|
"Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Milton L. Childs
Appointed to: Milwaukee County Circuit Court Appointment date: Oct. 29, 2019 (elected 2020 to term ending Aug. 1, 2026) Education: Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Master of Business Administration – Keller Graduate School of Management, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Undergraduate – Xavier University of LA, New Orleans, Louisiana High School – Milwaukee Trade and Technical High, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: July 2009-present – Attorney manager, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin February 2007-July 2009 – Assistant state public defender, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Racine, Wisconsin June 2006-February 2007 – Attorney, Childs Law Office, Glendale, Wisconsin September 2004-June 2006 – Assistant state public defender, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Sheboygan, Wisconsin Military service: 1984-1992 – Department of the Navy, Branch - United States Marine Corps. Highest Rank - E-5/Sergeant, Discharge - Honorable Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin General character of practice: I am currently an Attorney Manager for the WI Public Defender in the Milwaukee Juvenile and Mental Health. My practice is broken into 4 areas. 1. I represent juveniles and adults under Chapter 51, involuntary commitments. This includes individuals on initial commitments, extensions and redetentions. 2. I represent adults under Chapter 54/55 - guardianships and protective placements. 3. I represent adults on termination of parental rights cases. 4. I manage the mental health team - other staff attorneys and private bar attorneys that represent our Chapter 51, Chapter 54/55 and TPR clients. Also as manager, I attend meetings within the judicial system and within the community and I am a resource for other attorneys across the state in the area of mental health. Describe typical clients: 1. Many of my Chapter 51 clients are individuals that had been living pretty normal lives in the community, but for some reason stopped taking their medication or maybe they were never on meds, but their illness has reached a point that they need assistance. 2. My typical Chapter 54/55 client is an aging adult that is going through dementia or a degenerative brain disorder. They are at a point where they can no longer care for themself. 3. My typical TPR parent is a young female in her 20s or 30s, with some AODA issues, a victim of domestic violence and struggling with poverty. Many do not have the support system in place that so many other parents have. Number of cases tried to verdict: Jury: 70+, Court: 80+, Administrative: 40+ List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: In 2010 I was introduced to a 14 year old boy that was being charged with 2 counts of 1st degree sexual assault of a child and 1 count of exposing genitals. He was one of the first of many clients that I would begin to represent that was from a failed adoption. His adopted parents no longer wanted him, so he had no family or support. His birth mother was not able to care for him at that time. He would spend the next three years in the juvenile justice system, bouncing around from several residential treatment centers and finally ending up in Lincoln Hills. He did not pick up any additional charges during the next three years. He completed his sex offender treatment, but the facilitators felt that he was not putting as much into his lessons as they felt he could have. In October 2013, two months before his 18th birthday, we had a hearing requesting that the court permanently stay his sex registration. ADA Amanda Kirklewski was requesting that he register, but was leaving the amount of time up to the court. I was requesting a permanent stay. Judge Rebecca Bradley ordered lifetime registration taking into consideration some of the following: the ages of the victims, where the incidents took place (in church) and the probability that he would reoffend. This was the first lifetime registration that anyone in our office could remember being ordered. He was released from Lincoln Hills on his 18th birthday, December 30, 2013 and dropped off at the Milwaukee Rescue Mission in downtown Milwaukee. This case continues to remind me of the importance of the work that I do with juveniles and how decisions that so many juveniles make at a young age can affect them the rest of their life. In 2013 - 2015, I had an opportunity to represent a deaf TPR father. The case was scheduled in front of Judge Mark Sanders. The ADA was Elisabeth Mueller and the GAL was Deanna Weiss. This case educated all of the legal parties about the deaf community and the proper use of interpreters in the court system. I was also able to confront many of my biases and my ignorance about members of the deaf community. After completing this case, I have had the opportunity to work with several organizations within the deaf community and participate in the Legal interpreter Training Institute as they train and prepare new interpreters. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: 1. When I was in private practice, I appeared before several administrative judges representing individuals in unemployment compensation hearings and parole/probation revocation hearings. 2. As an Assistant State Public Defender, I have represented individuals in parole/probation revocation hearings. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). 2015 - 2017 - Equal Employment Opportunity & Affirmative Action Officer for the WI State Public Defender - The position involved investigating, mediating and resolving employment and discrimination complaints Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None Previous runs for public office: [None listed] All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Joseph Donald, Wisconsin State Supreme Court, 2015 Paul Rifelj, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge, 2016 Danielle Shelton, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge, 2018 Rebecca Kiefer, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge, 2018 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Tabernacle Community Baptist Church, music director, current WI Association of African American Lawyers, past board of director member, current National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, current State Bar of Wisconsin, Board of Governors, Diversity /Inclusion Oversight Committee, 2015-2017 Civic Music Association of Milwaukee, board member, 2015 WIAA Basketball official, current (over 20 years) American Legion, Post 455, current (over 20 years) Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: No significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: Becoming a judge was not one of my goals in life when I was younger. There are times I still do not believe that I am a lawyer. I dreamed of giving back to my community by either creating a business or becoming a teacher. I became a teacher. I had the opportunity to teach for a number of years and I really enjoyed it. My students were the ones that encouraged me to become a lawyer. They would share with me their challenges at home, in their community and in the courtroom. I became an advocate for them; providing support, even coming to court on a few occasions to speak on their behalf. I begin to read law books, cases and the State statutes. I then decided to go to law school to get a better understanding of the law, with the goal of becoming a true legal advocate for the community. My goal was to learn as much as I could and then to share my education with the community. My reason for wanting to serve the people of Wisconsin as a judge is similar; to educate and serve my community. As a judge, I would remain involved in Milwaukee County; educating people of the laws, the changes that are occurring in the laws, make them aware of their rights and encourage them to participate in all areas of the political process. I would work with entities, across the county, and listen to their concerns, issues and recommendations to improve the judicial system. Additionally, I would work hard to reconnect the judicial system and the community. There is a strong disconnect and distrust, all across the county. This divide appears to be continuing to grow. Many citizens throughout the county feel that they have no voice; they feel isolated and ignored. Many citizens are looking for those on the bench for leadership. I have had the opportunity to appear in front of some great judges across the State. These judges were not afraid to apply the law properly. They were not afraid to hold people accountable, but still show respect to all of the litigants involved. These judges visit schools, senior citizen centers, churches and other place to hear from their constituents; and not just during election time. My goal would be to do the same. I am very concerned that many of the judges in Milwaukee County are disconnected with the people that come in front of them - in all areas of the law. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. I believe that the Wisconsin Supreme Court Case, In the Interest of Jerrell C.J., 2004 WI App 9, 269 Wis.2d 442, has had a significant positive impact on the people of Wisconsin. Prior to this case being decided, law enforcement jurisdictions across the State were inconsistent in juvenile interrogations. Most did not record interrogations. Additionally, many of the parents of my juvenile clients would be shocked (and still are) when I would tell them that the police does not have to contact them or allow them to be in the room when they interrogate their child. Requiring police to electronically record all juvenile interrogations provided some protections to juveniles. The decision also explained the benefits from recording juvenile interrogations: (1) it will provide courts with a more accurate and reliable record of the juvenile's interrogation, (2) it will reduce the number of disputes over Miranda and voluntariness issues for juveniles, (3) it will protect the individual interest of police officers wrongfully accused of improper tactics, (4) it will enhance law enforcement interrogations of juveniles, and (5) it will protect the rights of the accused. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: One judge that I admire is Judge James Bolgert in Sheboygan County. A few months after graduating from law school, obtained a position in the Sheboygan County Public Defender's Office. I was advised how conservative the judges were in Sheboygan, except for Judge Bolgert. I was also advised that he was not afraid of going below the prosecutor's recommendation (and even at times going below the defense attorney's recommendation). However, my respect and admiration for him was for the way he treated the defendants. He would allow the defendants an opportunity to tell their story and explain how they ended up in the situation that they were in. He gave first time offenders the benefit of the doubt, but would be a little harsher on probation violators. During sentencing, he took into consideration the person's history, or lack of history, their support system, their mental health or AODA, as well as other factors. As a new attorney, he was patient with me. He understood the caseload of public defenders, so he would allow public defenders to appear at 8:30, before private attorneys. This helped me to create a good habit of getting to court early. He also had a month orange book club. He would meet with attorneys from across the county once a month during the lunch hour to review new cases that came out. This was also helpful to meet in staying current with new case law. The second judge that I admire is Judge John DiMotto in Milwaukee County. A number of years ago Judge DiMotto rotated to the TPR calendar at Children Court. He had a reputation of knowing the law extremely well and he expected attorneys that appeared before him to know the law and be prepared. He did not disappoint me. I learned so much in the area of civil law in those two years. He was approachable. The proper role of a judge: The proper role of a judge is to interpret the law and be an impartial decision maker. Judges must be fair and treat all parties equal, removing any bias. They must be firm, but humble. They must be able to communicate effectively, but with the right temperament
0 Comments
"Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Theresa A. Beck
Appointed to: Jefferson County Circuit Court Appointment date: July 26, 2024, to term ending July 31, 2025 Education: Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Whitewater High School – Lake Mills High, Lake Mills, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: May 2010-present – Assistant district attorney, Jefferson County, Jefferson, Wisconsin January 2009-May 2010 – Attorney-partner, Beck & Kiewit, S.C., Jefferson, Wisconsin June 2000-December 2008 – Associate attorney, Monogue & Witt, S.C., Jefferson, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin General character of practice: ln my current role as an Assistant District Attorney I am assigned juvenile delinquency, criminal (misdemeanor and felony), and criminal traffic referrals. My practice includes the responsibility for reviewing and making charging decisions, litigating pre-trial motions, negotiating offers to resolve cases and representing the State and or County at trial. In juvenile, criminal misdemeanor and criminal traffic cases, I am responsible for representing the State or County in appellate matters. My practice previously included the prosecution of Chapter 48 cases, including Children in Need of Protection and Services and Termination of Parental Rights cases, between 2010 through 2019. Describe typical clients: In my capacity as an Assistant District Attorney, the client is both the State of Wisconsin and Jefferson County. The cases involve prosecution of criminal, traffic and juvenile matters on behalf of those entities. My current areas of specialty are criminal and juvenile law. While in private practice, my specialty was family, and juvenile law I also was appointed by the courts as a GAL tasked with representing the best interests of children in custody matters. Number of cases tried to verdict: approximately 85-90 cases List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: (1) State v. Terrance Curtis, Jefferson County Case No. 15CF359 . . . . This is a First-Degree Reckless Homicide case that originated in 2015. The matter involved the death of a young child in a rural Jefferson County residence. I was assigned the case by the District Attorney, Susan Happ after the matter was charged. I was the sole prosecutor for the case, through pre-trial litigation, trial, and all post conviction litigation. The appellate work on this file was handled by the Wisconsin Department of Justice Appellate Division, as the case made its way from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court, where it was affirmed and remanded back to the Circuit Court. After exhausting his appellate issues, the defendant recently filed a Motion under Section 974.06 requesting a new trial. The matter is currently inactive, pending an evaluation by the State Public Defender's Office and the filing of a responsive brief by defense counsel. Two of the primary issues at trial and in post-conviction practice have been "Denny" third party evidence and a dispute over the victim's cause of death. The trial was significant for a number of reasons. The evidentiary issues were complex during the trial. Specifically, the allegation that a third party within the home was responsible for the child's death and that the injuries sustained by the victim were caused by a fall rather than multiple blunt force trauma injuries. The testimony at trial relied heavily on scientific/technical opinions by the medical examiner. The defense expert at trial, attempted to opine as to cause and manner of death, despite lacking sufficient credentials to render those opinions. The trial involved conflicting experts on a variety of issues. This matter was tried to a jury in a weeklong trial that resulted in a conviction and a significant prison sentence. Given the severity of the crime, the technical nature of the evidence, the sheer number of witnesses, and exhibits as well as the impact on the victim's family; this matter is one of the most significant trials of my career thus far. #2) State of Wisconsin v. Mark Salgado, Jefferson County Case No. 18CF118 . . . . This matter is an Attempted Homicide, Kidnapping and Substantial battery case involving a multi hour standoff with law enforcement at a local motel. The primary defense argument was that this incident was mental health related, namely it was a botched self-harm episode, rather than an intentional attempt to harm the victim. The defendant entered a not guilty & NGI plea during the pre-trial phase of the case. A subsequent evaluation of the defendant did not support the claim of NGI. The defendant maintained his NGI plea despite the lack of support by the court appointed evaluator. Defense counsel did not seek to retain their own expert to address NGI matters, their strategy appeared to be to cross examine the State's expert vigorously at trial. Just prior to the commencement of the trial, the defendant elected to waive his right to a jury and proceed to a bench trial in 2019. After the State's evidentiary presentation, the defendant withdrew his NGI plea and elected to testify in his own defense. One of the significant issues addressed prior to and during the trial was the defense strategy of not retaining their own NGI expert. The Court was required to address whether an NGI claim could be substantiated based solely on the cross examination of the court appointed evaluator, without additional expert testimony. Issues of who had the burden of persuasion and production of evidence were highlighted by the Court related to the NGI aspect of the case. The trial court took extra precautions to ensure that the defendant understood the proceedings, given his NGI claim. At the conclusion of the trial, the defendant was found guilty on all the charges and later sentenced to prison. The convictions were later affirmed by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court denied the Petition for Review. There is no current motion practice before the trial court. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: None Non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation): None Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None Previous runs for public office: None All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Joann Miller, Jefferson County Circuit Court, Br. 3, 2015 Jennifer Weston, Jefferson County Circuit Court, Br. 1, 2009 Susan Happ, Attorney General, 2014 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Council for Performing Arts in Jefferson County, executive committee secretary, May 2004-June 2010 Campus Guardians of Wisconsin, board member, February 2024-present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: My primary volunteer service has been with the State Bar High School Mock Trial Tournament during the previous 8 years. I became a volunteer for the Juneau regional tournament, volunteering annually in the competition. My roles have been everything from being a score sheet runner, acting as a performance judge and a presiding judge for competitions. