P
| Author | Mark Thompson/Elizabeth Smith |
| Pages | 633-670 |
M–R
-P-
-P-
PACE, Annemarie
Temperament/Demeanor
Judge Pace “is a very friendly woman,” one interviewee
said. Another said, “I think she’s very professional and
friendly. She is not standoffish. She is not snobby like some
judges get. She doesn’t think she’s better than everybody
else.” A third attorney said, “I found her to be very, very judi-
cious, a thinker, not reactive and willing to listen.”
Intelligence/Knowledge
Judge Pace “is very on top of the game” and “a very bright
woman,” one interviewee said. A second interviewee, who like
the first is a criminal defense attorney, said, “She is gener-
ally knowledgeable. In comparison with the other judges,
she is probably a seven or eight out of 10.” A deputy district
attorney added, “She is highly intelligent and extremely
hard-working.”
On Motions
Criminal defense attorneys were divided over whether
Judge Pace tilts towards the prosecution in her rulings.
Several who were interviewed about her said she is clearly
“pro-DA,” but others said she is receptive to defense motions.
“I didn’t find her that way,” said one defense attorney,
responding to the complaint that she favors the prosecution.
“If you approach her with a reasoned argument and there is
validity to your position, I think she listens. I think she really
does.” The attorney added, “I have had her in two cases, one
where I wrote an extensive mitigation letter on the client who
had committed a battery against a minor.” She did not react
emotionally to the “egregious” details of the crime but was
very “judicious” and “went out of her way to try to resolve
the case,” the attorney said. “We got a year in county jail
instead of the state prison sentence that the DA wanted.” On
the other hand, another defense attorney who has appeared
before her in a number of preliminary hearings complained
that she is somewhat reluctant to make a decisive ruling
when the prosecution’s case is weak. “In my prelims with
her, if the prosecution couldn’t prove their case, it was not as
if she was trying to help them. But instead of not holding the
defendants to answer or granting a 17(b) [motion to reduce
a felony to a misdemeanor], she would stop and say, ‘can’t
we settle this,’ and things like that. But at least she would
recognize when the District Attorney didn’t have a good case,
so overall, I thought she was okay.”
On Trial
One defense attorney who tried a case in Judge Pace’s
court said, “I think she gave me a very fair trial. She is
very approachable. One of the biggest things for me is how
approachable a judge is, so that we can sort out issues,
whether they be calendaring issues or witness issues or
whatever. She had a very open door policy.” The attorney
added, “She is a very, very good note taker. I can tell you
that because in the trial I did with her, I objected to some-
thing in closing arguments, and she had very good notes, so
she could tell the prosecutor, no. I saw her notes. They were
very thorough.” Two other attorneys who have handled trials
or extended preliminary hearing before Judge Pace compli-
mented the way she ran her court. “My experiences with her
have been mostly good,” said one of the attorneys. “She is
willing to try to work out decisions on both sides. She does
her homework and prepares her cases.” Another said, “She’s
very good at getting her job done in terms of calendar man-
agement. When she was in a very busy preliminary hearing
court, she was great. She ran that court. She ran it.”
Continuances
Attorneys who were interviewed about Judge Pace said
she readily grants extensions of time. “She didn’t give me any
problem whatsoever on continuances,” said one interviewee.
“I think in San Bernardino, they have enough trials going
on that if you continue a case, it’s no big deal. She was very
accommodating so I wanted to stay in her courtroom. I could
have gotten sent out to another court, but I wanted her to
keep the case and she helped us keep the case.” Another
interviewee said, “I didn’t find any problem with her on that,”
though she did give the prosecution undeserved leeway in
one case. “The DA had not bothered to read my motion, even
though it was served in advance of the court date,” the inter-
viewee said. “I think the judge should have been angry, but
she didn’t show any emotion. She granted a continuance.”
Settlement
One of the criminal defense attorneys who was inter-
viewed about Judge Pace complained about the role she
played in settlement negotiations. “In terms of deals and
brokering, I didn’t love her. She was very pro-DA, in my opin-
ion,” the attorney said. Another defense attorney, however,
said the way she expresses her opinion about the issues
at the heart of cases can help the parties move towards
an agreement. “She is proactive, though I don’t think she
bends anybody’s arm,” the attorney said. “But the way she
approaches the problem, the attorneys have to rethink their
position, and think that maybe there is validity in what she
is saying, especially if they’re being intransigent.” A third
interviewee said she seems to have a good sense about when
further efforts to get a settlement are futile. “She tried to help
in a disposition but the client didn’t want to take a disposi-
tion so there wasn’t anything more she could do except say,
hey, let’s go to trial, it has to be tried,” the attorney said.
