"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address ()

* *

Confirm E-mail Address

* * *

Zip

Occupation

Add a comment only

Only items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating.

General Rating Criteria

* Temperament		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Scholarship		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Industriousness		(1=Not at all industrious,10=Highly industrious)
* Ability to Handle Complex Litigation		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Punctuality		(1=Chronically Late,10=Always on Time)
* General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
* General Ability as a Trial Judge		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
Flexibility In Scheduling		(1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)

Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation		(1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
General Inclination Regarding Bail		(1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Plea Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation		(1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Involvement in Settlement Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)
General Inclination		(1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)

Comments

Please type what you see below:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. John P Devine

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA48696
Rating:2.0

Comments:
I appeared today before Judge Devine on a trial de novo with respect to a small claims case.

I'm not impressed by him. He refused to consider integral evidence, such as that the defendant previously perjured herself in court before (and gave inconsistent testimony) AND also perjured herself today. On top of that, she kept interrupting both him and myself and even cursed in front of him. Had I, a man, behaved this way, there's no doubt he would have thrown me in jail for contempt of court. He advised her, "I'm giving you leeway because you are frustrated". There's a difference between offering leeway and being a pushover. He was the later.

The only reason why I'm increasing my rating a star is he will look into the fact she missed the appeal deadline. As a result, I will likely prevail.

He needs a backbone for future proceedings. There's no excuse to not slap a contempt charge on someone who misbehaves as much as her. He also must examine evidence where a litigant lies, be it in his proceeding or a prior one. Perjury is not a minute crime. The fact he was nonchalant about it is troubling.