behalf will save you large amounts of time that you would normally take off of work in order to attend court. This Judge usually will not interfere with any plea deals negotiated between the Defendant’s Attorney and the Prosecutor. This can be very beneficial when arranging plea agreements.

Comments: This Justice of the Peace normally will not interfere with any agreements reached between the Prosecutor and Defense Attorney. This can be very beneficial when negotiating plea agreements. It is our opinion that this Justice of the Peace will almost always accept the credibility of an Officer’s testimony over that of a Non-Officer. We find it is very difficult to get a Defense Ruling in his court.

Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: Although this Judge is a Former Prosecutor, he will hold the Prosecutor to strict compliance when conducting a sentencing. He does appear to take the word of an Officer over that of a Non-Officer.

Comments: She is a very pleasant and polite Judge. However, she has been known to not give home detention on a DUI case until 15 days have been served in jail. This can be a bit harsh, and it is our opinion that it may be beneficial to have an Attorney assist you should you have an Extreme DUI or a Prior DUI Conviction going into her court.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: This Judge was a former Administrative Law Judge for the Motor Vehicle Department. While at MVD it appeared that she very rarely ruled in favor of the Defendant. However, we do find her to be a very fair Judge on the criminal bench.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: We have found this Judge to be somewhat gruff and harsh in sentencing if you do not have a specified sentence Pre-Negotiated in your plea agreement with the Prosecutor.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: This Justice of the Peace use to be a former Court Interpreter for Spanish speakers until she ran for the Justice of the Peace position. She appears to mainly exercise her discretion in favor of the Prosecution. Her Rulings do not appear to be well reasoned. She also has been known to be gruff with Defense Attorney’s.

Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Per Rule 10.2 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, a Defendant, Defense Attorney or Prosecutor can file for a “Notice Change of Judge” within 10 days of Arraignment or being assigned a particular Judge. A Notice for Change of Judge is filed in order to be reassigned to a different Judge. This can be done by choice as long as the Notice is filed in good faith and not for the purposes of the following: Delay; to obtain severance; to interfere with the reasonable case management practice of a Judge; to remove a Judge for reasons of race, gender or religion. It is also unethical to use Rule 10.2 for these additional reasons: Using the Rule against a particular Judge in blanket fashion by a defender group or Law Firm; in order to obtain a more convenient geographical location; or to obtain an advantage (or avoid disadvantage) in connection with a plea bargain (or sentencing) except as permitted under Rule 17.4(G).

In the past, some of our Attorneys have, properly and in good faith, independently chosen to file a “Notice for Change of Judge” when assigned to this particular Judge in order to have a different Judge assigned to their case. It is our opinion that you should ask any Attorney you interview about whether they have ever appeared before your assigned Judge and whether they will, or will not, be filing a “Notice for Change of Judge”

Comments: N/A

Comments: This Justice of the Peace happens to actually be an Attorney. He is very professional and intelligent and helps both sides move a case forward to conclusion. He is very knowledgeable.

Per Rule 10.2 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, a Defendant, Defense Attorney or Prosecutor can file for a “Notice Change of Judge” within 10 days of Arraignment or being assigned a particular Judge. A Notice for Change of Judge is filed in order to be reassigned to a different Judge. This can be done by choice as long as the Notice is filed in good faith and not for the purposes of the following: Delay; to obtain severance; to interfere with the reasonable case management practice of a Judge; to remove a Judge for reasons of race, gender or religion. It is also unethical to use Rule 10.2 for these additional reasons: Using the Rule against a particular Judge in blanket fashion by a defender group or Law Firm; in order to obtain a more convenient geographical location; or to obtain an advantage (or avoid disadvantage) in connection with a plea bargain (or sentencing) except as permitted under Rule 17.4(G).

In the past, some of our Attorneys have, properly and in good faith, independently chosen to file a “Notice for Change of Judge” when assigned to this particular Judge in order to have a different Judge assigned to their case. It is our opinion that you should ask any Attorney you interview about whether they have ever appeared before your assigned Judge and whether they will, or will not, be filing a “Notice for Change of Judge”

Comments: This Justice of the Peace is pleasant, but his court staff can be very off-putting. We have not had pleasant experiences with his staff.

Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: This particular Judge used to be the Presiding Judge in the City of Scottsdale. He has been known to be temperamental, but he will Rule in a Defendant’s favor if the law is on his side. It is our opinion that it is helpful to have a Defense Attorney assist you in presenting your case to him.

Per Rule 10.2 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, a Defendant, Defense Attorney or Prosecutor can file for a “Notice Change of Judge” within 10 days of Arraignment or being assigned a particular Judge. A Notice for Change of Judge is filed in order to be reassigned to a different Judge. This can be done by choice as long as the Notice is filed in good faith and not for the purposes of the following: Delay; to obtain severance; to interfere with the reasonable case management practice of a Judge; to remove a Judge for reasons of race, gender or religion. It is also unethical to use Rule 10.2 for these additional reasons: Using the Rule against a particular Judge in blanket fashion by a defender group or Law Firm; in order to obtain a more convenient geographical location; or to obtain an advantage (or avoid disadvantage) in connection with a plea bargain (or sentencing) except as permitted under Rule 17.4(G).