Several interviewees noted that she got a lot of practice in
disposing of cases before she was appointed to the bench
when she worked in the District Attorney’s office and had
the job of expediter. “I had a good working relationship with
her,” said a deputy public defender who dealt with her regu-
larly in those days. “We were able to resolve a lot of cases.
She would make offers to facilitate settlement short of a
preliminary hearing. My experience with her was very good,”
the defender said.
Proclivities
A deputy district attorney who knows Judge Pace “very
well” said, “She is a superior judge, one of the best in the
county, I think. She is tough, but she is one of those judges
who will actually work with the people. She will bend over
backwards to make sure that both sides can be satisfied with
how things are going to go. She is good—really, really good,
I think.” Several criminal defense attorneys also praised her
as a “fair” and “very, very judicious” judge, who will seri-
ously consider mitigating factors, even in cases of serious
crimes. But several other criminal defense attorneys said she
clearly tilts towards the prosecution. An attorney who has
handled quite a few preliminary hearings in her court called
her “very pro-DA” but also said “she is very pragmatic.” She
won’t stubbornly cling to a position because “she likes to get
the calendar done.” The attorney added that even though
she tilts decidedly in favor of the prosecution, “I don’t mind
her.” Another defense attorney complained that she picked
up some bad habits from a judge who she regularly worked
in front of when she was a prosecutor, a judge who had a
tendency to drastically raise bail on defendants who made
bail, only to have the prosecution to file additional charges
against them. “She learned that habit and sometimes she
will jack the bail up and throw them into custody. She’s not
as bad as her mentor, but she’s bad enough. That’s the only
real problem I’ve had with her,” the attorney said. Another
attorney, on the other hand, said that as a prosecutor, “she
was able to see the special circumstances that defendants
faced and handle the cases individually. That led me to
believe that she would be a good judge,” the attorney said.
Summary
Interviewees described Judge Pace as a bright, friendly
judge who maintains an open door policy. Though she was a
prosecutor for years before she became a judge, she is recep-
tive to defense arguments, will consider mitigating factors,
even in cases involving serious charges, and is good at set-
tling cases. By the account of some defense attorneys, she is
noticeably pro-prosecution in her leanings, and is reluctant
to make a tough call against the prosecution on a pretrial
motion. But at least she recognizes when a case is less than
Profiles Pace623
CJ_Volume_2.indb 623CJ_Volume_2.indb 623 9/5/2014 12:47:53 PM9/5/2014 12:47:53 PM
M–R
airtight, her critics conceded, and in those cases, she will
suggest that the prosecutor should reduce charges. She runs
her court well, even when she is faced with a crowded docket
of preliminary hearings, and is an all-around good judge,
interviewees said. (10J)
PACHECO, John M.
Temperament/Demeanor
Family law attorneys interviewed about Judge Pacheco
were unanimous in offering high praise for him in every
respect including demeanor. “He is a very fine judge. He is
very considerate. He treats the litigants well. He is very com-
passionate,” said one interviewee. Another said, “He has a
good disposition. He is a very nice guy.” A third interviewee
said, “I like Judge Pacheco. He is very reasonable. He is help-
ful to the pro per clients. He works well with people.” Three
other interviewees said he “has very good judicial tempera-
ment,” he is “calm,” and “is a pleasure to be in front of.”
Intelligence/Knowledge
Judge Pacheco “is very bright. He is knowledgeable,” one
family law attorney said. Another said, “He is very knowl-
edgeable and knows the law, so it is really a pleasure to be
in front of him because we don’t have to educate him, as we
do with some judges.” One interviewee, who was somewhat
less impressed with his legal acumen, said, “He is not the
brightest person in the world, but I think he makes up for
that in terms of his overall willingness to work with people.”
Another interviewee, responding to the suggestion that
Judge Pacheco is not particularly scholarly, said, “I don’t
know that that’s true. There is not anyone I know of who
knows everything about all areas. But the one thing that I
do know about Judge Pacheco is that if something comes up
that the judge doesn’t know about or it is a difficult issue,
he researches it.” A fifth interviewee said, “He did not have a
background in family law. He was a personal injury lawyer.