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: The justice system is a vital component to our society. Circuit Court judges are the gatekeepers of the legal system, and they must confront a large and diverse case load. This significant responsibility should be fulfilled by judges who have experience in multiple areas of the law, who have excellent interpersonal and administrative skills, and by individuals who can maintain an even judicial temperament. In addition to addressing the courtroom aspects of the position, a judge must be able to successfully interact with other judicial system stakeholders, to ensure the court system is running smoothly. Citizens who come before the courts are best served by judges who have practical experience in the law. A judge who can quickly understand and narrow the issues to be decided, apply the rules of evidence to arrive at a conclusion that is lawful, and fair to the parties involved, provides the best outcome. This approach also promotes efficiency in calendar management, to ensure cases are resolved promptly, and the parties can reach finality without unnecessary delay. In the previous 24 years, I have taken part in various aspects of the justice system, allowing me to accumulate the skills necessary to fulfill the duties of a judge. As a private practice attorney and a prosecutor, I have gained experience in multiple areas of law, including family law, juvenile law, guardian ad litem work, criminal law, civil litigation, and probate law. I have litigated my entire career in the circuit courts of Jefferson County. This experience has provided me with an understanding of how the circuit court system functions in Jefferson County. I have established relationships with many of the stakeholders involved in the legal system. As a lifelong resident of Jefferson County, I have developed relationships with many individuals who live in the area, providing an opportunity to fine tune my interpersonal skills, and to gain the trust of individuals who need legal assistance. The system will benefit from someone who can hit the ground running, is familiar with the existing framework of the County, and has the necessary skills to fulfill the obligations of the position. I believe that my experience, and my existing relationships within the system, and my temperament make me an ideal candidate to fulfill the obligations of the role of a circuit court judge. Decisions by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court which have impacted the people of Wisconsin: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022) The United States Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade after 49 years of well settled law impacted the citizens of Wisconsin by removing a conduit to reproductive care. The legacy of the decision created uncertainty for patients and medical providers in Wisconsin and all over the United States. The removal of the protections of Roe has impacted the reproductive rights of our citizens today in a negative manner. After Roe was overturned, the state was left with the 1849 law, which contains no exceptions, and is significantly outdated. The law was authored before issues such as alternative conception methods were even contemplated. Subsequent legal challenges to the law such as the December 2023 ruling from Dane County, has done little to alleviate the uncertainty around reproductive care. The Dane County decision is working its way through the appellate courts, leaving the matter unresolved. Many medical professionals have expressed fear of losing their license or being prosecuted for providing care to their patients. Individuals who need medical care may be forced to seek these services outside of the State. They face potential barriers of locating a physician or clinic to perform the services, increased costs, and the inability to utilize insurance coverage. The politics of this decision has impacted a vital relationship in society, namely the relationship between a doctor and a patient. Until there is some legal resolution to this issue, or the law is revisited, medical professionals will be hampered from providing care for patients, and it may discourage doctors from continuing the practice of medicine in Wisconsin, leaving fewer options for patients. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: (1) Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson Although no longer with us, Chief Justice Abrahamson left a long-lasting legacy on the Wisconsin legal system. Her dedication to educating the public about the legal system and its role in society was remarkable. From her tenure as a law professor through her time on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, she devoted her life to the education of individuals on the rule of law and fought to increase accessibility to the legal system. Her support of pro se litigant clinics is one example. Justice Abrahamson recognized a need to address the growing percentage of self-represented parties. She recognized that providing the necessary tools to self-represented individuals allowed the system to function more effectively and increased public confidence. This approach allows stakeholders to fulfill their obligations. Specifically for judges, they can maintain their neutrality, and decide cases based solely upon the facts and the law. These contributions to the enhancement of the functioning of the legal system benefit everyone. Justice Abrahamson spent much of her time trying to improve the justice system. Her efforts to educate litigants on procedure and thus improve accessibility to the justice system have promoted confidence in a system that is often complex and difficult to navigate. Justice Abrahamson’s efforts showed a devotion to law that is admirable. 2) Former Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge-Jacqueline Erwin Judge Erwin was a presiding judge in Branch 3 of the Jefferson County Circuit court system for twenty-two years. She retired from the bench in January 2013. During her tenure on the bench, Judge Erwin exhibited many admirable qualities which helped her fulfill her obligations as a judge. She is smart, tough, and fair. She worked hard and expected others to do the same. Judge Erwin was well versed in the law, and she worked extremely hard to remain up to date as the body of law changed. In areas of the law where she had not previously practiced, she did her research. She took notes, she prepared her files, and she was always ready to address her caseload in an efficient and prompt manner. She was constantly striving to be a better judge. She expected the same level of commitment from the lawyers and litigants who appeared in her courtroom. She expected all parties to conduct themselves in accordance with legal and moral ethics and to maintain professionalism in her court. She challenged me and others to be better lawyers. In her decisions, Judge Erwin was tough, yet fair. Her decisions were rarely overturned on appeal. When I think of the qualities a judge must possess to effectively fulfill the obligations of the position, Judge Erwin personifies all of them. Those qualities of a strong intellect, a desire to continue learning, a strong sense of ethics and professionalism and compassion and empathy are all qualities that I strive to exemplify every day. The proper role of a judge: Circuit Court judges are the gatekeepers of the legal system. Their responsibilities include presiding over proceedings, maintaining order in the court, and ensuring the prompt administration of justice. A judge must also always maintain impartiality and decorum. Judges must be educated in multiple areas of the law and have a working knowledge of the rules of criminal and civil procedure as trial court judges preside over diverse types of proceedings. One of the primary duties of a judge requires the determination of the admissibility, and relevance of evidence offered by the parties. A judge should ensure that for all hearings there is a proper record kept of the proceedings. Judges should ensure that all parties have a chance to be heard and present their evidence and arguments. Once the parties have fulfilled their duties, it is incumbent upon the judge to apply the law, and exercise appropriate discretion, rendering a prompt decision to the parties, setting forth the basis for their decision, on the record, or in writing. In a hearing involving a jury, the judge also acts as a director of the proceedings to ensure that the jurors are informed of their duties and their general needs are addressed during their duty. A judge must ensure that a jury is properly instructed on the law and ensure that the jury only hears relevant and non-prejudicial information. A judge also needs to have excellent interpersonal skills, as they are dealing with the litigants, lawyers, victims, jurors, other magistrates and court personnel on a daily basis. A judge should always ensure that professional courtesy is maintained and should expect courteous behavior of those who appear in court. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Payal Khandhar
Appointed to: Dane County Circuit Court Appointment date: June 17, 2024, to term ending July 31, 2025 Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin-Madison Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Madison High School – York Community High, Elmhurst, Illinois Recent legal employment: May 2016-present – Attorney/owner, Jasti & Khandhar, Madison, Wisconsin April 2012-May 2016 – Assistant state public defender, Madison, Wisconsin August 2009-April 2012 – Assistant state public defender, Spooner, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin General character of practice: My practice is primarily state and federal criminal defense. Half, to two-thirds of my cases are appointments through the State or Federal Public Defender's Offices. Since 2018 I have also conducted Supplemental Hearings as a Supplement Court Commissioner for Dane County Branch 7. Describe typical clients: My clients are predominantly young, indigent, and have many obstacles in their lives. I have developed a reputation of working well with individuals deemed to be 'difficult clients.' Most commonly, I receive referrals for individuals who struggle with mental illness and those who are distrustful of the system. Number of cases tried to verdict: 17 to verdict; 2 as second chair; 1 as standby counsel List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: I have not included case names or case numbers per the advice of Ethics Counsel for the State Bar of Wisconsin. Dane County Case Judge Julie Genovese Assistant District Attorney Paul Humphrey I was appointed to this case in July of 2021 through the Criminal Defense Project. It was a fraud case with complicated financial and medical issues. This case was outside of my area of expertise, but as part of the Criminal Defense Project you are expected to take all cases appointed to you. My client had multiple previous attorneys who withdrew from the case. I was appointed as the sole attorney on the case, and I tried it alone. Ultimately, in September of 2022 we had a four day jury trial. After five hours of deliberation, the jury found my client not guilty of all charges. This was my first jury trial after COVID. It also required the cross-examination of numerous medical experts. The discovery included extensive financial and medical records. After not trying cases during COVID, starting with such a complicated case was overwhelming and intimidating. I worked hard to give my client the best possible chance of success at trial. Even before the verdict, my client thanked me because my hours of dedication to his case were evident during every part of the trial. Dane County Case Judge Jill Karofsky Assistant District Attorney Matthew Moeser and Assistant District Attorney Tracy McMiller I was appointed to represent my client in October of 2018 for his federal charges and ultimately took over his state cases in January of 2019 when he was dissatisfied with his state attorney. I tried the state case alone in April of 2019. I was very nervous at the beginning of this trial because we did not have many facts in our favor. Regardless, my client wanted a trial and deserved to have the best possible trial given the facts. Everything was contested in this trial. Very few decisions went in our favor. Many of the alleged offenses were captured on surveillance video or discussed over recorded jail calls. Given the circumstances, I had to be creative in presenting my client's defense in a way that incorporated all of the bad facts, but still supported not guilty verdicts. Ultimately, the jury deliberated for five and a half hours (over two days) before returning guilty verdicts on seven of the nine charges The fact that the jury took so long to deliberate confirmed that I had presented a strong defense for my client, despite the evidence not being in our favor. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I regularly represent clients in contested revocation hearings before the Division of Hearings and Appeals. Over the last 15 years, I would estimate that I have had approximately 60 contested revocation hearings. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation): None Previous runs for public office: None listed Public offices to which you were appointed or elected: November 2018-present – appointed supplemental court commissioner, Madison, Wisconsin Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: Treasurer - Campaign to Elect Diane Schlipper for Dane County Circuit Judge, Branch 3 All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Diane Schlipper, Dane County Circuit Court judge, 2022 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Federal Defender Services of Wisconsin, board of directors, September 2019-present ARC Community Services, board of directors, April 2024-present WACDL, member, July 2016-present DCCDLA, member, March 2017-present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: JustDane JustDane is a non-profit agency that assists justice impacted individuals, and focuses on systematic change, to create a just and equitable community. I served on the JustDane (formerly known as Madison area Urban Ministries) Board of Directors from 2003 - 2009 and again from 2016 to 2023. For the last five years I was the Board President. I helped lead the organization through strategic planning as well as a name change. Merit Selection Panel for the Reappointment of the Part-Time Magistrate Judge I served on the Merit Selection Panel that ultimately recommended Magistrate Judge Peter Oppeneer for reappointment in the Western District of Wisconsin. I was appointed to this committee by Chief Judge James D. Peterson in July of 2021. Madison Metropolitan School District From March of 2017 to October 2018 I served on the Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD) ad hoc Education Resource Officer (ERO) Committee where we reevaluated the Madison Police Department's (MPD) contract with MMSD. This contract places MPD Officers in each of the four major MMSD High Schools. This was a contentious and time consuming committee. Tipping the Scales Since Spring of 2021, once a year, I co-teach a lesson on racial profiling to East High School students in the Dane County Courthouse as part of the Tipping the Scales Program. The purpose of this program is expose high school student to a diverse set of lawyers that are otherwise underrepresented in the field. Before beginning the lesson, we share our paths to becoming lawyers and educate the students about the importance of diversity in the legal system. Red Caboose Day Care Center From the Fall of 2013 to the Fall of 2018 I served on the Health, Nutrition, and Safety Committee to help ensure healthy meals and a safe environment for the children at the daycare. From the Fall of 2011 to the Fall of 2016 I also served on the Personnel Committee helping the agency update and rewrite personnel policies and job descriptions. I periodically volunteer with Legal Action at their Expungement Clinics. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: Although I have been an attorney for fourteen years, I have spent the last twenty years committed to creating a just and equitable community. I started my journey as a case manager in a residential facility, supervising women released from prison. This was my first exposure to the justice system. Working alongside the Department of Corrections and the Bureau of Prisons, I gained an understanding of the complexity in balancing the needs of formerly incarcerated people against the needs of the community to which they returned. I built on that experience as a neighborhood-based case worker, assisting low-income families to stabilize their housing. I was fortunate to have these experiences before I began law school. They allowed me to envision the real-life consequences of what was otherwise presented as theoretical legal concepts in a classroom. I continued to engage with the community during law school, acting as the community service liaison for a student organization. This background gave me a solid foundation for my first legal job as an Assistant State Public Defender. As an Assistant State Public Defender, I practiced indigent defense where I advocated for justice and equity one case at a time. Eventually, I left the Public Defender’s Office to dedicate more time to each case. Regardless, most of my work in private practice is still indigent defense. The flexibility of private practice allows me to increase my volunteer work to address broader issues of justice and equity. Additionally, as a private practitioner, I have taken on the roles of supplemental court commissioner and guardian ad litem. These different roles balanced and broadened my concept of justice. As a circuit court judge, I will have an opportunity to incorporate all my experiences to make just and equitable decisions. It will be a continuation of my commitment to the community. Circuit Court Judge would be the next step in my career dedicated to serving the people of Wisconsin. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. Within the last few years alone, there have been life changing court decisions that will have widespread impact on the people of Wisconsin. Although by comparison State v. Lickes, 394 Wis. 2d 161 (2021), may not seem significant to some, it is the case that has impacted the greatest number of my young clients with criminal convictions. In Lickes, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that (1) a violation of a Department of Corrections (DOC) imposed condition of probation, not just a court ordered condition of probation, is sufficient to deny an individual expungement; and (2) if an individual violates a DOC imposed condition of probation, the Circuit Court does not have the discretion to find that the individual otherwise successfully completed their sentence for the purpose of expungement. The purpose of probation is to allow an individual to learn and grow while being safely monitored in the community. Individuals are placed on probation after taking responsibility and pleading guilty to criminal charges, so there is no doubt that they previously struggled to follow the rules. With young defendants, their charges are often the result of immaturity, impulsivity, the influence of negative peers, substance use disorder, undiagnosed mental health issues, trauma, or other factors that do not immediately go away simply by being placed on probation. As such, it should come as no surprise that many continue to struggle while they are supervised, and may continue to make poor choices while on their road to becoming law abiding adults. While on supervision, if the poor choice does not require revocation, it should be used an opportunity to learn with the guidance and monitoring of the DOC. If an individual can learn from their mistakes and still make forward progress, they should not lose the option for expungement. Taking away the opportunity for expungement with any rules violation makes expungement unattainable to most, if not all my clients. If the community would not otherwise be harmed, and it is in the best interest of the individual who has otherwise successfully completed their sentence, demanding perfection is an unnecessary and impossible standard to impose upon a young person. Prior to Lickes, I commonly negotiated a recommendation for expungement as part of a plea agreement. Although the requirements for expungement in Wisconsin were already far more stringent than most other jurisdictions, expungement after completing a sentence was still a possibility for many of my young clients. After Lickes, I no longer emphasize the value of expungement. Although I want to believe my clients can be successful on probation, it is unlikely that any young person who is already in the criminal justice system can complete years of probation without a single rules violation. And now, because of Lickes, the record of their youthful mistakes will continue to remain public. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg There are many reasons to admire Justice Ginsburg – her legal acumen, her professional accomplishments, and her forward thinking on social justice issues. In addition to all these attributes, above all, I admire her lifelong ability to maintain true to her beliefs in the face of opposition. Often, throughout my life, I have been one of few women of color in the room. In professional settings, it is common for me to be the only woman of color. Because my experiences have been different than many of my professional colleagues, at times my perspective and my opinions are also different. When you are the only person in the room in your demographic, and you hold a different opinion, it takes a lot of courage to share that opinion. It is sometimes easier to convince yourself that your opinion must be wrong, or holds less value. Justice Ginsburg was one of very few women in her law school. She was one of very few women law professors. For much of her service, she was one of just two women on the Supreme Court of the United States. Justice Ginsburg spent most of her career being the only woman in the room. And yet she had the courage to maintain her position and express her opinions. Although in recent years she became famous for dissenting against the majority opinion, I can only imagine how difficult it was early in her career. Fortunately for us all, Justice Ginsburg remained true to her beliefs. And for that, I admire her courage. Dane County Judge John Markson and Burnett County Judge Kenneth Kutz I have had the privilege of appearing in front of both Judge Markson and Judge Kutz numerous times. Although they are different judges in many ways, they share common traits that I admire as an individual and as an advocate. Both judges treated every individual in the courtroom with respect. Regardless of your role in the case, when either judge spoke to you, you felt valued and heard. Both judges had a calm demeanor, no matter how litigious the case. This set the tone for their courtrooms, impacting how court staff and attorneys treated each other. Both Judge Markson and Judge Kutz had the ability to impose lengthy prison sentences on defendants convicted of committing serious crimes while still treating them with dignity. They acknowledged that defendants could commit terrible offenses and still not inherently be bad people. I have never heard either Judge Markson or Judge Kutz raise their voice, or say anything to humiliate or degrade a defendant. Among the dozens of judges I have practiced in front of over fifteen years, Judge Markson and Judge Kutz distinguish themselves as judges who embody the qualities of an excellent judge. The proper role of a judge: Fundamentally, a judge’s role is as a neutral and impartial decision maker. All judges make decisions, but how a judge conducts hearings, reviews filings, and comes to a decision can vary wildly as anyone who has practiced in front of different judges can attest to. The proper role of a judge is as a patient listener. Parties deserve the opportunity to be heard. The best judges listen, ask thoughtful questions, are transparent with their concerns, and communicate their decisions clearly. They are aware of their own gaps in knowledge, and bridge those gaps with hard work and intelligence. The proper role of a judge is to treat all parties with dignity and respect. I know firsthand that parties that leave the courtroom feeling like they were heard, and treated respectfully, are more willing to accept a decision even if a judge rules against them. Maintaining this culture within a courtroom also encourages all parties to treat each other accordingly. A judge should also be open-minded in making their decisions. Judges earn their role as a decision maker because of their education and experience. Unfortunately, judges sometimes presume that because they have been chosen to be the decision maker, they must have all the right answers. The proper role of a judge is to continue to educate themselves about the areas in which they preside, and be open to being educated by the parties about the case in front of them. A judge’s role is also to make decisions in a timely matter. Unquestionably, cases have an enormous impact on the named parties. What is often less visible, but equally important, is how those decisions impact the family of those parties, their employers, the community, and so on. Even if a decision is not in an individual’s favor, deciding in a timely manner allows the parties to cope with the outcome, and move on with their lives. Ultimately, the proper role of a judge is to strive to achieve justice with each case they preside over. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Jon Richards
Appointed to: Milwaukee County Circuit Court Appointment date: Sept. 21, 2020 (elected 2021 to term ending Aug. 1, 2027) Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin Undergraduate – Lawrence University, Appleton, Wisconsin High School – Waukesha North High School, Waukesha, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: November 2015-present – Attorney and partner, Ziino, Germanotta, Knoll & Christensen, Milwaukee, Wisconsin August 2012-November 2015 – Attorney and shareholder, Richards Law Office, S.C., no longer operating January 1999-December 2014 – State representative, Wisconsin State Assembly January 2012-August 2012 – Attorney, Walny Legal Group, LLC, Milwaukee, Wisconsin September 2009-November 2011 – Attorney, Offices of Emmanuel Mamalakis, S.C., Wauwatosa, Wisconsin April 2002-August 2009 – Attorney, Jeffrey S. Hynes & Associates, S.C., Elm Grove, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: Wisconsin Supreme Court Federal Courts (unspecified) General character of practice: I am a partner in a general practice law firm. My firm has been operating for nearly 70 years and our client base is a broad range of people, some from families who have worked with our firm for many years. I enjoy the challenge of effectively addressing the variety of matters my clients bring to me. I manage my own clients and am, in the vast majority of cases, solely responsible for handling their matters. My practice involves a great deal of interaction with clients, the drafting and review of complex documents, formulating strategies for estate plans and business transactions, litigation and carrying out of negotiations on behalf of my clients. When my clients are involved disputes, I have represented them in the courts, in front of administrative agencies, in arbitrations and in informal negotiations. As one example of my work, two years ago I was the lead attorney representing the seller of a successful, heavily-regulated business with several employees which he had operated for more than three decades. After much negotiation and successful procurement of government approvals, we completed the sale and allowed my client to retire. In another recent matter, I successfully worked with clients to create and obtain IRS recognition for a non-profit organization that uses contributions from the United States to fund the construction and operation of a series of children's homes in Kenya. I also recently worked with a family to handle the affairs of a woman who died, suddenly and unexpectedly, leaving a son. I regularly take on pro bono matters. In my pro bono work I have handled evictions, probate matters, municipal citations, non-profit law, real estate matters, election law and policy projects. In addition to my traditional legal work, I am the director of a multi-disciplinary coalition that is helping to address the opioid crisis and protect Lake Michigan through the safe disposal of unused medicine. Describe typical clients: My clients come from a broad cross-section of society - some far more financially sound, emotionally stable and familiar with the legal system than others. While some of my clients engage me to help them with the legal issues involved with expanding their business, others engage me when they are deeply in debt or when they are being evicted. I have represented plaintiffs in personal injury actions. I have drafted complex estate plans and marital property agreements for affluent clients and drafted simple wills for people with no close relatives and few worldly possessions. I have represented for-profit companies, to handle a wide range of business and corporate governance matters, and non-profit organizations. My practice areas are business counselling including contract negotiations and the buying and selling of businesses, real estate, estate planning, probate administration, landlord-tenant work, family law, disability law, non-profit law and representing plaintiffs in personal injury cases. I have also practiced elections law and have helped with several efforts to ensure that voters are able to cast their votes without unlawful interference. Number of cases tried to verdict: Over my career, the vast majority of my cases have settled before a complete trial to a verdict. I have tried five cases to a verdict. List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: 1. GTO Stucco & Designs, LLC v. Brookfield Ventures, LLC. Milwaukee County Case Number 18 CV 6964. I represented the plaintiff which was seeking payment for work it had performed. The case was significant because of its relative complexity. It involved several fact and expert witnesses, the application of construction law, the enforcement of a mandatory arbitration clause in the parties' agreement, and the application of arbitration rules to our dispute. Through my own investigation and cultivation of a strong expert witness, we developed a convincing set of facts and legal theories which produced a positive outcome for my client: a good settlement one day before arbitration was to begin. 2. Divall Midland Associates Limited Partnership II v. Kathleen Buck. Ozaukee County Case Number 2019 SC 226. I represented the defendant who was recovering from a stroke. My client asserted that her lease had been wrongfully terminated and that her possessions and car had been unlawfully discarded by the landlord while my client was still in an assisted care facility. The case was challenging because my client had communication challenges due to her stroke, the law was tilted heavily in the landlord's favor, and new facts continually came to light. I was able to overcome those challenges, the landlord dismissed the eviction action they had filed and I was able to resolve the case to my client's satisfaction. 3. Eagle View Manor v. Wisconsin Department of Health Services. Wisconsin Division of Hearings and Appeals Case No. ML-19-0152. I represented the petitioner, the operator of a nursing home that was disputing violations issued against by the Department of Health Services. The case was extremely fact-intensive and involved a significant amount fact gathering, applying those facts to the statutes and administrative rules governing nursing homes and several long and detailed meetings with counsel for the Department of Health Services to challenge their findings, argue the law and address their concerns. We were able to address the department's concerns, they granted the relief my client requested and my client dismissed the appeal. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I have served as the sole attorney representing clients in adversary proceedings before administrative law judges (ALJs) for the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development (DWD) and for the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS). I have also represented clients before municipal licensing committees. My cases before DWD ALJs concerned a.) determining the appropriate party responsible for the workers compensation obligations for a particular set of employees, b.) whether people who work for my clients should be considered independent contractors or employees and c.) whether my client owed unemployment benefits to a terminated employee. In cases before the DHS ALJ I represented the owner of a nursing home to resolve citations issued against properties it owns. Before municipal licensing committees, I have represented clients who were transferring their business license from one party to another or who were seeking to renew their licenses under challenging circumstances. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). I have engaged in several forums to resolve disputes through mediation and arbitration. I successfully completed mediation or arbitration in each matter in which I participated. I have successfully arbitrated personal injury cases, disputes over the ownership interests in a company, and disputes over property interests when a couple ended their relationship. Last year, I successfully petitioned the court to compel arbitration to enforce a mandatory arbitration clause in a construction contract. On the eve of the arbitration we settled the case. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: Milwaukee County Election Counsel for Democratic Party of Wisconsin, 09/2014 to 11/2014 Treasurer, Assembly Democratic Campaign Committee, 2004-2008 Volunteer on many campaigns for President, United States Senate, United States Congress, Mayor, State Assembly and State Senate All offices to which you were appointed or elected: State representative, elected, January 1999-December 2014 Supplemental court commissioner, appointed, June 2017-present Community special prosecutor, appointed, November 2011-April 2012 Previous runs for public office: Attorney general, defeated in August 2014 primary State representative, won elections 1998-2012 All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Over the years I have endorsed many people for judicial or non-partisan offices. Below is a representative list of those I have endorsed. Jill Karofsky, Supreme Court justice, 2019 Brett Blomme, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2019 Rebecca Kiefer, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2019 Chris Larson, Milwaukee County executive, 2019 Tom Barrett, Milwaukee mayor, 2020, 2016, 2012, 2008, 2004 Jo Casta Zamarripa, Milwaukee alder, 2019 Marina Dimitrijevich, Milwaukee alder, 2019 Lisa Neubauer, Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, 2017 Rebecca Dallet, Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, 2016 Danielle Shelton, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2018 Hannah Dugan, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2016 Kritsi Yang, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2017 Laura Gramling Perez, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2015 Gwen Connelly, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2015 David Feiss, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2014 Joe Donald, Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, 2015 Carolina Stark, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2012 Mark Sanders, Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, 2011 Chris Abele, Milwaukee County executive, 2012 Louis Butler, Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, 2007 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: American Constitution Society, board member, Milwaukee chapter, 2016-present Big Brothers/Big Sisters of Milwaukee, mentor to my 'little brother,' 2007-2019 Woodlands School, Inc., trustee and committee member, 2019-present Take Back My Meds, MKE, coalition director, September 2015-present Milwaukee County Substance Abuse and Prevention Coalition, member, 2016-present Medical Society of Milwaukee County, board member, 2015-2018 Brady Street Area Association, board member, 2000-2019 Immanuel Presbyterian Church, board member, trustee and Sunday school teacher, assorted dates from 2015-present Wisconsin Center District, board member, 2009-2011 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: My pro bono legal work has included work for clients of LOTUS Legal Clinic, the clients of which are survivors of human trafficking. I have helped them with real estate and probate matters. Another aspect of my work with LOTUS is strengthening the Wisconsin statute that makes it possible for survivors of human trafficking to clear certain convictions from their criminal records that resulted from them being coerced by their traffickers. I have worked with prosecutors, judges and legislators to develop such a statute that can be workable and effective. I have also represented tenants who were being evicted from their apartments or whose property was unlawfully taken by their landlord after the tenant left the premises. I have successfully represented those clients and have had their eviction actions dismissed in Milwaukee and Ozaukee counties. I was a 'big brother', through the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program, for 12 years. We started when my 'little brother' was eight years old and he is now 20 and a father. I have learned a great deal from him and his family and I hope he learned a little from me. Life for my little brother is not, and has never been, easy. My little brother's circumstances were constantly changing. His family moved roughly every year, he had his possessions stolen more than once, and he experienced trauma several times. School was difficult. He is a kind, compassionate young man who likes to take care of others and loves animals. We continue to explore options for him to continue his education and improve his opportunities to make a living. My little brother knows he can come to me anytime, and I check in with him as well. Now that he is a young father he is working to provide for his daughter. His care for her and his commitment are wonderful. For several recent general elections I have served as a volunteer attorney on the Milwaukee Election Protection Team for the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. I have monitored polling locations in the City of Milwaukee to ensure that all eligible voters are able to cast their vote and have their vote counted. Finally, I have worked with the students in my Sunday school class to serve meals to homeless women and their families at the Cathedral Center in downtown Milwaukee and have helped pack meals for the homeless through the Larry Under the Bridge homeless meal program. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I want to be a judge because I care deeply about Milwaukee County and about the quality and integrity of the courts. I have the experience, temperament, and skill to be a judge who will apply the law accurately and fairly, run their court room efficiently and work to improve a justice system serving the needs of a diverse community where the scales of justice are often woefully unbalanced. My wide-ranging practice over nearly 25 years as an attorney has given me real-world knowledge about how various areas of the law impact people. Even when matters I worked on did not involve large dollar amounts, they almost always involved some of the largest transactions, most important decisions and most consequential moments for my clients. I would bring to the bench a deep understanding of how economics and power shape the issues raised to the court and the behavior of people appearing before the court. I have treated each client of mine with courtesy and respect and believe, whether people are at their best or at their worst, they still have rights that the justice system must honor. As a judge I would treat the people who come before me with that same level of courtesy and respect. I understand the need for judges to be impartial and to provide well-researched, reasoned, consistent and timely decisions that correctly apply the law and take into account the equities of a case. My sixteen years as a state legislator representing Milwaukee gave me invaluable training in dealing with a wide range of people fairly, effectively addressing complex social issues and creating lasting and positive change. I respect and understand what goes into making a law and the vital role of the courts in accurately and consistently interpreting and applying the laws passed by the elected representatives of the people. I believe judges need to be collaborative partners in efforts to make the justice system more accessible, more transparent and more equitable. Judges need to actively seek more knowledge about the forces shaping our society and resulting in matters before the court. I have led several initiatives to bring people together in Milwaukee County to create change. I worked with victims of gun violence and law enforcement officials to attempt to pass a law requiring background checks for gun purchases. I worked with judges in Milwaukee County Children's Court, the Office of the Public Defender, the Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office, the City of Milwaukee Office of Violence Prevention and community leaders to lay the groundwork for what became a comprehensive violence prevention plan for the city of Milwaukee modeled on best practices in other cities. I am currently working on an initiative with LOTUS Legal Clinic to address how the law treats survivors of human trafficking. I want to be a judge who will work for reform in our justice system. I want to bring my experience, passion for the community and work-ethic to the work of being a judge. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. I believe that Citizens United v. FEC (2010) has dramatically changed how politics works in our country for the worse. The ruling gave corporations the power to purchase advertising and otherwise participate in elections. It also held that corporations and unions can spend virtually unlimited sums to convince people to vote for or against political candidates, as long as the spending is independent of the candidates. Justice Stevens predicted in his dissent the decision "will undoubtedly cripple the ability of ordinary citizens, Congress, and the States to adopt even limited measures to protect against corporate domination of the electoral process." His prediction has been borne out. After Citizens United, other Supreme Court decisions opened the door to new regulations and laws regarding money and the elections system that benefit corporations at the expense of ordinary citizens. The resulting 'super PACs' and 'dark money' nonprofit organizations have created enormous opportunities for corporations to spend money influencing the political process with ever-diminishing transparency. In the 2014 U.S. Senate elections, as reported by the Center for Responsive Politics, outside spending more than doubled since 2010. In 2018, that figure more than doubled again. Also in 2018, the majority of outside spending on elections came either from dark money nonprofit organizations or groups receiving funding from those organizations. As money has poured into the election system in exponentially higher amounts the voices of ordinary citizens have increasingly been drowned out, the political power of the already rich and powerful has become stronger, and cynicism and division in our political system has grown markedly. The Wisconsin Supreme Court's League of Women Voters, et al. v. Walker, et al. (2014) decision hurt our democracy by upholding Wisconsin's voter identification law that makes voting more difficult for many Wisconsin residents. As Justice Abrahamson wrote in her dissent, "Without any evidence that in-person voter impersonation is a problem in Wisconsin, the voting restrictions the [Court approved gave] Wisconsin the most restrictive voting laws in America." I have seen first-hand, as an attorney monitoring elections in Milwaukee County and as a City of Milwaukee poll worker, the delays, frustration and embarrassment the voter identification law causes. Some citizens who show up to the polls are turned away because they did not have the paperwork required by the new law that would allow them to vote. I believe the restrictive voter identification law upheld by the court was a principal reason why 41,000 fewer people voted in the City of Milwaukee in the 2016 general election, when the law was in place, than in the 2012 general election, when the law was not in place. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: I admire Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's commitment to civil rights, her life-long quest for people to be treated equally under the law and the scholarship, gift for language and common sense she brings to her decisions and dissents. Instead of seeing the law as abstract and untouched by the lives of real people, she brings the real-world experience of litigants into her decisions. Her powerful dissent in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (2007), in which a woman was denied the ability to be paid the same as her male counterparts, called for Congress to address an improper interpretation of the law at issue. That call compelled Congress to take action and pass the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. I admire her belief, as she once stated in an interview, that the Constitution "has broad themes that were meant to grow with an evolving society" and is not a document meant only to govern the world as it existed in the 1780s. For example, with regard to the 14th Amendment, she clarified that gender equality is a constitutional right in United States v. Virginia (I996). Her dissent in Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) argued that in analyzing the equal protection clause in the 14th Amendment "[a]ctions designed to burden groups long denied full citizenship stature are not sensibly ranked with measures taken to hasten the day when entrenched discrimination and its aftereffects have been extirpated." I admire former Justice Shirley Abrahamson for her scholarship, for how she has stressed the importance of an independent court, for her work ethic, and for her focus on individual rights. I agree with her view that the Wisconsin constitution guarantees rights to individuals that are in addition to the rights provided by the United States constitution. I also admire her view, similar to Justice Ginsburg, that the law must evolve to meet the changing the needs of society. In these days when the judiciary is under attack, I admire her call for judicial independence. I admire her eagerness to learn how the courts operate in the lives of people who never appear before the Supreme Court, even serving for a short time to hear cases in Milwaukee County Small Claims Court. Finally, I admire her call for more transparency in the courts and leading the fight to allow cameras in the court. I admire Court of Appeals Judge Joe Donald for his leadership and commitment to the rights of people who appear before the court. As a Circuit Court Judge, he took on challenging leadership assignments, having served twice as the presiding judge in Milwaukee County Children's Court. In being the driving force to establish drug courts in Milwaukee County he has been an effective champion for innovation in the courts. He has consistently championed upholding the rights of individuals who appear before the courts, with a focus on procedural jurisprudence and on ensuring that investigations are done in a consistent and fair manner. The proper role of a judge: The overarching role of a judge is to dispense justice by interpreting and applying the law accurately, even-handedly and in a manner that best serves the community. A judge must ensure that the rights guaranteed to parties under the Constitution, especially due process rights, are protected. Where possible, it is important to set litigants up for success. For example, where addiction is the root cause of behavior that has brought a person before the court, requiring participation in a drug treatment program as part of a sentence. A judge must read through the pleadings and other parts of the case file and give all parties a chance to be heard. A judge must conduct trials in an even-handed manner and allow each side to present their case within the bounds of the rules of evidence and the rules of procedure. After each party has presented their case, the judge must interpret and apply the law, keeping up-to-date with recent developments. Interpretation requires carefully reading not only the laws and court decisions that bear on the matter, it also involves weighing the equities of a case to apply the law fairly and consistently. An important part of being a judge is reaching decisions. Even in difficult cases where the law or equities are not clear, a judge owes the people coming before them the ability to make decisions in an efficient manner. A judge should ensure that when a decision is made the person on the receiving end of the sentence or judgment has participated in the decision and not just had the decision thrust upon them. A judge bears a special responsibility to the community to be engaged in efforts to improve the justice system and the operation of the courts. Where possible, a judge should seek a deeper understanding of forces shaping society and actively work to find practical ways to apply that understanding to their work as a judge within the bounds of the law. A judge should also strive to make the courts and the justice system, to the extent possible, open and accessible to the public, especially to pro se litigants. For example, on the doors to his chambers, former judge Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Charles Kahn, posted a sign stating, "Welcome! This is an open and public courtroom! Please walk in." Former Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Michael Dwyer worked to make procedures in family court easy to understand for pro se litigants. A judge should work to reduce the intimidation and confusion many people feel when approaching the courts. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Bridget J. Schoenborn Appointed to: Waukesha County Circuit Court Appointment date: May 24, 2024, to term ending July 31, 2025 Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin-Madison Undergraduate – California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California High School – St. Lucy’s Priory High, Glendora, California Recent legal employment: May 2008-present – Assistant U.S. attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Milwaukee, Wisconsin June 2005-May 2008 – Pro se law clerk, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit General character of practice: Serves as a Criminal Division trial and appellate attorney representing the United States in all stages of the investigation and prosecution of federal offenses with an emphasis on complex narcotics offenses and related financial crimes. Responsible for the day-to-day prosecution of narcotics trafficking offenses, including drug conspiracies, illegal internet pharmacies, money laundering offenses, and violent crime. Pre-trial preparation of prosecution memoranda, search and seizure warrant affidavits, obtaining wiretap interception orders, criminal complaints, indictments, and plea agreements. Describe typical clients: Over the past 15 years, I have specialized in various practice areas, with particular emphasis on the following: drug conspiracies; illegal internet pharmacies; gang prosecutions; dogfighting offenses; firearms violations; money laundering and structuring offenses; and cryptocurrency seizures. Number of cases tried to verdict: 6 List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: United States v. Sanchez Vargas, et al., Case No. 20-Cr-127 (E.D. Wis.)(Hon. Pamela Pepper): In this matter, I represented the United States in all stages of the proceedings. This prosecution was based on a DEA investigation that began after an individual in Oconomowoc, who was purchasing controlled substances from an illegal internet pharmacy, committed suicide. The controlled substances, including Tapentadol, Carisoprodol, and Tramadol, were sold online without a prescription and mailed to customers across the country. Two California-based co-conspirators involved in shipping the controlled substances were convicted. This case was significant because it stopped the illegal distribution of pharmaceuticals through the website. Dates of involvement were: 2020 to 2023. Defense counsel: Gabriela Leija, Martin Pruhs, and Paul Basseliz. United States v. Gerardo Lara, et al., Case No. 21-Cr-204 (E.D. Wis.)(Hon. Lynn Adelman): In this matter, I am co-counsel in the prosecution of fourteen defendants charged with firearms violations, structuring offenses, and conspiracy to distribute crack and powder cocaine in Wisconsin and Illinois. To date, ten defendants have been convicted and sentenced. This case was significant because the conspiracy had connection to kilogram level cocaine distributors and many of the convicted defendants were career offenders who had significant criminal records. Dates of involvement are: 2021-present. Defense counsel: Michelle Jacobs, Edward Hunt, Eric Hart, Matt Ricci, Jeffrey Purnell, Kathleen Quinn, Christopher Cherella, Michael Hart, Martin Pruhs, Craig Johnson, and Angela Kachelski. United States v. Approximately 32,133.63 Tether (USDT) Cryptocurrency from Binance Account Number Ending 8770, Case No. 22-Cv-989 (E.D. Wis.)(Hon. Pamela Pepper): In this matter, the government pursued forfeiture of Tether cryptocurrency on grounds that it constituted wire fraud proceeds and was involved in money laundering. Specifically, between May 26 and May 28, 2022, A.D. provided $30,200 in U.S. currency in gift cards and Bitcoin to an individual falsely claiming that there was a warrant for victim A.D.'s arrest. The fraudster eventually converted A.D.'s money into Tether cryptocurrency, which was stored at Binance. The government tendered a seizure warrant to Binance and commenced judicial forfeiture of 32,133.63 Tether. After serving the Binance account holder via email and certified mail at his residence in India, and receiving no claim to the property, the government obtained default judgment and forfeited the asset. This case was significant because asset forfeiture enabled the return of fraud proceeds to victim A.D. Dates of involvement were 2022-2023. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I have not practiced before an administrative agency. However, as part of my criminal case responsibilities, I have prosecuted defendants whose terms of probation and extended supervision were revoked by an Administrative Law Judge. In connection with my civil practice, and as part of the forfeiture referral process, I am familiar with administrative law issues arising in matters handled by federal law enforcement agencies. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). In the criminal context, my non-litigation experience consists primarily in reviewing, drafting, and obtaining search and seizure warrants. I have prepared hundreds of search warrants for physical locations (residences, storage units, safety deposit boxes), electronic search warrants (email and social media accounts), and Title III wiretap intercepts. In the civil context, my non-litigation experience consists of preparing seizure warrants and conducting depositions. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: Not applicable Previous runs for public office: Not applicable All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Not applicable Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Elm Grove Police and Fire Commission, member, June 2022-present Elm Grove Woman’s Club, member, January 2022-present State Bar of Wisconsin, Diversity Clerkship Program Selection Committee, participant, 2020, 2021, 2022 Eastern District of Wisconsin Bar Association, co-chair, Criminal Committee, 2012-2018 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: From approximately 2006 to 2008, I was a member of the Eastern District of Wisconsin Bar Association Pro Bono Commitee. As a part of this committee, I reviewed policies and procedures for appointing pro bono attorneys to represent pro se parties in federal court. From approximately 2010 to 2014, I was a member of the Elm Grove Junior Guild. This organization has a strong emphasis on philanthropy, and for several years I was on the Memorial Day Parade Committee, which is responsible for organizing the annual parade in Elm Grove. