"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Maria Puente-Porras	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Los Angeles County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 1.5 - 3 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 6 rating(s)	Please send me alerts on this judge E-mail Address:

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. Maria Puente-Porras

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA54405
Rating:1.8

Comments:
RUN, RUN, RUN. Very biased from the beginning and no clue why. Has a very clear agenda and won’t let things like facts or evidence get in the way of her agenda. Even when appoints minor’s counsel, they’re are the younger newbies that cower to what she wants to hear, not doing any actual work or representing the children. Judge goes out of her way to spend much time chiding and berating everyone who appears before her for no other apparent reason that to make herself “look” better. Wasted time and then offensive orders.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA54404
Rating:1.8

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA51972
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Punte-Porras is a real one. Being a judge is hard especially in family court where there is no jury.
She is the best judge in Whittier courthouse. I love her. On the other hand, Her colleague judge Veronica Sauceda should be removed and prosecuted for psychological and emotional child abuse. Punte-Porras, if you ever see this comment, please yea h Sauceda how to keep her emotions about men at home when she comes to work. She is traumatizing children based on her views of men. Keep being great Maria. The community loves you. Signed- a dedicated devoted father.

Other

Comment #: CA48533
Rating:1.0

Comments:
She should not be in family court, awful and [redacted]. Doesn't know the meaning of unbiased on ruling or conduct in court. Something has to be done, she ruining my children lives and well as their parents. She doesn't have a clue, along with the attorneys appointed for the children's court Shahon (hypocrites). Supposed be in support what is best for the children and separating children from a parent permanently isn't what's best for the children, especially when the father is doing all asked of him and the other side is manipulating something else [redacted]. They both should be ashamed of themselves.

Other

Comment #: CA48532
Rating:1.0

Comments:
She was totally biased, abuse of power, used her power to literally work for defense counsel. Defense counsel did not have to sit there, the judge did his work for him. I think the judge, defense counsel and defendant (a sheriff) with ties in Whittier courthouse. Defendant's family is well know in the Whittier area and has a lot of influence. It showed in the courtroom.

Litigant

Comment #: CA48282
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I had video and witness evidence. The other party had no evidence since there was no wrong-doing on my part. Puente-Porras gave us both restraining orders, I believe, just to look balanced, in spite of what the evidence showed. The audio on the video was most important and when the court speakers would not play the audio portion she would not let me connect my own speaker to the laptop, which was ready to go. When the opposing woman of color yelled "Asian hate!" the judge (who is also a woman of color) sympathized with her and against me, a white male. The judge's rationale for giving me a restraining order was that I showed prejudice when I sent a let with a (USPS issued) stamp with a picture of a dragon.

The judge also gave a restraining order to my wife who had not spoken to the opposing party for years. In spite of the lack of contact, the other party served my wife court papers. When the judge confronted the other party about having no contact with my wife, the other party responded that my wife had taken a picture of her. Even though the photo was taken from within our own home, behind a closed window, to document events related to the serving of papers, the judge still issued a restraining order against my wife. The judge dragged out an open-and-shut case for days, until it was resolved by a different judge who ended the case in five minutes.

Other

Comment #: CA47051
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Puente-Porras, the term judge is used loosely. She does not read all presented evidence. She gives no explanation for her ruling only to say, "I feel.." Her ruling is not based on presented facts which she refuses to read/hear from witness. Be aware with this person.

Other

Comment #: CA46914
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Maria Puente-Porras does not hear/read evidence (text messages/photos/witnesses) of both parties. She relies on her own biased opinions. Please be aware of this judge who should be investigated for her unethical standards.

Other

Comment #: CA41637
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Maria puente porras holds unethical standards to the court, especially in family court. She doesn’t follow the court procedures but rather her own hormonal opinion. She doesn’t hear your side, she throws out your paperwork and says “it wasn’t filed in a timely manner” which is not true, it was filed before the opposing attorney’s deadline. She needs to be looked into. This was a family court custody and visitation matter.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA33277
Rating:1.0

Comments:
When she was a commissioner in Torrance, I had the extreme misfortune of encountering Puente-Porras. I'd had a minor fender-bender with a guy who then threatened me - and THEN filed 2 Elder Abuse Restraining Order requests against me - as well as complaints with the DMV and State Bar. After more than a year of fighting this malicious man, I not only beat all his malicious claims, I got a $30k settlement from him. But Puente-Porras dealt me an initial blow in that fight because she was so incompetent as a judicial officer. The guy had very clearly expressed he was a resident of Nevada. It is a fundamental element of California's Elder Abuse Laws that they only apply to Elders who reside in California. So because of Puente-Porras' incompetence, she granted his TRO request. When an Elder Abuse Restraining Order is granted, the person against whom it is granted loses their 2nd Amendment rights and I had to surrender my shotgun and rifle to the police. Despite my being able to defeat a "permanent" restraining order by pointing out Puente-Porras' incompetence, it was months before I could clear the hurdles to have my 2nd Amendment rights restored. She is emblematic of the incompetence of LASC judicial officers.