B
| Author | Mark Thompson/Elizabeth Smith |
| Pages | 44-126 |
A–F
40Bacal California Judge Reviews
-B-
-B-
Bachner Monica
Temperament/Demeanor
Judge Bachner is “a nightmare. Her court is a very
unpleasant place to be. She is rude and arrogant,” said one
of the criminal defense attorneys interviewed about her.
Another said, “I agree she is rude. On top of that, she is
imperial.” Several other defense attorneys were not quite as
critical. “She is stern but she is fair,” said one. Another said,
“She is impatient but she is not that bad. She can be mean-
spirited and impatient, but if you are there on time and
you’re ready, and if you do your job and you do it right, you
should have no problem with her.” A fifth attorney, who had
a lengthy trial in her court, said, “I did not find her demeanor
troubling at all.” Another interviewee who has known Judge
Bachner for years said, “I have a soft spot in my heart for
her.” That attorney has repeatedly “tried to explain to her
how to be a judge,” to no avail. “But every time I come in to
see her, she treats me like gold.” That attorney went on to
explain, “She came from a federal prosecutor background,
and they are so different than dealing in state court. So
she can be that arrogant person with a federal attitude, but
that’s just the way she is. It’s the way she was trained. She
tried to take a federal background to a state court, and you
just can’t do it. She still hasn’t figured it out.”
Intelligence/Knowledge
One criminal defense attorney who commented about
Judge Bachner rated her knowledge of law as “mediocre,”
and said that worse yet, “She gets her guidance from the
prosecution.” A second defense attorney said, “I would agree
she is not the greatest on knowledge of law.” Another defense
attorney said, “She thinks she knows it all. She is bright, but
she has a very slanted, very pro-prosecution view.” A fourth
defense attorney offered a far more favorable assessment.
“Out of 10, I would give her at least an 8½, maybe higher.
I don’t know about her knowledge of law, but I know of her
ability to dig and get it, which is different,” that attorney said.
On Motions
Criminal defense attorneys who commented about Judge
Bachner offered divergent opinions about her rulings on
motions. “I think she is a rubber stamp for the prosecution,”
said one. Another defense attorney who agreed with that
assessment added, “It appears she has already made up her
mind before you say anything.” A third defense attorney,
on the other hand, said, “Her attitude towards the defense
was one of listening and making what I felt were considered
judgments. Unfortunately, her considered judgments went
against my client. But she appeared to be considering her
rulings, and she had what I had to concede were reasonable
authorities for her positions. I think she chose the wrong
authorities, and I think on an appeal we may do okay. But I
can’t say that she didn’t consider my position.”
On Trial
One criminal defense attorney who has had contested pro-
ceedings before Judge Bachner said, “I found her to be very,
very pro-prosecution. She cuts you off. She doesn’t want to
hear from the defense.” However, another defense attorney
who had a “very long, very nasty trial” involving multiple felo-
nies and two victims in Judge Bachner’s court said, “I lost the
trial but I ended up with a lot of respect for her. She managed
the courtroom reasonably during the trial. She permitted all
manner of defense. She permitted all arguments. I wasn’t held
back at all. Her attitude was go ahead, defend the case. She
does come from the federal system and you do have to occa-
sionally remind her that we have a different evidence code.
But I don’t consider that a weakness at all. That is something
you have to deal with, with everybody.” A third criminal
defense attorney who tried a case before Judge Bachner said,
“I have heard complaints about her. But I had a trial in front
of her and she was very fair.” To be sure, the attorney had
a rocky start with the judge. “Initially, it was unpleasant in
there, but I am one who has to clear the air, so I actually went
into chambers along with the prosecutor after one of her rul-
ings and talked with her. I said, ‘Hey, what’s going on, I feel
like I am an unwanted stepchild here.’ She said, ‘What are
you talking about, I have been very fair.’ She explained to me
why she was making her rulings, and after I talked to her, I
understood. Then she gave me a very fair trial.”
Continuances
One interviewee complained that Judge Bachner is “not
good” on continuances because “she is in a hurry.” Another
interviewee said she is “pretty much run-of-the-mill like
everyone else” on continuances. A third interviewee said,
“I’ve had her only as a trial judge and we already had all
of our continuances before we got to her court. So I didn’t
make a motion for a trial continuance. But there was one
occasion when I needed a half a day to get some witnesses
together and she was fine with that. But my suspicion is that
because she comes from a federal system, and everything is
done more formally there, if you don’t come in with a well-
considered [section] 1051 [motion for a continuance] written
out, you are not going to get your continuance.”