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I want to serve as a Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge because I want to be the fair and impartial person who makes the thorough, well-informed, and challenging decisions needed to guide parties through litigation. I believe that this position is a natural progression from my current public service experience. I was a law clerk for nearly three years and have served as an Assistant United States Attorney for more than fifteen years. After seeing the judiciary from the inside, helping judges and drafting opinions, and then as a litigant, appearing before numerous district court and magistrate judges to argue on behalf of the United States, I believe that serving on the judiciary is where I need to go next to serve the people of Wisconsin. My qualifications for the position of being a circuit court judge have evolved. First, as a law clerk, I was in awe of the judges I worked with and for. My clerkship helped me appreciate the many-faceted role of a judge: to engage in thoughtful decision making, to learn about new areas of the law, to consider their judicial demeanor and appreciate that they are the public face of the court system, and, most importantly for me as a young lawyer, to be conscientious. As an example, I recall Magistrate Judge Patricia J. Gorence advising me to read pro se submissions carefully, because one meritorious argument could be nestled amongst dozens of others, nearly all of which were handwritten. Then, as a prosecutor, I sought to persuade judges to accept my reasoning and recommendations. Representing the United States, I am tasked with the ultimate goal of seeking justice. Justice, I learned, does not in every case call for a severe sentence or villainizing a perpetrator. Among many things, it means treating everyone, including defendants, with fairness and respect. As an example, I recall a case in which Judge Rudolph T. Randa sentenced the defendant, who had been incarcerated much of his life, to a significant term of prison based on his possession of a firearm and fentanyl. After imposing sentence, Judge Randa wished the defendant well and ask him to visit the judge's chambers upon his release from prison. I seek to be a circuit court judge because I have learned so much, both about what works and what does not, and I want to emulate the great judges I had the privilege of working with. I aspire to the conscientiousness of Magistrate Judge Gorence, the emotional awareness of Judge Randa, the preparedness of Judge William C. Griesbach, and the intellectual rigor of Judge Lynn Adelman. With this experience in mind, I believe that I am ready to serve as a Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. In Doubek v. Kaul, 2022WI931, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the Wisconsin disorderly conduct statute, Wis. Stat. § 947.01(1), is not a disqualifying predicate offense for purposes of carrying a concealed weapon. Doubek is important because, as the law currently stands, individuals may legally possess firearms even after having been convicted of domestic violence-related disorderly conduct, thereby exposing the public to an unacceptable risk of gun violence. Thankfully, Doubek’s dissent and the Attorney General’s proposed legislation demonstrate a desire to fix this legal loophole and reduce the risk of danger to the community. Daniel Doubek was convicted of disorderly conduct after breaking into his estranged wife’s trailer by smashing a window in the door, brandishing a 2 x 4 as a weapon, and loudly threatening her, telling her she “was dead.” When she yelled to the neighbors for help, he threatened to, “let her have it.” During this time, the couple’s four year old daughter slept nearby. Years later, Doubek successfully sought and obtained a concealed weapon license. However, in connection with a 2019 audit, the Wisconsin Department of Justice determined that he failed to meet one of the licensing requirements, namely he was “prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal or state law.” The federal law at issue, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), makes it illegal for an individual convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence to possess a firearm. Based on Doubek’s disorderly conduct conviction, the Department of Justice believed he was precluded from possessing a firearm and revoked his license. Doubek successfully argued before the Supreme Court that the disorderly conduct statute, section 947.01(1), is not a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” because it did not have “as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of deadly weapon.” Accordingly, he was not a prohibited person under federal law and was entitled to a concealed weapon license. The Court agreed with Doubek and the case was reversed and remanded. Although correctly decided, Doubek highlights a glaring omission in the Wisconsin Statutes. As Justice Jill Karofsky explained in concurrence, “although Doubek is legally correct, this result is as nonsensical as it is dangerous. In the realm of domestic violence, threats to kill, like the one Doubek made to his wife, more than double the risk of femicide.” And when a domestic abuse perpetrator, who has engaged in threats to kill or any other type of domestic violence, has access to a gun, the lethality risk for his victim increases significantly. Recognizing this deadly combination, Congress enacted a federal firearm ban on domestic violence misdemeanants, section 922(g)(9), limiting domestic abusers’ access to guns. On November 13, 2023, Attorney General Josh Kaul announced legislation to reorganize the crime of disorderly conduct and the definition of domestic abuse so that individuals convicted of domestic violence- related disorderly conduct offenses will be prohibited from possessing firearms, seeking to have Wisconsin join the effort to prevent this unacceptable risk of violence. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Patricia J. Gorence, Magistrate Judge In June 2005, Magistrate Judge Gorence hired me as a pro se law clerk. The pro se law clerks worked for all of the judges in the Eastern District of Wisconsin, conducting research and writing, preparing orders and opinions, and monitoring and moving civil dockets. At the time, I was a young mother and Magistrate Judge Gorence had grown children of her own. She was the first federal female magistrate in Milwaukee. As an advocate for women’s education and employment, and my direct supervisor, Magistrate Judge Gorence played a huge role in shaping me as a young lawyer. Beyond her personal guidance, I learned from watching Judge Gorence as she encouraged parties to reach agreements but was willing to make tough decisions when they could not. She crafted thorough and well-researched opinions, explaining her decisions in practical terms. Judge Gorence wanted the parties to feel heard, and often displayed compassion and empathy, but at the same time kept the proceedings moving at a steady pace. Finally, she treated everyone in her courtroom, from her staff and clerks, to attorneys and defendants, equally and with respect. Lynn Adelman, District Court Judge From 2005 to 2008, I worked with Judge Adelman as a pro se law clerk. It was immediately clear how much Judge Adelman loves being a judge and engaging with the law. Beyond his trial court responsibilities, he often sits by designation on the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and publishes articles about legal issues that are important to him. Working as a law clerk for Judge Adelman was not easy – his high standards demanded much of my research and writing skills – but I am a better lawyer as a result. Since joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office, I have appeared before Judge Adelman hundreds of times, and often in connection with my most significant cases. For example, during the summer of 2009, I prosecuted United States v. Bowie, Case No. 07-Cr-123 (E.D. Wis.), a week-long trial with numerous cooperating defendants as witnesses and dozens of wiretap intercepts as exhibits. At sentencing, Judge Adelman agreed that the defendant and his serious crimes posed a danger to the community and imposed a sentence of 253 months’ imprisonment. In the countless sentencing hearings I have had with him since, Judge Adelman and I do not always agree about the sentencing factors, offense enhancements, or guidelines ranges. However, regardless of the outcome, I immensely respect Judge Adelman for his intellectual honesty. I always feel heard and am confident that, although I may not get the outcome I seek, he is always prepared and thoughtful, using intellect and reason to support his findings. The proper role of a judge: Wisconsin Circuit Court Judges pledge to support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the State of Wisconsin, and to faithfully and impartially discharge their duties. It is the proper role of a judge to follow the statutory text and apply binding precedent, regardless of their personal beliefs. A judge should instill confidence in, and promote respect for, the legal system. I believe that a judge can accomplish this in the following ways. First, a judge must be as prepared as possible. This means reading the parties’ submissions and being ready to respond in court and in writing. It also means remaining present and meaningfully considering the arguments, issues, and facts raised on the record in open court. Next, a judge’s impartiality is critical. A judge must be committed to making thorough and intellectually honest decisions, and keeping an open mind until all of the issues are fully presented. Next, a judge should treat all those who appear in a courtroom fairly and equally. It is important to make litigants feel seen and heard, even though they may not receive the exact outcome they seek. The judge serves all parties in the courtroom, as well as the public outside the courtroom. This means getting to the heart of an issue quickly, making decisions, and keeping a caseload moving. Finally, a judge must be able to make difficult decisions. Many times, the parties in a courtroom are at the lowest point in their lives. Their liberty, parental rights, business, and way of life may be at stake. During these especially trying times, the parties turn to the courts to make decisions for them. A judge must be able to make thorough, well-informed, and efficient decisions.  Shoenborn (left) at her investiture on Aug. 15, 2024. Photograph by Margo Kirchner. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Jenna Gill
Appointed to: Lafayette County Circuit Court Appointment date: June 14, 2024, to term ending July 31, 2025 Education: Law School – William Mitchell College, St. Paul, Minnesota Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Madison High School – Darlington High, Darlington, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: January 2017-present – District attorney, Lafayette County January 2012-December 2016 – Attorney, Russell Law Offices, Darlington, Wisconsin Bar admissions: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin General character of practice: Currently as the District Attorney, I prosecute a variety of crimes that come into our office, including ordinance and traffic violations, misdemeanors and felony matters. As the solo attorney in my office until a part-time prosecutor was added, I handled every case myself averaging over 300 cases per year. Prior to being the District Attorney, I handled family law cases, including divorces and child custody matters, small claims actions representing both individuals and financial institutions, civil matters for both individuals and financial institutions, real estate transactions, and business and estate planning. Describe typical clients: I currently represent the State of Wisconsin carrying a felony and misdemeanor caseload. As a private attorney, I represented primarily Lafayette County residents, along with businesses and financial institutions. Number of cases tried to verdict: 13 jury trials, dozens of court trials List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: One specific trial that stands out as significant involved two sexual assault victims that reported decades later. The first victim to report came forward after being assaulted by her brother as a child, through age 16, with her brother being several years older than she was. She endured extreme emotional trauma because of the assaults after her reports to family went ignored and were covered up by her parents. It wasn't until her parents passed away and she was forced to confront her brother about the estate proceedings that she inadvertently reported it to law enforcement when dealing with other matters. The impact the assaults had on her life were unique. She moved out of her childhood home to essentially never return and became an accomplished working woman, but never married or dated to significance because of her past and distrust for other people. While conducting her interviews, law enforcement learned there was a possibility that her brother also assaulted his own daughter years later in the early 1990s. The defendant's daughter was hesitant to disclose the assaults because she struggled with drug addiction and was involved in the criminal justice on her own. At the time, the daughter had just recently graduated from our treatment court program and was doing well in life. I tried the case in Lafayette County before the Honorable Faun M. Phillipson in August 2023 with the defendant being represented by Attorney Andrea Winder. The charges only involved the defendant's daughter because of the statute of limitations on charges relating to his sister. However, his sister was able to testify and tell her story through an "Other Acts Motion" I filed, which was granted by the court. The jury found the defendant guilty despite the victim's own criminal history. It was significant because of the age of the case, but also the different impacts the assaults had on each individual victim and the fact that one victim was also a defendant I was familiar with. The case was a great example to show the community that the criminal justice system is meant to protect victims in every capacity and that no bias should exist when prosecuting cases based on who the victim is or what choices they have made in life. The case stems far beyond sexual assaults. All three of the children to this defendant have been involved in the criminal justice system, impacted by the drug epidemic. Each one separately had an opportunity to complete treatment court programs, two successfully doing so, but all three children are currently incarcerated within the Wisconsin State Prison, along with their father. However, the case provided an overarching look at how a defendant's upbringing impacts them through adult life and emphasized the need to protect children in our communities and provide intervention to them at an early age. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: N/A Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). While in private practice, I practiced in several areas of transactional law, including real estate, estate planning, and business planning, which are general non-litigation. In addition, we occasionally utilized mediation services for settlements of various types of cases. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: N/A Previous runs for public office: Lafayette County district attorney, elected, serving 2017-present All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: (None listed) Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Lafayette County Bar Association, member, 2012-present Lafayette County CJCC, co-chair, 2017-present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: In private practice, our office engaged in various legal work pro bono for individuals within the community. Since taking office as the District Attorney, I have not performed any pro bono legal work. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: Having already held a role of public service, I recognize the importance of holding a position of this authority. I believe that I am the best candidate to serve the people of our county, because I have earned the trust of the community, as an individual, but also as the District Attorney. I want to ensure that our county continues down the path that Judge Jorgenson left in his passing, one where the public feels confident in the judge’s ability to serve the people how they wish to be served by upholding the law. My experience in almost every area of law applicable in our community has given me the experience needed to handle the variety of matters presented before the court on a daily and weekly basis. I have established relationships with the legal community and key stakeholders within the community to continue to develop the court system to meet the needs of Lafayette County. Ultimately, I want to serve Lafayette County as Judge because I feel compelled to maintain integrity in the system and believe I hold the knowledge of what it will take to do so in an effective and efficient manner. Without someone truly invested in the community they serve, where they live, where their children or grandchildren attend school, where they volunteer, where they attend community events and parades, where they go to Friday night fish fry, and where they go to church, the integrity of the system instantly depletes. The system loses its sense of “community” when the investment in said community doesn’t exist. The people become “people” instead of neighbors, colleagues, friends, acquaintances, business owners of your local stores, and community members. For the last seven plus years, I have worked hard to develop programs that impact our court system and by serving as the Judge, I will be able to continue to provide insight to ensure those programs see the progress necessary to make an impact on the community as a whole. While I did not go to law school specifically to be a judge, I did go with the desire to help people. I’ve now spent my legal career practicing in different areas, assisting the public in many different ways, and I believe I can be the most helpful to the people, our county, by serving as their next Judge as an invested member of the community. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. It is rare that a case decided by the higher courts are only positive or negative to the people of Wisconsin. Rather, and unfortunate, there are always people on each side of a decision for various reasons. There are many significant cases that impact a large amount of the population but in current practice, applicable to my profession as a district attorney, the implementation of Marsy’s Law has significantly impacted victims in the State of Wisconsin. In Wisconsin Justice Initiative, Inc. v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld Marsy’s Law, which was voted to incorporate into the Wisconsin Constitution in 2020. While the analysis of the case was based upon a challenge to the wording of the ballot question, the overall outcome was the implementation of Marsy’s Law, which has greatly impacted my office and the victims involved in all types of crimes. In my experience as a prosecutor, victims are often met with frustration in navigating the criminal justice system. While this amendment was meant to be a positive impact for victims of crimes and it has certainly allowed victims to make headway, in practice, the implementation is slow and the concept is still underdeveloped. However, the positive takeaway from all sides is that victims have more of a voice, or at least the opportunity to be heard and be involved in the process. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Judge Duane Jorgenson: Despite Judge Jorgenson no longer being with us, his untimely passing offered an opportunity to truly reflect on the admirations many had of him. While I often pointed out his positive attributes to others and how fortunate we all were to appear before him on a daily basis, his funeral brought Judge Jorgenson’s compassion to the forefront. He ruled from the bench with compassion and empathy in a way that stood out from others. He was a very kind person and it showed in each and every interaction he had. It took a lot to get him upset because of his extraordinary patience. There was never a scornful admonishment that may have been appropriate, but a message filled with hope. Judge Jorgenson taught me as a prosecutor to never be discouraged by the outcome of a case, whether by a jury determination or a judge’s sentence that wasn’t quite what I had recommended to the court. Rather, he reminded me of the importance of my role, which was to present the case to the court or jury. My job wasn’t to find people guilty or send people to prison, it was to get the facts before the appropriate decision maker, the jury of their peers or the judge elected by the people who trusted him in our county. Either way, it was about trusting the process and trusting that the same community that elected me as DA and him as Judge would in one way or another, be the ones deciding the ultimate outcome of each case. He was insightful in his words and made an impact by making people reflect upon what was spoken to them. Judge Faun Phillipson: I have the fortunate opportunity to appear before Judge Phillipson on a regular basis. During her short term thus far, she has been able to quickly find her way in the Judge world. Being the first female judge to take the bench in Green County, I quickly gained an admiration for her ability to resonate with people. Similar to myself, Judge Phillipson has a strong desire to serve the community she was born and raised in. She knows the people in the community and their values. She has a rapport with defendants that is unmatched, always speaking at their level, never down to them, appreciating the different levels of intelligence. She truly treats everyone with the highest level of respect, but in way that they understand her. Judge Phillipson has truly immersed herself in the profession and takes great pride in getting to know the people that stand before her. Listening to her speak with each individual, she has an almost magical ability to reason with them and illuminate the true concern she has for each of them. After every hearing, I am always left admiring her sense of reason and level-headed nature. The proper role of a judge: The Judge, especially in a small rural county, shall be unbiased and nonpartisan while upholding the laws of the State of Wisconsin. Not only does this mean being knowledgeable about the law, but also being willing to learn the law when necessary. A proper judge has the ability to be authoritative to effectively make difficult decisions all while having the ability to be compassionate and empathetic for the persons standing before them. While a judge must interpret the law in each case and guide the procedure in the matters, it is essential the parties are treated fairly and that a fair outcome is reached through discretion. Throughout my legal career, I have had the opportunity to be before dozens of judges and they are not all created equal, each with their own set of strengths and weaknesses. I have always found the most impactful judges to be the ones that were relatable with the individuals before them. Above all, a judge must be an effective communicator, a skill that is sometimes lacking despite the extreme intelligence they possess. The right, or wrong, personality can completely change the course of the court system and the effect of the outcomes of the individuals involved. To truly leave an impact, a positive one, a judge must be personable. Ultimately, a judge must maintain the utmost integrity in running their courtroom. As a leader in the legal community, the proper role of a judge is to be that of a role model, which includes being efficient, timely, fair, open-minded, cordial, educated, dedicated, and trusted. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Adam Y. Gerol
Appointed to: Ozaukee County Circuit Court Appointment date: May 24, 2024, to term ending July 31, 2025 Education: Law School – Drake Law School, Des Moines, Iowa Undergraduate – The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa High School – The Prairie School, Wind Point, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: July 2009-present – District attorney, Ozaukee County September 2008-July 2009 – Assistant district attorney, Milwaukee County July 2008-September 2008 – Assistant attorney general, Wisconsin Department of Justice, Criminal Litigation Division September 1992-July 2008 – Assistant district attorney, Ozaukee County Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin Illinois State Bar Association (lapsed) U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit General character of practice: I advise law enforcement on investigations, and assist with law enforcement training. I review and charge criminal cases, litigate these matters through trial to disposition, and sometimes through the appeal. I am also the department head of my office for purposes of budgeting, staff supervision, and government relations. As an assistant district attorney in Milwaukee County I was assigned to the Drug Unit and the Gun Unit in the Violent Crimes Division where we handled everything from Felon in Possession to Attempt Homicide. Staffing in Ozaukee County allows for little specialization. However I have always prosecuted the bulk of sensitive crimes in Ozaukee County, and as the district attorney I personally review and prosecute the most serious of allegations .… Describe typical clients: Prosecutors don't have clients in the traditional sense. We act in the name of the State of Wisconsin, and law enforcement agencies are our witnesses. We have statutory and constitutional obligations to the victims of crimes, but they are also, technically, not our clients. As the district attorney I still assign myself the bulk of all the sensitive crimes Number of cases tried to verdict: Approximately 250 jury trials List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: I was the prosecutor in State v. Banas, Ozaukee County Case No. 2018CF000333. My participation began with the investigation commencing in 2007, where ultimately, more than 20 women reported being surreptitiously drugged after socializing with a local man. While all the women reported similar experiences, none had come forward within the time frame where traditional forensic testing could help identify the substances used or even what conduct may have occurred. Ultimately, a victim in 2014 did report within a time frame where we were able to use forensic hair analysis as pioneered by a leading world expert on drug-facilitated crimes, Dr. Pascal Kintz of Strasbourg, France. The case was tried before The Honorable Todd Martens, a Washington County judge. Motion practice was extensive, and the three day trial began on February 24, 2020. The opposing counsel was Brent Nistler. This case demonstrated the difficulties in applying the statute designed to address this type of behavior, Wis. Stats Sec. 941.32, Administering Dangerous or Stupefying Drug. There was extensive public attention to this matter from the earliest days of the investigation through trial. I was the prosecutor in State v. Kerschbaum, Ozaukee County Case No. 2020CF000156. Opposing counsel was Attorney Jerome Buting. Only the second phase of a bifurcated case was tried, and that was to the bench. The Honorable Sandy Williams was the judge. This was a sensitive crime prosecution, together with related counts of Child Pornography. The behavior was among the most disturbing I’ve ever encountered. This case involved applying existing state and federal law on the question of Miranda and police interrogation of a special needs suspect. However, the critical issue was the role of the defendant's (redacted) and how it might apply to questions of intent and mental responsibility. A related question was the relevance of expert testimony on the question of a knowing and voluntary Miranda waiver. This defendant suffered from significant limitations, and this case demonstrated the sometimes awkward fit between existing law and the state of medical science when addressing questions of cognition and intent. I was the prosecutor in State v. Difrances, Ozaukee County Case No. 2019CF000143, where the defendant was convicted of Incest with a Child, contrary to Wis. Stat Sec. 948.06. I litigated all material aspects of this case from its inception in June 2019 through trial and through the post-conviction motions that concluded on April 8, 2023. The two day jury trial began on June 29, 2021 before the Honorable Paul Malloy. Opposing counsel was Jason Baltz. This case touched on almost every reason why the Shiffra/Green procedure harmed victims. Here, it resulted in substantial delays but also demonstrated other aspects of how that process was flawed. When asked for a treatment history, this child didn't know who she might have treated with when she was very young. This was also the first case where I encouraged the victim to seek her own representation because Marsy’s Law creates tension between a prosecutor's interest in complying with a discovery order and the victim's right to have her records remain private. This victim was represented by Attorney Nancy Noet of the Crime Victims’ Rights Project, associated with Legal Action of Wisconsin, Inc. This case is also an example of another related privacy concern with incest victims. When we charge the crime of Incest, the identity of – and the trauma experienced by – the victim essentially becomes public. In these cases, I would ordinarily choose just to charge a sexual assault for this reason, leaving out the Incest count entirely. That option wasn't available here. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I have no recent experience. More than 30 years ago I represented a client involved in a banking regulation matter. We were able to resolve the matter with the Wisconsin Department of Justice without any further litigation. In private practice I represented a client who was a witness in a matter with the Department of Regulation and Licensing related to a fraud committed by a real estate agent. As a defense attorney I represented a number of people who had been charged with operating while intoxicated at their administrative hearings regarding their drivers licenses. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). In the early years of my practice I worked on corporate formation, creation of employee benefit plans, and the occasional tax problem. A number of years ago I formed a non-profit corporation, negotiated a land transfer, and obtained charitable status for a local dog park. As a volunteer with Habitat for Humanity, I assisted with land use questions, grants, and corporate compliance. I offer advice from time to time to my wife's employer, the Milwaukee Center for Children and Youth. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: I've served as treasurer for Jim Konowalski who was running for the county board approximately 10 years ago. I was the Courthouse Representative with the Ozaukee County Republican Party, and was active with them from 2009 until 2022. I know that I have dropped literature or helped with yard signs with campaigns in the distant past, but I can't accurately specify them. I know that I was very active with the campaigns of Sandy Williams (district attorney and judge), Tom Wolfram (Judge) and Steve Cain (Judge). Previous runs for public office: Ozaukee County District Attorney, appointed in 2009 and elected in 2012, 2016 and 2020 All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: I never maintained a list of endorsements that I’ve made. I tried to be accurate with this question by checking my email accounts and researching internet history for cached versions of relevant campaign websites. With that caveat, I believe this list is complete. I would add that it’s likely that I endorsed Brian Hagedorn for the Supreme Court. I don’t believe I ever endorsed Daniel Kelly. Jennifer Dorow, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2023 Maria Lazar, Court of Appeals, 2022 Shelly Grogan, Court of Appeals, 2021 Steve Cain, Circuit Court Judge, 2019 Annette Ziegler, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2016 Brian Hagedorn, Wisconsin Court of Appeals, 2017 Michael Screnock, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2017 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Wisconsin District Attorneys Association, roles including president, 1994-present Rotary International, 2008-2021 Habitat for Humanity, board member, 2008-2014 Ozaukee County Jail Advisory Board, 2009-present Wisconsin Bar Association, district governor, 2016-2018 Joint Legislative Councils, various committees and dates Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: While in private practice I helped numerous people with various concerns without charging a fee. Since becoming a prosecutor, Wis Stat. Sec. 978.06 places restrictions on the ability of a prosecutor to perform other legal services. That said, I helped create the current incarnation of the Grafton dog park in the early 1990s and helped when they had problems with their regulatory filings. I also provided informal assistance when I volunteered with Habitat for Humanity, assisting with grants and contracts. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I have had a fulfilling career in litigation, which has given me an excellent legal education. However, it has also made me aware of many flaws in our court system. One that demands resolution is the cycle of never-ending status conferences in court calendars. These frustrate litigants immensely, leading many to settle their cases arbitrarily. These calendars ultimately leave judges with less time to focus on the crucial aspects of cases. This inevitably has a corrosive effect on the whole judicial process. My first goal is to change this dynamic. As an advocate, I've built where I could. Ozaukee County has an efficient district attorney's office that studies its cases, excels at providing complete discovery to litigants, and works hard to obtain fair outcomes. Thousands of cases, hundreds of trials, and dozens of appeals have built a strong foundation in the letter of the law. My resume reflects how I've also tried to serve the broader legal system. Our justice system isn’t just about laws. It's about people. I've never lost sight of the human side of my cases. Every case represents a significant turmoil in someone's life, and few people choose to become embroiled in the legal system. They find themselves trapped within a court system that is daunting, confusing, and often appears capricious. They're forced to rely on the advice of strangers. Their relationship with their attorney is frequently marked by caution and occasionally suspicion. Almost everyone is afraid. My understanding of the legal system extends beyond my professional experiences. It's deeply personal, shaped by the victims I encounter, the clients I've represented, and my family's experiences with the law. All of this has reinforced my belief in the importance of empathy, patience, and communication in the justice system. People deserve a court system that will treat them fairly, respectfully, and honestly. This is my commitment. The key is to understand the people in our courtrooms. Judges must have the ability and the desire to engage with people in a way that allows them to leave the courtroom understanding what has occurred. There is nothing more critical to the integrity of the entire justice system. In every case, there will be litigants who will not agree with the outcome. However, when a judge follows the law and explains how it applies to the facts that have been proven, the fairness of that outcome – no matter how unwelcome it might be – will resonate. As a judge, I want to accomplish all of these things and am dedicated to making this a reality. I am deeply rooted in this community and committed to using my skills and knowledge to ensure a fair, honest, and trusted court system. For the past 35 years, I have had the privilege of observing many great judges across southeastern Wisconsin, and I am eager to apply those lessons in this courthouse that is so important to me. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. State v. Johnson, 2023 WI 39, 407 Wis.2d 195, 990 N.W.2d 174 was the most significant triumph for victim rights in Wisconsin in the last 25 years. The modern world has made great strides in destigmatizing mental health concerns. We encourage every sexual assault victim to seek therapy immediately. But since 1993, in State v. Shiffra,175 Wis.2d 600, 499 N.W.2d 719 (Ct. App. 1993), our courts have provided a legal strategy to force victims to either surrender their privacy interests in their counseling records or watch the prosecution get dismissed. Shiffra motions became the standard of practice in every sexual assault case, with defendants commonly asking trial courts to inspect victims' private counseling records for exculpatory information. In the Shiffra sexual assault prosecution, the defendant claimed that the victim's history of psychiatric issues could have affected her ability to perceive and convey truthful information. The Court of Appeals held that the victim’s psychiatric history and the records from any doctors, hospitals, or counselors that may have treated her could be obtained if the defendant made a preliminary showing that such documents might be relevant and helpful at trial. They created a standard, and if the trial court made the requisite finding and the victim did not consent to release the treatment records for an in-camera inspection, the remedy would be suppressing the victim's testimony. I've prosecuted the most sensitive crimes in Ozaukee County for the last 30 years, and I know just how upset victims become when told that the defendant is trying to access their counseling records. The fact that only the judge will do the initial review does not comfort them. Johnson rejected this entire scheme. In a logical and reasoned fashion, Johnson set aside an ill-crafted mechanism that had the natural effect of retraumatizing sexual assault victims. "… in the past thirty years, because of Shiffra, countless sexual assault victims who reported their victimization have been on the horns of a dilemma, forced to choose between either disclosing their mental health records or not testifying in the trials of their perpetrators. Neither option was tenable, leaving victims with no choice but to have their suffering compounded by the system meant to administer justice." Johnson, ¶80. Johnson explained the “special justification” to reverse Shiffra and why the doctrine of stare decisis supported this outcome. The Supreme Court explained why the Shiffra line of cases was wrongly decided, unworkable, and inapplicable in light of the constitutional amendments enshrining victim's rights. Johnson recognized how Shiffra had ignored statutory protections, ran roughshod on the sensitivities of people who had been grievously harmed, and "allowed perpetrators to harass victims into silence." Johnson was a vindication of the rights of victims and a rejection of outmoded thinking about the presumed behavior of people who had been sexually assaulted. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Perhaps drawing from his experience as a small-town lawyer and judge, Justice Jon Wilcox crafted ‘useable’ opinions that were direct and straightforward. He was committed to ensuring that the law was easily understood to all who needed to apply it. A prime example of this can be seen in his concurrence in Carney-Hayes v. NW Wis. Home Care, 2005 WI 118, 284 Wis.2d 56, 699 N.W.2d 524: "I write separately to set forth some clear rules regarding the analysis to be employed in applying the expert privilege, in hopes of providing guidance to litigants and judges dealing with this seemingly difficult area of the law." Carney-Hayes, ¶ 63. Justice Wilcox believed in judicial restraint, stare decisis, and the judiciary's limited role. This was particularly stressed when approaching matters of public policy – something Justice Wilcox emphasized should be left for the legislature. That’s not to say that he would always agree with what the legislature had done, once writing: "… I write separately, however, to address the serious concerns raised by the broad language in Wis. Stat. § 974.07(6) ... and I strongly urge the legislature to take a hard look at the practical consequences of this subsection. …" State v. Moran, 2005 WI 115, ¶ 59, 284 Wis.2d 24, 700 N.W.2d 884. Justice Wilcox never recited a principle just to say it. When dissenting, there was never anything ad hominem in his words. Even his most strident objections could be read as a fair exchange of opinion, leaving for the reader – or perhaps later courts – to further consider who was correct. Judge Joseph McCormack of Ozaukee County was the finest judge I have ever practiced before. He was never concerned with impressing others or demonstrating the breadth of his intellect. He only made his presence known at trial if a ruling was necessary. During his tenure, some of the most complicated cases in Ozaukee County were tried in his court. Whether it was a products liability case involving a 'big 3' automaker, a horrible medical malpractice claim, or an aggravated felony, he would immediately seize the essential thread of a subject. He always looked for the established standards that should apply to any question. Perhaps gained from his years as a social worker, Judge McCormack had a unique ability to connect with the people before him quickly. No litigant, victim, or defendant ever left his courtroom wondering what had occurred or with a lingering doubt that the outcome was anything other than well-considered. Judge McCormack was the first presiding judge in Ozaukee County to reach out to other justice system partners to improve local practices. I will always credit him for consolidating criminal calendars so prosecutors and public defenders could organize their time. He mentored young lawyers and was always willing to offer advice to those who showed interest. He was highly respected and known for his genuine concern for others. The proper role of a judge: Every society throughout history has expressed its thoughts on the proper role of a judge. 2,500 years ago, Socrates said, "Four things belong to a judge: to hear courteously, to answer wisely, to consider soberly, and to decide impartially." All of these remain true today. The best judges have the same qualities: They listen, they grasp the issues presented, they apply the law fairly, and they are respectful to the litigants. Today, the best judges are also mindful of the public’s perception of the court. Society must have confidence in their justice system. A judge must always consider that their behavior and demeanor affect the public's opinion of the judiciary. Everyone in the courtroom must perceive the judge as unbiased, unaffected by any familiarity with the litigants or by personal feelings toward the subject matter. A judge should go to great lengths to demonstrate that they approach the record objectively, guided solely by statutes and common law. Any deviation from this principle fosters contempt for the judicial system because it allows people to remain skeptical of the outcome. The law is a sacred thing, bequeathed to us by thoughtful, wise individuals who refined a system of resolving disputes. Every judge should acknowledge that precedent holds a superior understanding of the law than anything they might choose to invent. Respect for stare decisis is the most compelling of judicial virtues and a guiding principle for a trial court judge. A judge's calendar should prioritize the prompt resolution of cases rather than fostering a system that might pressure litigants into settling for the sake of convenience or cost. Fair compromises uphold the interests of justice, but when a case is settled for the wrong reasons, it breeds resentment. Someone will feel let down or perceive the justice system as manipulable, inevitably eroding respect for the legal system. When a judge's calendar offers a genuine opportunity for a case to be tried promptly, and where litigants know there will be no 'penalty' for doing so, few will leave the courtroom feeling that the outcome was forced upon them. A judge can't force anyone to resolve anything, and stern messaging by frustrated judges is soon forgotten. There’s nothing to be gained from status conferences where little will occur except for scheduling yet another date. Consequently, the client will be billed for another hour's work, which could have been put to better use. A judge should default to trusting the lawyers to advance their own cases. Before a jury trial, a judge should encourage litigants to discuss the expected testimony so that rulings can be anticipated. In a trial, a judge should avoid becoming an active participant whenever possible because that behavior is too easily misunderstood. In the eyes of jurors, the judge should appear to be the most neutral party in the courtroom. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Peggy L. Miller
Appointed to: Marinette County Circuit Court Appointment date: March 21, 2024, effective July 31 2024 (term ending July 31, 2025) Education: Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Undergraduate – Concordia University, Appleton, Wisconsin Associate – Northeast Wisconsin Technical College, Green Bay, Wisconsin High School – Ashwaubeon High, Green Bay, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: January 2019-present – Family Court commissioner/court commissioner/register in probate, Oconto County, Oconto, Wisconsin May 2015-August 2019 – Attorney, DiRenzo & Bomier, LLC, Neenah, Wisconsin January 2011-May 2015 – Attorney, Peterson, Berk & Cross, S.C., Appleton, Wisconsin October 2011-June 2015 – Paralegal Program chair, Globe University, closed January 1999-January 2011 – Attorney, Stellpflug Law, S.C. (now known as One Law Group, S.C.), Green Bay, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin General character of practice: While in private practice I represented clients in the following areas: All aspects of family law, such as divorce, post divorce matters, legal separation, annulment and paternity matters. I served as Guardian ad Litem for children in placement disputes, and as Guardian ad Litem for adults in guardianship matters. I represented clients in small claims matters, including landlord/tenant disputes and money judgment claims. I was appointed by the Wisconsin Department of Justice to handle foreclosure mediation matters, and appointed by the Eastern District of Wisconsin to handle bankruptcy mediation. Additionally, I served as a private mediator at the request of attorneys to assist in settlement of contested divorce personal property matters. Describe typical clients: My typical client would be involved in a paternity, divorce or post judment family matter. I also represented the best interests of children and adults while serving as their Guardian ad Litem. I represented clients as litigants in small claims and restraining order matters. Number of cases tried to verdict: None List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: As Family Court Commissioner of Oconto County, from March 8, 2019 to February 28, 2022, I heard four motion hearings, two contempt hearings, held four status conferences and presided over one placement trial involving the same parties. . . . (T)he Respondent was pro se. I had been informed before the very first hearing on March 8, 2019 that the Respondent is often difficult and had threatened one of our Judges. I was to never conduct a hearing without security present. Unfortunately, we were experiencing a security officer shortage and it was not possible for me to have security present at all times. The Guardian ad Litem made several complaints during the hearings about the Respondent's attitude toward her. I made it a point to treat the Respondent with respect throughout each hearing and trial, and expressed empathy with his difficulty to manuever through the legal process without counsel. 1 complimented Respondent on his respectful demeanor and ability to adequately represent himself during the hearings and trial. I made the most of opportunities to educate the Respondent on the legal process without providing legal advice. While extremely challenging at times, I believe my calm demeanor and respectful attitude with the pro se Respondent aided in the hearings being conducted without incident. The Respondent made a point of thanking me for treating him fairly, and informed me on several occasions that he and the opposing party were getting along better. The experiences with this Respondent are significant to me because it verified the way you treat a litigant can make a difference in how they view the judiciary, the legal process and the legal profession. A second significant trial occurred in 2020. As the Family Court Commissioner of Oconto County, I conducted a post judgment placement trial. The parties were both pro se . . . . The Mother had primary placement of the minor child for several years. The Father had infrequent contact with the child. The Mother felt it was unfair to award the Father any placement since he'd had little contact prior to the commencement of the legal matter. The Father had obtained stable employment and residence, and was now emotionally mature enough to understand the significance of being a parent. I awarded a graduated placement schedule to the Father. I was able to develop a placement schedule that increased Father's time at a pace that allowed the Mother to ease into the idea of no longer being the only responsible parent for the child. At the same time I was able to recognize the Father's signficiant emotional and financial strides toward becoming a responsible parent, while at the same time considering the best interests of the child. A few months after the trial, the Mother thanked me and informed me that the new placement schedule was going well. The Mother's comments made this case significant to me because it confirmed my belief that making it known you are addressing everyone's concerns while delivering a decision can make a difference to the parties acceptance of and compliance with the decision. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I represented a litigant in one adversary proceeding before a Department of Natural Resources Administrative Law Judge. My client was losing part of his shoreline to erosion which made ingress and egress to his property unsafe. After consultation with a local DNR Agent, my client planted specific and approved plants on the shoreline. There were complaints by boaters on the lake regarding the ugliness or the client's plantings. The DNR Agent ordered my client to remove the plantings. The client refused, A citation was issued and we went to trial. After a full day trial, the Administrative Law Judge ruled in my client's favor. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). While in private practice, I handled child custody/placement mediation for Kewaunee County for several years. I handled many small claims mediation matters for Winnebago County. I was appointed by the Wisconsin Department of Justice to perform foreclosure mediation in nine northern Wisconsin counties when the homeowner requested mediation. I was also appointed by the State of Wisconsin, Eastern District to perform mediation in bankruptcy cases when requested by a filing party. Finally, I have acted as a private mediator in divorce actions regarding division of personal property, when requested by attorneys. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None Previous runs for public office: n/a All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: None Professional or civic and charitable organizations: From 1/2001 until 12/2018 I represented parties in pro bono divorce actions for both Brown County and Winnebago County. As I completed each case I would accept a new case. I completed and filed necessary paperwork to establish a non-profit organization for Green Bay Elite. This is an all-star cheerleading competition organization that did various fund raising events to alleviate the cost of uniforms, cheerleading competition fees and travel expenses. Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: Planning and Public Advisory Committee, member, March 2023-present OLR, Special Preliminary Review Committee, member, January 2022-present Family Court Commissioner Association, treasurer, January 2023-present Family Law Section Board, board member, January 2012-December 2020 State Bar Board of Governors, board member, January 2002-December 2006 CLE Committee, member, January 2002-December 2006 YWCA of Greater Green Bay, board member, September 2001-August 2005 Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I want to serve the people of Wisconsin as a Judge because I want to make a difference in the way the general public views the court system and the judiciary. I want to show litigants that the Judge can treat them with respect and express empathy, even while making a difficult decision. Serving as Judge of any County is a privilege that must be taken seriously. This is a privilege I want to extend beyond the bench with community involvement. Speaking and volunteering within the community I serve, as allowable by the judicial ethical rules. It is my belief that the more the public has access to the court system and the judiciary, the better the public will understand, have confidence in, and respect the legal profession as a whole. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. Obergefill v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015) U.S. Supreme Court decision which made same-sex marriage allowable in all states was, in my view, one of the most significant positive decisions made affecting the entire country. This is a positive stride in recognizing human equality, no matter race, religion, or sexual orientation. Not only did this case allow people of the same sex to legally marry, but it began a flood of cases to extend the rights beyond just marriage. It remains to be seen how many changes the Obergefill decision will cause, but further antidiscrimination protections are likely. This case is a definite win for diversity. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: I admire former Justice Shirley Abrahamson as the first female to be appointed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. I had the pleasure of meeting her in person during a State Bar event. She was kind, responsive and very unpretentious. She served a long and distinguished career. But, beyond her legal career she was a wonderful and engaging speaker on many topics. I consider myself lucky to have heard her speak on numerous occasions, as well as having met her in person. Her inception of the Court with Class program for high school students was, in my opinion, an amazing way to get a new generation involved and interested in the legal system. I knew Judge Marc A. Hammer prior to my attending law school. During law school I began working for Marc Hammer as a law clerk. Immediately upon graduation, I was hired by the same law firm and was lucky to call Marc Hammer my mentor and friend. Marc was a wonderful teacher. He exhibits compassion, kindness, patience and an amazing ability to think on his feet. I will forever be grateful to the tutelage I received from Judge Marc Hammer who continues to be my friend. The proper role of a judge: I would describe the proper role of a Judge to be a person with better than average oral writing and analytical skills. A person who can apply the law with strength and compassion. A person who strives to stop personal, societal and political bias from entering a decision. A person who joins the community he/she serves for the good of the legal profession and the public. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Jane E. Bucher