But he has made it his business to keep informed about
family law matters.”
On Motions
The one interviewee who asserted that Judge Pacheco is
not the most scholarly of jurists said, “If you give him a com-
plicated legal issue, he is not great on those.” He will listen to
the arguments presented by each side, said the attorney, who
added, “But I’m not positive, when you get to the end of all of
that, that he is always going to reach the right conclusion.”
Other interviewees had no such complaints. An attorney who
has litigated a complicated, long-running case before Judge
Pacheco said, “From my experience with this particular case,
I have done all the homework, and when I submitted issues
to him, he read the papers and he issued very well thought
out, very well analyzed rulings. And he is very prompt about
it, which I am very pleased about.” A third attorney said, “His
rulings in my cases have been fine. He knows the law better
than I do. I haven’t seen anything that would cause me to
question his knowledge or his legal interpretations.”
On Trial
An attorney with extensive trial experience before Judge
Pacheco said, “I have a really obnoxious case in front of him.
It is a litigated-from-hell case. I can’t get the other side to
agree on what day of the week it is. There is a lot of stuff
going on. We have been at this for about five or six years, and
when I go before him, he is prepared, he has read the paper-
work, and he knows what’s going on.” In trial proceedings,
the attorney added, “He runs his courtroom fairly well. He
allows the parties to have their say. He is very professional.
He is very responsive to what’s going on. He pays attention.
He is absolutely aware of the facts of the case.” Most attor-
neys noted that Judge Pacheco puts an emphasis on settling
cases, and he is very good at that, but as one put it, “He will
make every effort to assist in resolving the situation, but
he doesn’t avoid trying a case, and he lets the attorneys try
their case. It’s a very comfortable atmosphere” for trials, the
attorney said. Two other interviewees seconded those obser-
vations. “He allows lawyers to try their case without undue
interference from him. He listens to what lawyers have to say
and he attempts to accommodate lawyers. He pays atten-
tion and listens to what everyone says before he reaches
a decision. He is a very highly qualified judge,” said one.
Another said, “Because of the nature of what I do, my cases
are all contentious cases that go to trial, and he doesn’t get
in the way of doing that.” Even the attorney who said Judge
Pacheco isn’t the highest caliber of legal scholars and issues
rulings that aren’t always right had no complaints about how
he conducts trials. “He is a judge that I would try a case in
front of any day of the week,” the attorney said. “He will let
you try your case. He will listen to what you have to say. He
will not get in your face. He works with pro pers and lawyers.
Judges in San Bernardino have to deal with a lot of pro pers,
and he is very good with pro pers.”
Continuances
“I have not had any problem with him on that score,” said
one of the attorneys who commented on Judge Pacheco’s
policy on continuances. Another interviewee complained that
he is perhaps a bit too easy with extensions of time. “He is
pretty lenient on those, actually, much to my dismay. I think
the biggest problem he has is not having enough time for all
the cases. There are just so many. So when you get a continu-
ance on something, it may be four to six months before you get
back in his court. He is just buried. But as far as granting con-
tinuances, he is pretty good until you have worn out your wel-
come.” A third interviewee insisted that he won’t let one side
take advantage of the other on continuances. “He is accommo-
dating, meaning that if the lawyers are in agreement he does
not question that,” the attorney said. “But if one lawyer wants
to continue a case and the other lawyer is opposed, the lawyer
who wants to continue the case has to have a legitimate reason
why that should take place. And he will go out of his way to
make sure that the opposing party is not prejudiced.”
Settlement
Judge Pacheco “makes a very definite effort in favor of
settling cases,” said one interviewee, offering an observation
with which all interviewees agreed. “He favors alternative
dispute resolution. He is very much in favor of that. I have
been involved with collaborative divorce, and he was at one
of our meetings. He is a very deep proponent of our move-
ment.” Another attorney said, “He is a good judge to have
a mediation in front of. I think he’s good at settling cases.
There is no question about that. He has a good disposition,
and he lets you know how he feels about a case and what
value that he thinks your case has, and he encourages you
towards resolution.” A third interviewee said, “He settles
things that he can. I never had anything that went to a full
judgment with him. Everything always settled beforehand.