Settlement
One attorney who was interviewed about Judge Bachner
said “she is less likely” to participate in negotiations to dis-
pose of cases prior to trial “because her background is in
federal court where the judges don’t have any involvement.”
Another interviewee, who has appeared before her in a num-
ber of cases, said, “I can’t really cite an instance where I saw
any evidence of her being proactive in settling cases.” Other
interviewees, likewise, had no experience in plea negotiations
with Judge Bachner.
Proclivities
Criminal defense attorneys who commented about Judge
Bachner offered widely divergent assessments. “She is a shill
for the prosecution,” said one defense attorney, who, like
most, also said she has a hostile demeanor. Another defense
attorney said, “She is just so biased. It’s a terrible place to
be, unfortunately. She thinks she’s a federal judge and she
treats people that way. She has no compassion.” A third
defense attorney, with a somewhat different complaint, said,
“She makes faces. You can tell by looking at her face what
she is going to say, and it’s usually not something very com-
plimentary.” A fourth defense attorney, voicing yet another
common complaint about Judge Bachner, said, “The joke
is we call her courtroom ‘federal court.’ But the good news
is that she equally offends DAs as well as defense lawyers.
Usually, deputy district attorneys who are assigned as cal-
endar deputies stay in a court for several years, but she has
had a succession of calendar deputies, which leads me to
believe they have wanted out.” Several other defense attor-
neys had no complaints about Judge Bachner. “I haven’t
encountered anything negative about her,” said one. Another
defense attorney who has had several cases before her said,
“My clients got treated reasonably well in her court.” A fourth
defense attorney, who said that she can be impatient and
sometimes mean-spirited, had an overall favorable opinion
of her anyway. “She will give you a fair shot,” that attorney
said. “I did a bail review in front of her and she gave me
a fair shot. She made a fair ruling. She can be somewhat
impatient. But as long as you are there on time and you are
prepared, you should have no problem with her.”
Summary
A majority of criminal defense attorneys who commented
about Judge Bachner were highly critical of her. They said
she is rude, arrogant and impatient, and has an inap-
propriate “federal attitude” about state courts, which is a
product of her background as a federal prosecutor. She is,
by the account of some defense attorneys, a rubber stamp
for the prosecution and a nightmare for the defense. Other
defense attorneys, on the other hand, while agreeing that
she is impatient and “in a hurry,” had favorable experiences
with her. In trial, she will let defense attorneys defend their
clients and will make fair rulings, those who liked her said.
Attorneys who are on time and are well-prepared will do fine
with Judge Bachner, several interviewees insisted. (13A)
CJ_Volume_1.indb 40CJ_Volume_1.indb 40 9/5/2014 12:59:14 PM9/5/2014 12:59:14 PM
A–F
Profiles Bacigalupo41
BACIGALUPO, Paul A.
Temperament/Demeanor
Judge Bacigalupo “has great demeanor,” said one inter-
viewee. “He is a total gentleman. He’s a great listener.”
Another interviewee said, “He is definitely a gentleman. I
found him that way from the first time I met him. My only
beef with him is that he is not one of those guys with a court
that you can get in and out of real quick.” A third interviewee
said, “He is not a horrible guy. He is a pleasant guy, for the
most part.” A prosecutor had a mixed opinion of the judge.
“He’s a very personable and professional man. He is very
accommodating and fair in chambers. I don’t like him on
the bench.”
Intelligence/Knowledge
Interviewees offered an array of opinions about Judge
Bacigalupo’s grasp of law, with some calling him knowl-
edgeable, others saying he knows the law but doesn’t fol-
low it and others recalling his struggle to learn criminal
law. “He’s very knowledgeable on the law,” said one of the
attorneys who was complimentary. “I thought he was smart
and knowledgeable, and when he didn’t know something,
he wasn’t shy about saying he did not know and looking
for help. I appreciated that,” said another. An attorney who
was somewhat critical said, “I have nothing bad to say about
him other than to say that he waits for you to educate him.
It doesn’t seem like he is too much in a hurry to learn.”
