Comment #: CA38333
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
My husband has chronic heart failure and was told he had 6 months to live. He was also told he was not a candidate for a defibrillator. His doctor stated if he catches Covid he would likely die sooner. Judge Brennan knowing about all of his medical issues and so forth threw him in the Mendocino county jail. The worst jail around and it is covered in Covid!!

Comment #: CA37019
Rating:1.0
Comments:
He is not consistent in his rulings and feels everyone who tries to represent themselves should get an Attorney. No one wins except for the Attorneys who get the big bucks and the little guy loses both financially and and by his rulings. I don’t believe he really reads all the facts and when he continues hearings because he wants to go home he doesn’t reread all the prior facts and previous testimony.

Comment #: CA35744
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Had a restraining order issued against me when the person filing it I had never seen in my life !!! I had never made a treat to eith him or his family and there was NO LEGAL REASON for the issueance of a restraining order. THEN told me to see a psychiatrist! HOW was this man put in the position of a judge ? Makes a total farce of the judicial system and has NO regard for the LAW.

Comment #: CA32985
Rating:1.0
Comments:
The County DA calling for peremptory in advance challenges clearly shows a lack of confidence in Brennan's ability to protect the public. From the DA's Facebook page:

FORT BRAGG, Monday, Jan. 4. – COAST JUDGE WILL NO LONGER HEAR CASES INVOLVING ANIMAL CRUELTY AND/OR CASES WITH A SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT ALLEGED RELATING TO THE PERSONAL USE OF A FIREARM.
Mendocino County District Attorney David Eyster announced Monday morning that -- effective immediately -- he has directed all of his deputy prosecutors to file peremptory challenges to disqualify and prevent Superior Court Judge Clayton Brennan from hearing any pending criminal case or future cases that will be filed in which a defendant is charged with animal cruelty.
Likewise, the DA has also directed his deputy prosecutors to file peremptory challenges to disqualify and prevent Judge Brennan from hearing any criminal case in which the DA has alleged that the defendant personally used a firearm in the commission of a felony.

California jurisprudence and statutory law allows District Attorneys to refuse to accept a judge on a particular case or certain types of cases if it is believed that the judge is “so biased against the People that he or she cannot be entrusted with the fair administration of justice,” Eyster said.
In issuing his directive, the DA continued, “The judge currently sitting in the Ten Mile court house in Fort Bragg has betrayed community standards and community trust. He has made it abundantly clear that he has no use for, does not value, and is biased against law enforcement and the community’s ongoing efforts to seek justice against those who victimize animals and use firearms to commit felonies. Accordingly, I deem him legally unfit to sit as a judge on the types of criminal cases described above.”

When asked if the peremptory challenges to Judge Brennan will occur only in cases involving animal cruelty or cases where it has been charged that the defendant has personally used a firearm, DA Eyster replied that the scope and definition of cases for which Judge Brennan will be disqualified remains an open question that is under evaluation by the DA and his senior attorneys.

Comment #: CA32778
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge is a disgrace to the judicial system. He is not interested in achieving justice for victims. He needs to resign

Comment #: CA32044
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Complete disregard for actual justice. Put my child into custody of dangerous custodians. Ruined my good standing in my local community. Completely snubbed eyewitness testimony on behalf of the falsely accused. A disgrace to the judicial system and those who elected him.

Comment #: CA24538
Rating:1.0
Comments:
My ex followed me to Argentina, which we proved beyond a reasonable doubt, where I was followed, chased through the city, and battered - all corroborated by multiple witness testimony - until I hid in my hotel room. Then she came back and sought and won a protective order on lies, with which she’s now able to stalk me with impunity. She was not able to prove a single allegation, not one.

Judge Clayton Brennan created rather than ameliorated the abuse, even more than my abuser, by consistently ruling in direct contradiction to evidence. He ignored wandering and evolving testimony, conflicting declarations, he did not read briefs, motions, did not familiar himself with the case before hearings, did not understand basic legal terms, did not apply the legal basis he did understand, has a clear bias in favor of Petitioners, and is dangerously forgetful and did nothing to help this handicap.

Judge Brennan obstructed a witness, the actual County Sheriff, had another witness be assaulted in the actual 10 Mile courthouse foyer and ignored the video we all watched with that witness describing the assault, when my abuser began a phone harassment campaign he ignored all the screenshots, bills and witness testimony of the phone calls. And on and on and on. I am disabled, my abuser says she can “outrun” me, and I am frightened whenever I venture out. Indeed, emboldened, she has now assaulted at least one other individual, who also later testified.

In short, I am part of a growing segment of the Community expressing serious dismay over this Judge, He has adversely affected 100s if not 1000s of lives, and likely to so impact as many more. He is grossly irresponsible and a scourge to our Community. He needs recalled.

Comment #: CA10918
Rating:1.2
Comments:
He issues no tentative rulings. When we got to court, he parroted opposing counsel's non sequitur arguments, saying very little. It was clear he'd neither read the motion and opposition, nor the underlying case law. It was impossible to get him to follow the clearly applicable law.

Comment #: CA3424
Rating:1.0
Comments:
He allowed blatantly falsified evidence in a Small Claims trial. It was brought to his attention, and he acknowledged it, but let it slide, did not even ask the falsifier to explain. He then found in favor of the party who had falsified the evidence. He barely acknowledged anything the defendant had to say, seeming to be heavily biased from the outset in favor of the winning party. He also forgot that the winning party was being countersued, had to be reminded, very nearly "brought the gavel down" before all business was completed. He seemed, if not downright corrupt, careless and disengaged.

Comment #: CA3364
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
A conservate Judge for Mendo. Perhaps a
skeptic on defense issues.

Comment #: CA151
Rating:5.7
Comments:
Young, new, nice guy, tries hard.