He wasn’t so much proactive, but he was certainly open to it.
We settled the case, whereas probably another judge would
have pushed us to a trial.”
Proclivities
One interviewee asserted that Judge Pacheco “leans a
little bit towards husbands rather than wives.” None of the
other attorneys who were interviewed about him agreed with
that. “I specifically find that is not the case. I represent the
wife, and the husband is an attorney. Judge Pacheco has
gone out of his way to let him speak, but I don’t see any
swaying towards the dad at all. No matter what the case
involves, he makes a ruling based on what he feels is right.”
Another attorney, addressing whether the judge leans one
way or the other in family cases, added, “I have not had that
experience with him and I have appeared before him many
times. I have not been able to figure out any biases that he
has. I think he is very unbiased and neutral, to be honest
with you. He is very fair and open-minded.” An attorney who
hasn’t appeared before him very often but is active in bar
associations and has heard all the scuttlebutt about Judge
Pacheco said, “I have heard great things about him. He is
very involved in the community.” Among members of the
family bar in the county, “they all say he’s great.”
Summary
Judge Pacheco is calm and reasonable, and he maintains
a comfortable, pleasant atmosphere in his court, for attor-
624Pacheco California Judge Reviews
CJ_Volume_2.indb 624CJ_Volume_2.indb 624 9/5/2014 12:47:53 PM9/5/2014 12:47:53 PM
M–R
neys and litigants alike. He sees many litigants in family
court who are representing themselves and handles them
effectively, with patience and compassion. He is a proponent
of collaborative divorces, and places a major emphasis on
resolving cases without trials. But he doesn’t get in the way
of attorneys and litigants who want to take their cases to
trial, and he stays out of the lawyers’ way once a trial com-
mences. Whether he is a top-notch legal scholar or not is a
subject of some debate, but most attorneys agree that he has
all the right tools to be an excellent family judge. (10J)
PACHECO, Randall F.
Temperament/Demeanor
Judge Pacheco is “considerate” and “patient,” said two
of the attorneys interviewed about him. Another said, “He
is very courteous to attorneys. He likes it when people are
courteous in his courtroom.” A fourth interviewee said, “He is
a kind, gentle person. He has really nice judicial demeanor.
He will listen. He will give pro per litigants their due course
in time. He is very respectful of the attorneys who come in.”
An interviewee who was otherwise critical of Judge Pacheco
said, “His courtroom demeanor is okay.”
Intelligence/Knowledge
One of the attorneys interviewed about Judge Pacheco
said his knowledge of law is “excellent. He knows what he’s
doing. He is very knowledgeable.” Another attorney who
made half a dozen appearances before Judge Pacheco in a
case that did not involve any complicated or difficult issues
of law said, “I thought that he had a good understanding
of the law and tried to do what was right and fair.” Other
interviewees said he is not a legal scholar, which some found
problematic but others did not. An interviewee in the latter
group said, “He does not seem to be particularly legal. He is
not overly concerned with precedent and statutes, as far as
I can see. But he is a thoughtful guy.” Another family law
practitioner said, “I am not sure how strong he is on prop-
erty division, but most of the things I have done in front of
him dealt with issues of custody and support, and I think
he made appropriate orders.” An attorney who complained
about his legal acumen said, “I don’t think he knows the law.
He made rulings that didn’t make any sense at all.”
On Motions
The attorney who asserted that Judge Pacheco is not
overly concerned with precedent and statutes said that in
ruling on motions, “He kind of shoots from the hip a little
bit.” Other interviewees agreed. “He doesn’t abide by the
law. He abides by what he feels and when he feels it. He
is paternalistic,” said one. “He thinks he’s doing the right
thing, but he’s not doing the right thing. The law is the
law.” A third interviewee said, “I would agree that in certain
areas, he doesn’t necessarily follow the letter of the law.” A
fourth interviewee concurred, but noted that Judge Pacheco
previously handled family law cases in the low-income com-
munity of Compton. “If you work in Compton, you have to be
creative,” the attorney said. “You have people with domestic
violence and drunk driving and drug arrests and stuff like
that and they are coming in and asking for time sharing with
the children.” The attorney asserted that in other communi-
ties, parents with such records would not be given custody,
“but in Compton, you’re thinking, at least they want to spend
time with their kids. So you end up deciding that it’s better
for the kids, even if the parent isn’t perfect. He kind of brings
that same attitude to Los Angeles. He will tend to overlook
some of people’s less attractive qualities if he thinks overall
it would be in the best interests of the children,” said the
attorney, who added, “I feel comfortable in front of the guy.