Another interviewee, who complained that Judge Bacigalupo
is afraid of angering the prosecution, added, “It’s not that
he’s unfamiliar with the law. He’s gutless.” Two attorneys
recalled his rocky introduction to the criminal courts after
a stint as a judge for the State Bar. “He had no background
in criminal when he came in here, and it showed.” “As far as
the law, he tried real hard. When he came to his first assign-
ment, a misdemeanor court, he came from the State Bar,
and he was like a fish out of water. He very quickly ascended
to doing felony trials in Superior Court because of a change
of personnel, and I think it was a little fast. I think initially,
he was not comfortable with the waters.”
On Motions
Attorneys had contrasting opinions of Judge Bacigalupo’s
handling of pretrial motions. “I found that my initial view of
him was that he wasn’t too trainable,” a defense attorney
said. “He is not the guy who is going to go read the cases or
take the time to figure out what the issues are and get up on
the law. He will wait for you to educate him on it and then he
will read it. So it is a slow process. But on the other hand, [it
was] because of the way that trial went. I think he did have
a lot of respect for me, and so I am one of the people who
thinks he is a better listener. He is fair, even if he doesn’t
rule my way. If the law is on my side and I tell him the law,
he will listen to me.” Another defense attorney also said the
judge “listens to the lawyers very carefully.” In contrast,
another defense attorney, who lost on a bail issue in which
he ultimately prevailed on appeal, said Judge Bacigalupo is
“gutless” and will do only “what the DA will let him do.” To
be sure, Judge Bacigalupo isn’t popular in the district attor-
ney’s office either, according to one prosecutor. “His reputa-
tion in our office was that he was considered to be bungling
it, basically. He did not understand criminal trial procedure.
He did not handle motions effectively. He took way too much
time and didn’t get it right. So for pretrial, he had a horrible
reputation,” the prosecutor said.
On Trial
The prosecutor who commented about Judge Bacigalupo
said he was no better in trial. “I had a number of trials in his
court, and I didn’t like his demeanor. He seemed not in touch
with the prosecution or the defense.” The prosecutor said the
judge’s handling of jurors was especially clumsy. “I felt sorry
for jurors in his court because he was not managing his time
well. The thing that was disturbing was his voir dire. It was
a disaster.” The judge would quickly read through qualifying
questions and he “never even looked up from his script. He
would blow through that, and never acknowledge anybody
who was doing their best, short of shouting at him, to indi-
cate that they had a hardship. It was the same way every
time in three trials. Defense counsel and I would look at each
other like what the hell’s going on here, because that doesn’t
work for either of us. Challenges for cause are rarely granted.
And I don’t think that works for either side.” Summing up
the judge’s manner of selecting juries, the prosecutor said, “I
thought the way he handled that aspect of the trial was not
something I wanted the public to see. He is a symbol of what
justice is about to the community,” and his conduct “gives a
bad impression to the public.” The prosecutor went on to say
that Judge Bacigalupo abruptly changed in some respects. “I
believe at some point somebody must have said something to
him, either one of the head deputies or the presiding judge,
because he did a 180 from being sort of deliberate and care-
ful, and trying to understand what was going on, to a slash
and burn rush ahead without care for what was trying to
be done… I have really felt like he was on his own page and
not paying attention to either side.” Two defense attorneys
said they found Judge Bacigalupo to be ineffective in their
trials. “I have done trials in his court. If you are in his court
as a calendar court, he is very slow. If he says he’s going to
start the case at nine o’clock, then maybe 10:30.” Despite
that, the attorney added, “I think he is very fair in trial. He
keeps an open mind. But it took forever because we only had
so much time to do it every day.” Another defense attorney
added, “The calendar starts late. He doesn’t do anything
and he takes forever to do it, which makes it more painful.
I personally hate appearing in front of him, because it takes
forever to get anything done and everything is a big deal. He
is not very good.” Another defense attorney was keeping an
open mind about the judge. “I think he’s not seasoned yet.
He needs more time to get into his own. But I think eventu-
ally, he will be a good judge,” the attorney said.
Continuances
One interviewee suggested that Judge Bacigalupo’s prior
experience as a judge in the attorney disciplinary system
has left him unusually unaccommodating to requests for
extensions of time. “That experience has not rendered him
particularly mellow or responsive to sloppy lawyering. He
tends to be harsh and stern with counsel,” one interviewee
explained. The prosecutor who commented about Judge
Bacigalupo said he was not always like that. “When he first
came to the court, he was sloppy generous. Then there came
a point when that guy did a 180 degree shift, and it didn’t
matter what was going on, he was denying them. It didn’t
matter who you were.”