In the past, some of our Attorneys have, properly and in good faith, independently chosen to file a “Notice for Change of Judge” when assigned to this particular Judge in order to have a different Judge assigned to their case. It is our opinion that you should ask any Attorney you interview about whether they have ever appeared before your assigned Judge and whether they will, or will not, be filing a “Notice for Change of Judge”

Comments: N/A

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: This Judge has a very pleasant disposition.

Comments: This Judge received a Disciplinary Action from the Commission on Judicial Conduct in 2014. We have provided a link that will take you to the Commission’s website. Click This Link – to read all details of the Complaint and the Commission’s Ruling.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: This particular Judge is very pleasant and polite. He does not look to hammer Defendants at sentencing. He serves as a Judge in both Fountain Hills and Guadalupe.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: This Judge is very knowledgeable and is a career Criminal Law Attorney. Well reasoned Rulings.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: Many Arizona Defense Attorneys find that he is the best Judge to be in front of for a Defendant. However, there are some that feel he will not Rule in the Defendant’s favor. Overall, the opinion is that a Defendant will get a fair shake in this Judge’s court room.

Comments: This Judge is a Former Prosecutor who was briefly a Defense Attorney. Although he is very pleasant and knowledgeable in the law, he tends to accept a Police Officer’s testimony as more credible than that of Non-Police Officers, and will Rule mostly in the Prosecutor’s favor.

Per Rule 10.2 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, a Defendant, Defense Attorney or Prosecutor can file for a “Notice Change of Judge” within 10 days of Arraignment or being assigned a particular Judge. A Notice for Change of Judge is filed in order to be reassigned to a different Judge. This can be done by choice as long as the Notice is filed in good faith and not for the purposes of the following: Delay; to obtain severance; to interfere with the reasonable case management practice of a Judge; to remove a Judge for reasons of race, gender or religion. It is also unethical to use Rule 10.2 for these additional reasons: Using the Rule against a particular Judge in blanket fashion by a defender group or Law Firm; in order to obtain a more convenient geographical location; or to obtain an advantage (or avoid disadvantage) in connection with a plea bargain (or sentencing) except as permitted under Rule 17.4(G).

In the past, some of our Attorneys have, properly and in good faith, independently chosen to file a “Notice for Change of Judge” when assigned to this particular Judge in order to have a different Judge assigned to their case. It is our opinion that you should ask any Attorney you interview about whether they have ever appeared before your assigned Judge and whether they will, or will not, be filing a “Notice for Change of Judge”

Comments: This Judge was a Former Prosecutor in the City of Gilbert. Many of our Attorneys feel that she will deny Motions to Continue automatically in the interest of judicial economy. She also appears to lean towards the Prosecutors point of view.

Comments: Some of our Attorneys have the opinion that this Judge’s mood dictates her decisions.

Comments: Some of our Attorneys have found that this Judge will hold the Prosecutor to a high burden of proof, and hold them accountable to the technical legal procedural Rules. However, one of our Attorneys found that he did not do this in regards to an issue of an Independent Blood Test on a DUI case. It may be helpful to have private Defense Counsel assist you with helping explain the nuances of the Discovery Rules to this particular Judge.

Comments: We find this Judge to have a good perspective when it comes to criminal trials. He appears to genuinely weigh all evidence when making his Rulings.

Comments: This Judge was a long time Judge for The City of Phoenix. She is very knowledgeable when it comes to the law. She now conducts the majority of the Settlement Conferences in The City of Glendale and appears to usually attempt to steer a Defendant into accepting the Prosecutor’s plea. It is our opinion that it is beneficial to have a knowledgeable and energetic Defense Attorney appear on your behalf in front of this Judge.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: This particular Judge is very pleasant and polite. He does not look to hammer Defendants at sentencing. He serves as a Judge in both Fountain Hills and Guadalupe.

Comments: It is our opinion that it would be very beneficial to have a Defense Attorney assist a Defendant with an explanation of the nuances of the law to this particular Justice of the Peace. This Justice of the Peace seems to defer to the Prosecutor on most issues.

Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Per Rule 10.2 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, a Defendant, Defense Attorney or Prosecutor can file for a “Notice Change of Judge” within 10 days of Arraignment or being assigned a particular Judge. A Notice for Change of Judge is filed in order to be reassigned to a different Judge. This can be done by choice as long as the Notice is filed in good faith and not for the purposes of the following: Delay; to obtain severance; to interfere with the reasonable case management practice of a Judge; to remove a Judge for reasons of race, gender or religion. It is also unethical to use Rule 10.2 for these additional reasons: Using the Rule against a particular Judge in blanket fashion by a defender group or Law Firm; in order to obtain a more convenient geographical location; or to obtain an advantage (or avoid disadvantage) in connection with a plea bargain (or sentencing) except as permitted under Rule 17.4(G).

