Posted on
May 21, 2008 in
In November there are seven incumbent “Republican” felony court judges up for reelection in Harris County. I put the party affiliation in quotes because (A) judges should not be elected in partisan elections; and (B) the best of these judges don’t act as though their party affiliation has anything to do with their judging.
All of Harris County’s elected officials are Republicans, and have been for years. There was a Republican sweep back in ’94 or ’96 that cleared the last of the Democrats out of the Harris County criminal courthouse.
AHCL and I agree that there is at least one district court judge who should not be returning for another term in 2009 (I’m serving as campaign treasurer for his opponent, Shawna Reagin). But we probably disagree on how many good judges losing their benches would be acceptable collateral damage in the quest for change in the criminal judiciary.
I’ve written before that I think that sweeping the incumbents out of office would, on balance, be a good thing. Judges need to remember whom they serve, and the tree of liberty etc.
Infinitely better, though, would be if the voters were intelligent enough to carefully vote for some new judges as well as some incumbents.
Other than the judge of the 176th District Court against whom Shawna Reagin is running, I’m not going to publicly suggest which judges might better serve the people of Harris County by staying home than by returning to the bench in January.
After all, I have clients, and while none of these judges are doing my clients any favors, my clients are not necessarily well-served by my pointing out which judges have become so miserable on the bench that they, as well as their constituents, would probably be happier if they took off their long black dresses and resumed golfing or took up gardening.
I will, however, point out one shining example of a judge who should absolutely not be taking up golf or gardening any time soon: Judge Caprice Cosper of the 339th District Court.
I say this of the only judge who has ever held me in contempt, as the only lawyer she has ever held in contempt: Judge Cosper is one of the judges who should be reelected and keep on judging. She is smart, fair, and just. When a client’s case lands in her court, I know that he will get a fair shake, which is more than can be said for more than one of the incumbents. If you didn’t know the shared party affiliation of all of Harris County’s judges, you might never guess hers.
There are judges up for reelection who treat the defense poorly, and at least one judge up for reelection who treats both sides atrociously. Judge Cosper treats everyone with courtesy and respect.
When the prosecutorial blogger known as “A Houston Criminal Lawyer” and I agree on something, as we agree on Judge Cosper’s reelection, we must be right.
(Lest any of the other incumbent candidates get any bright ideas for garnering my support, my support for Judge Cosper is not because of the contempt.)
Hell has officially frozen over. Mark and AHCL agree on something.
Ironically, she became my favorite judge when she held Mark in contempt.
Just kidding.
Capi love it if you would mail me.Realy love to catch up. Tim
It is your blog so you can say whatever you desire; even if it is no more than an obvious attempt to gain preferential treatment. “Judge Cosper treats everyone with courtesy and respect”….your assessment must exclude everyone that has stood trial in her courtroom.
That’s a problem with blogging — can’t say anything nice about anyone or people think you’re sucking up.
I’ve tried two jury trials in Judge Cosper’s courtroom, and represented dozens of clients there, and never seen her treat anyone with anything other than courtesy and respect. I’d be interested in your observations as a non-lawyer.
I don’t need preferential treatment from Judge Cosper — the way she treats everyone else is just fine with me.
CW Maxwell, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Judge Cosper has not always ruled fairly over someone that comes before her bench. In fact she’s done the opposite. She rules by intimidation so much so that even attorney’s in a few instances have removed themselves from their client’s case and refunded their fees. And let’s be brutally honest, sometimes the officer’s police report isn’t 100% factual. It’s written with (added) details in order to improve the odds of the charges being accepted. There is definite corruption within our system.
Really?,
People often aren’t happy with a fair judge’s rulings. It’s easy to cry foul when your ox has been gored. Without knowing the facts of the situations you’re talking about, it’s hard to argue with you. But I challenge you to name a single lawyer who has removed himself or herself from a client’s case because of intimidation by Judge Cosper.
A lawyer who is so intimidated by Caprice Cosper has no business practicing criminal law.
Of course the offense report is often not 100% factual; of course it’s written with added details (or with exculpatory details admitted; of course there is corruption within our system. None of this is Caprice Cosper’s fault.
She lost? Damn. She was amazing. Maybe you should run for judge….a tad bit of an income change, but you’d be amazing as well.:)