Settlement
Judge Bacigalupo “is completely non-proactive” when it
comes to trying to work out settlements, said an interviewee
who added, “He doesn’t do anything.” The attorney men-
tioned a case involving a very low-level crime in which the
prosecution was insisting on a state prison sentence. “There
was a 100 percent chance that it would be settled and the
defendant would not go to prison, but Judge Bacigalupo
just refused to get involved in the case.” After the jury was
selected, the defendant finally got the deal that the defense
attorney had been seeking for months, the attorney said.
The judge “wasted everybody’s time and money because he
wouldn’t make a decision on a case that had zero chance of
backfiring on him.” Another defense attorney had a similar
experience in a case that resulted in a hung jury with the
majority in favor of acquittal. “He didn’t seem to consider dis-
missing it very seriously, and he didn’t budge on bail either.”
The charge was ultimately dismissed, but Judge Bacigalupo
did nothing to bring that about. “My impression is that he is
fairly cautious,” the attorney said.
Proclivities
Some criminal defense attorneys think Judge Bacigalupo
is fair while others think he is loath to stand up to the
prosecutor. The judge “didn’t have the guts” to grant bail
in a case in which charges were ultimately, and predict-
ably dropped, “because the DA objected,” one attorney said.
Another interviewee, who agreed that he is pro-prosecution,
said, “I don’t think he has an agenda,” but occasions when
he goes against the prosecution are rare. “My understand-
CJ_Volume_1.indb 41CJ_Volume_1.indb 41 9/5/2014 12:59:15 PM9/5/2014 12:59:15 PM
A–F
42Back California Judge Reviews
ing is that he undercut a DA last week and it was such a
story that we are still talking about it. It was a big deal, and
that is not a good sign.” Another criminal defense attorney
who agreed with others that Judge Bacigalupo is reluctant
to disagree with the prosecutor was surprised on one occa-
sion. “I remember one time when the prosecutor was new,
and was as rude and nasty and she could be, and he called
her on it. He said she didn’t have to address [the defendant]
like that.” Other defense attorneys had generally favorable
impressions of the judge. “I have litigated a couple of cases
before him, and I have been fairly pleased with him. I do
think he has a pro-prosecution leaning, but not especially
so. It seems to me that he tries to do the right thing. I was
fairly impressed with him,” said one. “He is pretty much
prosecution minded, but I think if you have something
going for you, he would give it to the defense. I see a sense
of fairness,” said another. One defense attorney said Judge
Bacigalupo was notably receptive to defense arguments at
sentencing. “I thought he was very accommodating in the
post-conviction proceeding that I had with him. The guy was
a long time cocaine abuser, and the judge gave him a lot
of slack, over the prosecution’s objections.” The judge “was
apparently raised in a Roman Catholic environment… and
so he is, by disposition, a little more receptive than certain
other bench officers are to notions of penance and remorse.
So that was helpful. It is helpful to understand that about
him.” The prosecutor who commented on Judge Bacigalupo
took exception to any suggestion that he is pro-prosecution.
“I don’t see that at all,” the prosecutor said. “He does not roll
over for the prosecutor. He does not bend for the defense.
The thing that stresses me about him is that he seems like
he is on his own agenda, which is unpredictable and danger-
ous, from my perspective.”
Summary
Judge Bacigalupo is very cautious in his rulings, accord-
ing to some criminal defense attorneys, because he is afraid
of angering the prosecution. Some prosecutors also have
reservations about him, believing that he clumsily handles
proceedings such as jury selection and is erratic in his rul-
ings. Other interviewees, however, had no complaints and
insisted that Judge Bacigalupo is competent and fair. (09M)
BACK, Brian J.
Temperament/Demeanor
Judge Back is “a gentleman. It is a pleasure to be in
his court,” one interviewee said. “He is very even-tempered
on the bench,” said another. A third interviewee said,
“Personally, he is very pleasant with a sense of humor, which
you need in family law.” A fourth interviewee added, “I like
him a lot as a person. He is a great man. But he is a frustrat-
ing judge,” said the attorney, who asserted that Judge Back
is indecisive. Another interviewee said, “In my opinion, he is
a fabulous judge. I think he takes the parties into consider-
ation. He knows that these are human beings and he treats
them with respect.”
Intelligence/Knowledge
Judge Back “is one of the brighter judges on the bench.
