Monday, February 27, 2017

3 Minutes to Wapner

  • RIP Judge Joseph Wapner of the People's Court fame. [RJ]
  • The threat of a crackdown on illegal immigrants is causing fear in several communities and the possible legal repercussions are more widespread than you might think. [Las Vegas Sun]
  • Here are some items the Legislature is inviting public comment on this week. [Las Vegas Sun]
  • A. William Maupin is returning to the bench via taking retired justice senior status. [Nevada Business]
  • From a press release issued by the Supreme Court of Nevada, here are the applicants for the vacancies on the bench in the Eighth Judicial District:
The applicants for the Dept. 10 open seat are:

  • Michael F. Bohn, 57, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Terrance Allen Coffing, 52, Las Vegas, attorney
  • George Edward Cromer, 56, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Tierra Danielle Jones, 35, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Anat R. Levy, 55, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Craig A. Mueller, 56, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Esther C. Rodriguez, 51, Las Vegas, attorney
  • David Allen Stephens, 61, Las Vegas, attorney

The applicants for the Dept. 18 open seat are:

  • Karl Wesley Armstrong, 58, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Soonhee Bailey, 46, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Mark B. Bailus, 64, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Mark L. Gentile, 57, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Shannon D. Nordstrom, 43, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Jay P. Raman, 38, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Berna Rhodes-Ford, 45, Las Vegas, attorney
  • Phillip Nelson Smith, Jr., 40, Las Vegas, attorney

The applications, with the exceptions of confidential information such as medical records and personal identification information, may be viewed on the Supreme Court website at: http://bit.ly/NVJudicialSelection. Interviews to fill the vacant position are scheduled for the week of April 10, at the Nevada Supreme Court in Las Vegas, 408 East Clark Ave., and will be open to the public.

The Commission invites written public comments about the applicant qualifications. Commission rules allow letters to remain confidential if requested by the letter writer. However, the Commission may discuss the contents of the letter with the applicant during executive session. Anonymous letters may not be considered at the discretion of the Commissioners.

Submit written comments regarding the applicants by 5 p.m. on March 17 to:  

Ms. Robin Sweet
Secretary, Commission on Judicial Selection
Nevada Supreme Court
201 S. Carson St., Suite 250
Carson City, Nevada, 89701

Once the interviews are complete, the Commission will consider and recommend three finalists, whose names will be submitted to Governor Brian Sandoval for the appointment.

And as an FYI on the Nevada Commission on Judicial Selection

The Commission is composed of seven permanent members – the Supreme Court Chief Justice, three non-attorneys appointed by the Governor, and three attorneys appointed by the State Bar of Nevada. Neither the Governor nor the State Bar may appoint more than two permanent members from the same political party, and cannot appoint two members from the same county.

Commission Members:

  • Justice Michael A. Cherry, Carson City, Supreme Court Chief Justice, Chair (Constitutional appointee)
  • Valerie Cooney, Carson City, past executive director, Volunteer Attorneys for Rural Nevadans (State Bar appointee)
  • Jeffrey Gilbert, Henderson, veteran gaming executive (Governor appointee)
  • Jesse Gutierrez, Sparks, former executive director, Nevada Hispanic Services (Governor appointee)
  • Gregory Kamer, Esq., Las Vegas, attorney, Kramer Zuker Abbott (State Bar appointee)
  • Jasmine Mehta, Esq., Reno, Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners (State Bar appointee)
  • Leslie Williams, Schurz, administrative assistant for Washoe County Senior Services (Governor appointee)
  •  
For District Court vacancies, two temporary members are appointed from the judicial district where the vacancy occurs – a non-attorney by the Governor and an attorney by the State Bar – bringing the Commission membership to nine.

Temporary Commission Members:

  • Peter Guzman, Las Vegas, president, Latin Chamber of Commerce, Nevada, Inc., (Governor appointee)
  • Trevor L. Atkin, Las Vegas, owner/partner, Atkin Winner & Sherrod (State Bar appointee)

32 comments:

  1. I share some of the concerns as a couple others who have posted during the last few days. I reject the conventional wisdom, shared by most of those in the legal profession, that judicial elections are absurd, and that they often result in substandard attorneys being elected, and that the appointment process is supposedly the silver bullet solution tot hat dilemma.

    Obviously, judicial elections do include the unseemly aspect of judges and judicial candidates seeking contributions from those who will appearing before them, and such elections often result in not very good attorneys being elected.

    However, the concept that the judicial appointment process is infinitely superior, and that there are always numerous outstanding applicants for each position, is likewise absurd. Just look at the slate for Dept. 18. A couple decent ones and the rest are Rogue's Gallery. Also, appointments are also very political, albeit in somewhat different ways than the election process. Most of the time when there are appointments, attorneys rightfully perceive that the best candidate was not ultimately appointed, but instead the one with the most juice, and/or who profiles properly for what the Governor is looking for, is appointed over three or four vastly superior applicants.

