Posted on 04/29/2006 11:58:32 AM PDT by radar101
A Monterey County judge is in trouble with the state's disciplinary agency again, this time for allegedly violating the rights of drunken-driving defendants and increasing their jail sentences if they questioned his rulings.
Superior Court Judge Jose Velasquez, elected in 1995, was censured by the Commission on Judicial Performance in 1997 for a variety of misconduct offenses, including accusing lawyers and fellow judges of racism for getting him removed from drunken-driving cases. The 47-year-old judge could be removed from the bench if the commission sustains the new allegations against him.
In a 58-page document Thursday, the commission listed seven cases, in 2003 and 2004, in which defendants convicted of drunken driving appeared before Velasquez without lawyers to seek more time to comply with conditions of probation, such as attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. In all the cases, the judge found that defendants had deliberately violated probation and ordered them jailed, without giving notice that he might do so, the commission said.
In six cases, all in 2004, Velasquez increased jail sentences, or threatened to do so, because of the defendants' comments or questions at hearings, the commission said.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Why do you say he is good? Because he is mean to some defendants? He sounds quite capricious and arbitrary to me, which is not what one desires in a judge.
He sounds like a jerk.
The SF Comical didn't mention some of this other stunts. Such as:
Wearing a Mexican "charro" suit to his swearing-in ceremony in 1995.
Some knee-jerks like him because he displayed a crucifix in his courtroom, allowed his name to be used in a pro-choice newspaper advertisement, and announced from the bench that he would issue tough, automatic sentences for drunken driving.
But he is a bozo, in legal terms "arbitrary and capricious" and should probably go.
To be removed for misconduct by a group run by lawyers requires some nasty behavior.
This judge needs another line of work.
He may be a good judge in general but I have concerns about some of this...
>>increasing their jail sentences if they questioned his rulings<<
Questioning is an American right.
>>In other cases, Velasquez improperly penalized defendants whose lawyers failed to show up and failed to advise certain defendants of their right to plead not guilty, the commission said.<<
Judges, like everybody else need to follow the law.
>>asked them whether they felt good when they spun their tires. If a defendant said yes, the judge imposed the minimum $200 fine; if not, Velasquez said he was lying and fined him $800 or more.<<\
This sounds like he enjoys toying with defendents.
People like this get in office because of PC and very shallow thinking. This man has the ability to ruin or save lives. But that is not his responsibility. He is nothing more than an arbitrer of the law. Nothing more, nothing less. A judge with an "agenda" is a very dangerous thing. This clown should be removed from the bench post haste.
Because he is a minority and knows how to play the race card.
This is DU, isn't it? What are you, Jocon307? Some sort of conservative?
Believe it or not, in many places there is a waiting list for alcohol treatment safe driving courses plus fees that often must be paid in advance.
Judges aren't often scrutinized by fellow members of the cloth, when they are it is generally worth noting.
Sorry.....My comments were addressed to no one in particular -- but responding to all who seemed horrified by a Judge who imposes consequences for deadly behavior and non-compliance with court ordered conditions of parole.
Semper Fi
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.