He is very, very smart,” said one of the attorneys interviewed
about him. “On a scale of 1 to 10, with regard to intellectual
capability and being able to do the legal scholarly analysis,
he is a 10.” An attorney who appeared before Judge Back in
juvenile court said, “I was very impressed with him. He was
very thorough. He was very well acquainted with the issues
that were before the court. He was very intelligent.” When
he was later transferred to family court, he found himself in
a mostly unfamiliar arena. “I don’t think he has ever done
this. It has been a steep learning curve for him and he has
done it very well,” said a family law attorney, commenting
on Judge Back earlier in his tenure in a family court. “He is
working hard at it, he is doing a good job on it. He is very
good.” Another family law attorney added, “He is very will-
ing to be educated in family law and to listen to attorneys.
He is making an effort to understand the principles and
considerations of the laws that are unique to that practice.”
A third interviewee said, “He doesn’t have a background in
family law, but in my particular case, he was a quick study,
and he got the issues rather quickly.” Other interviewees
said Judge Back’s prior bench assignments have been good
preparation for a stint in a family law court. “He has a good
knowledge of custody issues, because he was in the juvenile
dependency court, so he has a fair understanding of that,”
one attorney said. Another added, “He worked with the juve-
nile court system, so on child custody and visitation, I think
he has a good, compassionate, innate sense of what is right
in terms of how you deal with kids. On some of the nuances
of property division or the tax ramifications or stock options,
he is learning, but he will learn because he is a bright guy.”
On Motions
One attorney who commented on how Judge Back han-
dles hearings on motions said, “It appears to me that he
is not decisive enough in certain instances. In family law,
sometimes you really need to be decisive, but he tends to
let attorneys run on.” Another attorney agreed, saying, “My
biggest beef with him is that he takes too long to make a
decision. With him, every decision is like a Supreme Court
ruling. It gets a little frustrating sometimes. He is a frustrat-
ing judge.” A third interviewee mentioned the same criticism,
but had seen some improvement over time. “I thought in my
initial appearances, he might be trying too hard to be well
liked by everyone. In my later appearances before him, I hap-
pily determined that he is absolutely able to make hard calls.
He is very considered in his decisions. He is very fair, as far
as I can tell.” Other interviewees had no such concerns. “I
do not find that he is indecisive,” said a family lawyer, who
insisted that Judge Back quite appropriately lets the parties
have their say without imposing his view on them. Another
interviewee said, “I have had a few matters before him and
I have never found him to be indecisive.” Judge Back treats
the parties with respect, and “knows their lives are going to
be affected by his rulings. In my experience with him, he
struggles to do the right thing and to make the right decision
and make everybody—win, lose or draw—feel that this judge
really cared about their case.”
On Trial
One of the interviewees who complained about Judge
Back’s indecisiveness when making rulings said the problem
was apparent in the way he handles his calendar in general.
“He was the same way in criminal when he was doing the
domestic violence calendar. He would take forever to do his
assignment.” The judge who succeeded him in that assign-
ment “does the same calendar in literally one third time.
When you’re a private attorney, and you go to court, you
need to get out of there before you have killed five hours. I’ve
always had a problem with the way he manages the calen-
dar, and I have told him so. But he is who he is.” Another
interviewee agreed that Judge Back “doesn’t have quite as
much control over courtroom procedure” as more experi-
enced judges. “He is still getting his feet wet in some of the
family law issues. But other than that, I haven’t seen any-
thing that disturbs me about him, other than the fact that
he needs more experience in the family law area.” A third
attorney said Judge Back certainly had no problem with
promptly reaching a decision after a trial. “I had a one-day
trial and the decision came in not more than two weeks after
trial. Judges have up to 90 days. So he was quite timely in
terms of his decision. That was my one experience. In terms
of timeliness, I thought it was fine.” Another interviewee who
tried a case in Judge Back’s court had no complaints. “He
interrupted the family law trial to take a criminal trial. He
was apologetic about having us wait so long until he was
done with the criminal matter. I didn’t think an apology was
necessary. He was doing his job,” the attorney said.
Continuances
In family court, said one interviewee, Judge Back “usually
doesn’t care at all” if attorneys ask for an extension of time.
“Right now the policy [in Ventura County] is that the judges
don’t insert themselves into continuances, unless they are
opposed. Unopposed continuances are generally granted
CJ_Volume_1.indb 42CJ_Volume_1.indb 42 9/5/2014 12:59:15 PM9/5/2014 12:59:15 PM
To continue reading
Request your trial