"The Robing Room: NY 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. Jeffrey Rosenblueth

Comments

Other

Comment #: NY10848
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge was extremely biased. He showed favoritism to the prosecutor the whole trial. While the prosecutor was examining his witness he joked up a little bit and the judge quickly gave him a break. When the defendant went up he was crying hysterically and never offered a break. He allowed the prosecutor to get away with a lot more then he should have. The jury was asleep for most of the trial and he never took notice to it. The jury was not able to fill out the judgement form correctly and even though it was past 5 pm he made them go back to delegate and redo the form. I strongly believe at this point the jury was exhausted and just wanted to go home so they settled instead of continuing to defend what they thought was right because jurors did admit to being indecisive after the trial was over. At the sentencing he was extremely insulting. He believed everything that was said by the prosecutors witness’ and nothing that was said by the defendant. He turned his words around several times and continuously called him a criminal. A man with no past criminal history and was wrongfully accused had to first deal with the fact that he was found guilty of a crime he did not commit and then had to humiliated and be little by the judge because of the biased opinion on the judge. I think this judge performed poorly from beginning to end. I’m hoping an appeal is approved with a better judge because it is because of judges like him that there are innocent people behind bars.