In the past, some of our Attorneys have, properly and in good faith, independently chosen to file a “Notice for Change of Judge” when assigned to this particular Judge in order to have a different Judge assigned to their case. It is our opinion that you should ask any Attorney you interview about whether they have ever appeared before your assigned Judge and whether they will, or will not, be filing a “Notice for Change of Judge”

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: This particular Justice of the Peace has been known to be somewhat gruff. He appears to defer to the Prosecution on most issues. It may be helpful to have a Defense Attorney assist you in this particular court room.

Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: N/A

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: This Judge will routinely require out-of-County Defendants and Defense Counsel to needlessly appear in person at all court dates. Although many Defense Attorney’s will push a case to conclusion in order to avoid having to drive to Lake Havasu multiple times, we will not do this. We will fight the case to its conclusion. It is also our opinion that this particular Judge sides with the Prosecutor on most issues, and finds the Police Officers more credible then Non-Police Officers at Evidentiary Hearings and Jury Trials. We feel it would be most beneficial to have an aggressive Defense Attorney appear in this court on your behalf.

Comments: This Judge will routinely require out-of-County Defendants and Defense Counsel to needlessly appear in person at all court dates. Although many Defense Attorney’s will push a case to conclusion in order to avoid having to drive to Lake Havasu multiple times, we will not do this. We will fight the case to its conclusion. It is our opinion that this Justice of the Peace will side with the Prosecutor on most issues. It is important to get all terms of a sentencing stipulated in a Plea Agreement, rather than allowing this Justice of the Peace to have discretion, as she may sentence more harshly. We feel that it would be beneficial to have a Defense Attorney appear on a Defendants behalf in this particular court.

This Judge received a Disciplinary Action from the Commission on Judicial Conduct in 2008. We have provided a link that will take you to the Commission’s website. Click This Link – to read all details of the Complaint and the Commission’s Ruling.

Comments: This particular Judge is a Former Prosecutor. He will normally require full jail costs from a Defendant, even if it is an absurd amount of money. This often sets up a Defendant for failure. We feel that it would be most beneficial to have a Defense Attorney advocate on your behalf in front of this particular Judge.

Per Rule 10.2 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, a Defendant, Defense Attorney or Prosecutor can file for a “Notice Change of Judge” within 10 days of Arraignment or being assigned a particular Judge. A Notice for Change of Judge is filed in order to be reassigned to a different Judge. This can be done by choice as long as the Notice is filed in good faith and not for the purposes of the following: Delay; to obtain severance; to interfere with the reasonable case management practice of a Judge; to remove a Judge for reasons of race, gender or religion. It is also unethical to use Rule 10.2 for these additional reasons: Using the Rule against a particular Judge in blanket fashion by a defender group or Law Firm; in order to obtain a more convenient geographical location; or to obtain an advantage (or avoid disadvantage) in connection with a plea bargain (or sentencing) except as permitted under Rule 17.4(G).

In the past, some of our Attorneys have, properly and in good faith, independently chosen to file a “Notice for Change of Judge” when assigned to this particular Judge in order to have a different Judge assigned to their case. It is our opinion that you should ask any Attorney you interview about whether they have ever appeared before your assigned Judge and whether they will, or will not, be filing a “Notice for Change of Judge”

Comments: Per the Arizona Constitution, a Justice of the Peace (JP) is not required to be a Lawyer, or even to have attended Law school. In fact, a JP is not required to have gone beyond a High School Diploma. JP’s are chosen by popular election and then they are given several weeks of legal/judicial training before taking the bench, which is supplemented with a few more weeks of training annually. This particular JP is not a licensed Arizona Lawyer. It is our opinion that using a Defense Lawyer on your behalf can assist all Non-Lawyer JP’s with navigating the law.

Comments: N/A

Comments: Although this Judge is a Former Prosecutor, he is very fair and well reasoned in his judicial rulings. He also does not look to be unnecessarily harsh during a sentencing.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: This particular Judge has a Child Protective Services (CPS) background. She appears to lean towards the Prosecution if given discretion. We feel it is advisable to have a Defense Attorney advocate on your behalf when in this particular court room.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: This Judge is very pleasant and professional. He is also very knowledgeable with the law. He is very thoughtful and well reasoned in his Rulings and he’s not afraid to use his discretion when finding Mitigating Factors while sentencing a Defendant.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: None at this time.

Comments: We have found this Judge to be temperamental at times and occasionally gruff with Defense Attorneys. It is our opinion that a skilled Defense Attorney could be of assistance when appearing in front of this Judge.