    But, admittedly, as someone pointed out a couple days ago, with the appointment process you are at least pretty well assured that someone really tainted or unacceptable is not appointed. The arduous interview and review process will usually weed out such individuals, but with the election process they can slip by.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The best part though is that with appointment, we have them for a year or two at most and then they're subject to review via election. It's not a perfect process, but it beats being stuck with someone for 6 years without knowing how they'll be.

      Delete
  2. Dear legislature...4-14 grams of drugs should not be drug trafficking. End rant.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's so gross to me that there isn't a criminal defense attorney on the commission...two departments that are going to handle significant amounts of criminal defense work. There should be a representative from the PD's office and an experienced private defense attorney.

    ReplyDelete
  4. My prediction is Terry Coffing for Dept 10 and Soonhee Bailey for Dept 18.

    ReplyDelete
  5. TC for sure but not Bailey.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I hope Sunny Bailey gets it. She is smart, and she is pleasant. No, this is not Sunny, promise. Knew her when she was a PD.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok not Sunny. You're smart, pleasant, etc. Whateves.

      Delete
  7. I think Bailus would do a decent job. He splits his work between civil and criminal defense as well. And he still rocks the old Vegas pompadour.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I wish Bonnie Bulla would run. She has great judicial temperament and doesn't let the power of her robe cloud her discretion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I get jokes (and regularly contribute to the Pro Bono Project and the Library).

      Delete
    2. Haha. She's the worst person to ever be made judge. I like to butter her up by laying on the "your honor" and "the honorable court" and "we obviously defer to your judgment" type bullshit nice and thick. Way more than I'd ever even do it for a real judge.

      Delete
    3. Anyone who thinks Bonnie is bad was not here for Biggar. What a jerk that guy was.

      Delete
    4. I was here for Biggar. I remember Galatz Earl & Biggar. Tells you what a saint Galatz was that he could pleasantly coexist with two pompous asses like Earl and Biggar.

      Delete
  9. My money is on Mark Gentile and or Karl Armstrong. Sunny no. TAC will probably get Dept. 10. Mark Gentile should get it. He has earned it. I see Karl as the alternate if they are deadlocked on Mark v. Sunny.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How has Gentile "earned it"?? Please explain..

      Delete
    2. Yeah that comment threw me off also. Gentile has tried a number of cases (as ID Counsel are wont to do) but has a personality that I consider not judicial in the slightest. I will not elaborate as the last time I tried to elaborate my comment got taken down by an Administrator.

      Delete
    3. Congratulations! Looks like you're learning how to express yourself constructively!

      Delete
    4. 1:02 PM asked how has Gentile "earned it." Gentile applied twice before and made the finalists that is what meant by "earned it." Sometimes judicial appointments don't get it the first or second time around. It takes a couple of tries. If you are trying a case, you would want Gentile as your judge. Level headed and experienced. Don't know what else to say. No, I am not Gentile.

      Delete
    5. Mike Davidson has made the final three numerous times. Final three does not necessarily come with a robe; just a set of steak knives.

      Delete
    6. I'm going to start applying now so I'll have earned it by 2020. No, I am not Amber Candelaria.

      Delete
    7. 3:44pm, if "earning it" means coming up short every single time, then you (for lack of a better term) are just an idiot. Sorry not sorry

      Delete
    8. 9:26 AM, what is wrong with folks on the blog reverting to playground name calling. A question was asked and answered. I hope Mark gets it. But he has competition. Suspect he has a shot at it but if diversity consideration prevails, then Sunny Bailey (maybe) and or Karl Armstrong. It is important that a trial judge actually try cases. I know that Mark has tried cases, heard cases, and decided cases. I had him as an Arbitrator and he was outstanding. Can't say that about any other candidate in either department. I was curious about the potential scurrilous comments that were taken down.

      Delete
    9. They pertained to personal conduct and substance use.

      Delete
  10. TAC for Department 10.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think everyone here agrees TAC for Dept 10. Great guy.

      Delete
  11. Good grief. Applicants who can't circle which department they are applying for on the first page should be disqualified. Applicants that cut / paste their earlier department 29 applications without an edit should be disqualified. Lack of attention to detail cannot be ignored.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's just judicial efficiency. A fine attribute! Why re-invent the wheel?

      Delete
    2. NOBODY gets disqualified. Levy circled both departments. She also continues to "practice" law in NV from a (very cramped?) P.O. Box rented from the UPS store on East Charleston. The NV Bar authorizes/allows ANY attorney to "practice" without disclosing where (s)he actually practices; no physical address required.

      But my favorite part of her or any application is her required legal writing sample which is from her representation of Voldemort against Willick.

      On the plus side, her litigation skills seem to be fairly good, just not enough in any NV courtroom.

      It could also help if she did a better job of choosing clients & election endorsements. And Voldemort falls into both categories.

      Delete
  12. JP Tobiasson received a public reprimand and a $1,000 by the State Commission.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A $1,000 fine, that is.

      Delete
  13. Hafen can bend her over as additional punishment.

    ReplyDelete