He tries hard, and I think that’s the most important thing.
None of the judges are ever going to get everything right.” A
fifth interviewee, commenting on Judge Pacheco’s rulings on
motions in one case, said, “I thought he made reasonable
decisions on everything, even though I was not always happy
with it. I felt one decision he made on sanctions wasn’t well
taken, and I was not happy with it; with hindsight, I don’t
think it was a good decision. But generally speaking, I prob-
ably appeared there five times and I thought he read the
paperwork and tried to do the right thing.”
On Trial
One of the attorneys who said Judge Pacheco doesn’t
strictly follow the law in his rulings on motions, said that
as for his handling of trials, “Oddly, I have found him to be
fairly strict. He does take control of his courtroom in a trial
setting. He will let the lawyers put on their case, but he will
take control. If he feels like he needs to get involved to man-
age it, he will.” A second attorney also said that in trial, “he
is very no-nonsense. He wants to get things done, which may
be one of the reasons why he sort of eschews the law.” Other
interviewees were more critical of his performance in trials.
“He may not be as prepared as some of the other judges,”
said one interviewee, who added, “I get the feeling that you
really have to educate him in the process. You are going to
have to remind him of the facts of the case, remind him of
the law, remind him of what he did the last time, and why
we did what we did last time, and why we are where we are
today.” A second attorney who was critical of Judge Pacheco
said, “I have had a lot of trouble with him in a couple of tri-
als. He is not a fair judge. It takes forever, and he often tried
to help the other side when he knew the other side was los-
ing. They didn’t even bring up the issues. He brought them
up, and that’s not his job.” One other interviewee said, “If
I had any complaint about him, it is that he will entertain
people expressing their views, even if what they have to say
has little evidentiary value. He will let it go, maybe thinking
it is cathartic or something.”
Continuances
Judge Pacheco is “as liberal as they come” on continu-
ances, said an attorney who added, “If I ever told him, Your
Honor, we want to continue it because we want time to settle
it, he will give you the continuance. I have continued matters
three, four, five times in his courtroom. If you need time to
conduct discovery or whatever, he will give you the time that
you need.” Another interviewee said, “I would call him fair
on continuances. I haven’t had any negative experiences on
that where I would say he was unfair. Like most judges, he
will grant a reasonable request for a continuance, unless it’s
excessive.” A third interviewee said Judge Pacheco is “okay
with continuances. I haven’t had a problem with him on
that.” A fourth interviewee said, “My recollection is that he
is pretty liberal.”
Settlement
One interviewee, who said Judge Pacheco gets personally
involved in trying to settle cases, said, “I remember that he
would often call us into chambers to discuss a resolution
without trial.” Another attorney, with a different recollection,
said Judge Pacheco “does not participate, in my experience,”
but he will “give you all the leeway you want to continue the
matter to try to go outside and settle it. He tries to make
the parties make their own decision, as opposed to having
the big gavel come down.” A third interviewee said, “I think
he encourages counsel to talk. He always gives lip service
to that, but when I went into chambers with him, we were
primarily talking procedure. We didn’t really get into the
meat and potatoes of the cases much. He didn’t really seem
to want to do that. His attitude was that if we were going to
address something off the bench, not in open court, then
lets kind of keep it on the procedural aspects, which I think
is fine. I like that better, personally. I don’t want to go into a
smoky room and cut a deal.”
Proclivities
One family law practitioner said Judge Pacheco is well-
suited for the job. “He has a passion for what he is doing.
He wants to be there. He still tries to problem solve from
the bench,” said the attorney, who noted that his previous
assignment handling family law cases in Compton had an
impact on his outlook. “The demographics of working that
Compton Court require you to basically work outside the box
because most of the clients are coming in as pro pers. A lot
of times you’re dealing with very emotional issues but not
a lot of money. He was a good problem solver in Compton.
Profiles Pacheco625
CJ_Volume_2.indb 625CJ_Volume_2.indb 625 9/5/2014 12:47:53 PM9/5/2014 12:47:53 PM
To continue reading
Request your trial