Appointed to: Green County Circuit Court Appointment date: March 15, 2024, effective April 5, 2024 (term ending July 31, 2025) Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin Undergraduate – New College of Florida, Sarasota, Florida High School – Burlington High, Burlington, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: August 2021-present – Senior associate, Russell Law Offices, S.C., Shullsburg, Wisconsin August 2011-August 2021 – Assistant state public defender, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Madison, Wisconsin June 2011-August 2011 – Associate, Kittelsen Law Firm, Monroe, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin General character of practice: Currently I practice approximately 40% Criminal Law, 40% Family Law and 20% a mix of forfeiture, traffic, injunction, CHIPS and guardianship cases. I also do some Guardian ad Litem work and I take some court-appointed criminal cases. Prior to entering private practice, I was a public defender for nearly 10 years. Describe typical clients: Currently I represent working class clients who live in rural Wisconsin and need help with divorce, child custody and placement, criminal cases, or traffic cases. Prior to entering private practice, I served as an Assistant State Public Defender, representing indigent criminal defendants as well as youth, individuals with developmental disabilities, individuals suffering from active mental illness, children who were the victims of abuse, and individuals committed pursuant to ch. 980. Number of cases tried to verdict: I've tried seven to a jury (some with co-counsel); dozens to the court List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: In December 2017 (I cannot find the exact date) in Green County Wisconsin, before Judge Thomas Vale, I tried a Petition for Discharge in a Ch. 980 case to the court. Opposing counsel was Devra Ayala of WI DOJ. My client had been committed pursuant to the ch. 980 law for approximately 20 years after serving his prison sentence. The case required careful and thorough attention to a large volume of records dating back to the original trial on the underlying charge. Additionally, the case required a thorough understanding of the actuarial science used to predict a sex offender's likelihood to re-offend. There were multiple expert witnesses involved and the trial lasted for two days. I had previously litigated, with co-counsel and unsuccessfully, a Petition for Discharge for the same individual in 2014 before a jury. The second time around, there were new developments in the science that assisted the defense. The client was released just prior to the holidays. He had been incarcerated since before cell phones or internet access were commonplace. This case was significant in my career because it was, originally, my first jury trial as a public defender and it involved a very steep learning curve regarding the actuarial science. The second time around, it involved becoming up-to-date on the latest developments in the science. Additionally, the outcome for the client was significant as he was able to go home to his family after having been incarcerated indefinitely. On May 28, 2019 I litigated a one day OWI 5th jury trial in front of then-judge Judge Karofsky in Lafayette County. The prosecutor was DA Jenna Gill. The case involved an automobile accident and the defendant was found on the side of the road some time after the accident. The outcome was a hung jury. Prior to the jury trial I had also litigated a suppression motion. This case was significant as the effect of the hung jury ultimately resulted in a negotiated non-prison resolution for my client who was able to get treatment in the community and has since successfully completed probation, is a productive member of society and continues to be in recovery. On March 14-15, 2019 I litigated a two day criminal jury trial involving charges of Possession with Intent to Deliver Cocaine, Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, and Misappropriation of ID. The judge was Judge Duane Jorgenson and the prosecutor was DA Jenna Gill. My client was pregnant at the time of the trial. We lost, bail was revoked and my client went to jail until her sentencing hearing. We proceeded to an argued sentencing hearing where the State asked for prison. My client had young children at home in addition to being pregnant. I successfully argued for probation with conditional jail time and the option for my client to have some of her conditional jail time stayed if she were to complete an ARC program for expectant mothers where she was able to keep her baby with her and also have her other young children visit her. This case was significant as it involved a young mother of color who had two young children at home at the time. Despite having fought hard and lost the trial, I was able to obtain a just outcome for her, one that allowed her see her children and have her baby with her. She successfully completed probation in 2023. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I have represented approximately 100 individuals in revocation of probation and revocation of extended supervision cases. I have represented a handful of individuals in administrative appeals of their revocation decisions. I also represented an individual in an Unemployment Appeal hearing. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). I have participated in formal and informal mediations in divorce proceedings as well as in a small claims case. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: I have knocked doors for Democractic candidates over the years. I do not recall each specific candidate or specific dates. I do recall volunteering for the Obama campaign in 2008 and for the Clinton campaign in 2016, however, there were others as well. Previous runs for public office: Green County Judge Branch 1, won primary February 2021 with 40% of vote; lost general election April 2021 with 48%. All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: None listed Professional or civic and charitable organizations: State Bar of Wisconsin, president-elect, June 2023-present State Bar of Wisconsin, governor, District 12, served on Policy Committee, June 2018-June 2022 Green County Bar Association, member, 2014-present; president, 2015 Family Promise of Green County, board member, 2021-2023 MultiCultural Outreach Program, co-chair and founding member, approximately 2018-2021 Green County Big Brothers Big Sisters, volunteer, 2018-2021 Green County CJCC, member, 2017-2021 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: Pro Bono Service: Generally speaking, while at the Public Defender's Office, I was required to request permission to take on extra legal work while serving as an Assistant State Public Defender. I usually reserved these permissions for “ancillary representation.” For example on a couple of occasions, I represented my criminal clients in injunction proceedings if those proceedings were related to their criminal case. Additionally, on two occasions, I had clients who were at risk of losing their liberty for failing to pay child support for a child that was not biologically their child. One of these such cases involved a client who had been extradited from another state on felony non-support charges. In each of these cases, I moved to re-open the underlying paternity judgment as a means of achieving dismissals in the other proceedings. Additionally, I volunteered at an Expungement Clinic in 2019. Although my volunteer work is not strictly considered Pro Bono, it did serve to address improving the justice system or reducing disparate impacts of the justice system. For example, I served on a Green County Latino Advisory Committee that discussed various legal issues facing undocumented individuals, including the inability to obtain drivers licenses. I also served on two statewide subcommittees both aimed at improving the justice system for children and youth: The Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board Chapter 48 subcommittee and the Youth Justice Statewide Assessment Implementation Policy and Document Development Subcommittee through DCF. Since entering private practice, I have served the community by accepting GAL appointments and Dean appointments. Volunteer Service: From 2002 to 2006 I volunteered at Cambridge Family and Children's Service as a mentor for a child who had recently emigrated from Liberia. From July 2005- January 2006 I volunteered at the Living Center of Boston serving meals to individuals living with HIV/AIDS. From 2006 to 2008 I was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Senegal where I spoke primarily in French and in Pulaar, a local indigenous language. While in Law School I volunteered at the YWCA providing drop in child care to unhoused women and at the Canopy Center providing drop in child care for parents attending therapy sessions. From 2018-2021 I was a Big Sister for the Big Brother Big Sisters program in Green County. From 2021-2023 I was a volunteer board member for Green County Family Promise, a non-profit that serves unhoused families and children. From 2017 to 2021 I served as a volunteer for the MultiCultural Outreach Program and was co-chair for some of that time. We organized events that offered some legal information, including "Know Your Rights" events as well as cultural education events. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: My desire to serve the people of Wisconsin as a judge is rooted in my commitment to making the criminal justice system more just and equitable, improving access to justice, and my belief that good judges can have an incredibly positive effect within the criminal justice system and throughout the broader community. Over the course of my life and career, I have seen the power of the law to right wrongs as well as to enshrine disparity. I have witnessed how misunderstandings about the fundamental pillars of America’s system of justice can tear at the social fabric of our communities and erode understanding about our courts. I have practiced in front of outstanding judges whose example I keep in mind every day. Unfortunately, I have also practiced in front of judges whose temperament, ability to apply the law fairly, and respect for the people before them is sorely lacking. Let me provide a couple of the experiences that have helped form my approach and beliefs. As a Peace Corps volunteer, I taught health education in a village in Senegal with no running water and no electricity. The well would frequently run dry and it was a great deal of work to get water each day. For members of the village, bringing running water to their homes was a major goal. As we explored that goal, it became clear to me that a lack of water was a health problem and it was also a legal problem. That is when I realized that the law was for me. As a public defender and now as an attorney in private practice, I have seen firsthand that Judges have the power to engender resilience in victims and in young offenders. Many of the youth I represented in delinquency proceedings as a public defender were intimidated by the court process and tended to view the whole world as against them. The manner in which they were treated by the presiding judge often had a huge impact on their view of the role of the law in their life. If they were treated fairly, they tended to engage with the process and view the court proceedings as an opportunity to show the court what they were capable of accomplishing. In private practice, I have represented domestic violence victims in restraining order proceedings. In these cases, I have seen how a judge’s ability to create a safe and controlled courtroom can assist individuals in summoning the strength to proceed with a difficult and potentially traumatizing process. Judges are the face of justice in their local communities. They are, de facto, the leaders in the legal community. As a judge, I want to serve the people of Green County and the legal profession in the same ways I have tried to serve in all facets of my life and career: with humility, compassion, an appreciation for diversity, and a deep and abiding belief that we can make the world a better place. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. Obergefell v. Hodges has had a significant positive impact on the people of Wisconsin, and the nation, and will continue to do so for generations to come. The magnitude of the decision cannot be overstated and the benefits are manifold. First, the decision ended the exclusion of same sex couples from one of the most basic legal statuses in the United States. Second, the decision served as a culmination of other gay rights decisions such as Lawrence v. Texas that slowly began to correct the many, and decades-long, state sanctioned harms against LGBTQ individuals. Third, it strengthened the legal bonds within countless families by creating pathways for the recognition of legal rights between children and their non-biological parent. Obergefell also provides same sex couples rightful access to a host of other benefits that derive from marriage, including immigration benefits, inheritance rights, and the right to visit a loved one in the hospital. In addition to the significant good for society in general, I have seen firsthand the positive effects of this decision on individual lives. Over the course of my career, I have represented many LGBTQ youth and have seen how rejection by family members or being alienated from their peers can lead to justice system involvement. There has been steady improvement in the acceptance and representation of the LGBTQ community in the rural areas in which I work. If young people who are concerned about coming out are able to see images of, and reporting about, LGBTQ people getting married, they are more likely to feel accepted in their communities and less likely to suffer from fear or isolation. In Green County just last year the County Board ratified PRIDE week and we have a PRIDE parade as well. All of these positive changes are due, in part, to a landmark Supreme Court decision which, at its heart, asserts what we know is true: a person has a right to love whomever they love. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice Shirley Abrahamson, and Judge Margaret Koehler. Justice Ginsburg: I cannot think of a justice who served as a greater exemplar of justice and equality. The decision that she penned in United States v. Virginia was groundbreaking. I can only imagine that decision was informed by her own experience as a trailblazing female lawyer. Additionally, her work ethic and her collegial relationships with ideologically diverse justices are also a source of inspiration. Justice Shirley Abrahamson. I admire Justice Abrahamson for her leadership of the Wisconsin Supreme Court as well as for her work ethic, intellect, innovative work to take the courts to the people, and for her steadfast commitment to maintaining the decorum of the court through turbulent times. I also appreciate her allegiance to the idea that states have the ability to grant rights over and above those granted by the federal constitution, which is obviously very significant given the curtailing of certain rights by the United States Supreme Court. Judge Margaret Koehler: Closer to home, in the counties in which I practice, I have had the opportunity to appear in front of some of the first female judges to take the bench. When I see photographs from bar association meetings just 30 years ago, some of these women, such as Judge Koehler, are among the only women in the photo. It reminds me of the scores of Wisconsin women attorneys who paved the way for myself and other female attorneys. I also think of Judge Koehler in terms of her exemplary work as a judge in a rural county. In one or two judge counties, judges are visible and well-known figures in the community. They work more closely than judges in larger counties with the county board and the clerk of courts on policy and budget items. Judge Koehler was in tune with the local community and ran an efficient and organized court. One further note: Having spent the majority of my legal career as a public defender for the state of Wisconsin, I am in awe of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson who brings to the bench her experience representing indigent individuals while also achieving the milestone of being the first black woman justice. The proper role of a judge: Judges must be impartial and fair. Their role is more complex than serving as “umpires” who simply call balls and strikes. Judges are called on to interpret the law. They must show respect and compassion for individuals on all sides of a case. They must be mindful of the challenges in our criminal justice system and intentional in being a part of efforts to improve the system. In addition, Judges have specific roles depending on the case or scenario in front of them. In criminal trial settings, a judge decides what evidence comes in and what evidence stays out and instructs the jury on the law. Judges are also charged with protecting witnesses and victims and ensuring that defendants get a fair trial before an unbiased jury. In court trials, judges must make factual findings and apply the law to those factual findings. They must weigh the credibility of the witnesses, assess any bias a witness may have and determine who to believe regarding a particular issue, and then apply the correct burden of proof. To my earlier point about the complexity inherent in being a judge, there are many situations where a judge must exercise her discretion and where her role is nuanced. Judges often have to balance conflicting interests. In treatment courts, a judge must participate in a collaborative decision-making process with an interdisciplinary team, engaging participants with motivational interviewing, and administering incentives and sanctions. In cases involving children and youth, the role of the judge includes ensuring that the administration of justice is trauma-informed because so many of the youth who come before the court are likely to have experienced adverse childhood experiences. Since 1848, judges in Wisconsin have been elected to the role. If appointed, I am ready and eager to run a proactive, well-resourced and winning campaign that will reach voters throughout Green County. Finally, as I observed elsewhere in the application, a judge is the face of justice in her community. Judges must be active, visible, and engaged in the broader community. Judges have a significant role to play in efforts to help inform the public about how Wisconsin courts work and how they are being, and can be, improved. Equal justice under the law is, and perhaps always will be, aspirational. The ultimate role of a judge is to do all she can, in all the ways she can, to root out inappropriate biases in order to move our courts closer to achieving that goal every single day. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Kristin M. Cafferty
Appointed to: Racine County Circuit Court Appointment date: Feb. 2, 2021 (effective April 9, 2021, and elected to a six-year term on April 5, 2022) Education: Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Undergraduate – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin High School – St. Joseph Academy, Green Bay, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: October 2004-present – Attorney/Shareholder, Habush, Habush & Rottier, S.C., Racine, Wisconsin 1996-October 2004 – Attorney, Hostak, Henzl & Bichler, S.C., Racine, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana Federal Court of Claims General character of practice: I have a busy practice representing individuals who have sustained personal injuries. I carry a heavy caseload and usually have 20-30 cases in active litigation. I help my clients seek fair compensation for their medical bills, wage loss and pain and suffering. I handle cases in the claims stage, in litigation (including court and jury trials), and in the appellate courts. I practice primarily in Racine and Kenosha counties, but handle cases all over the State of Wisconsin, and in federal court. Describe typical clients: My clients are as diverse as the population of Racine County. I represent people from a variety of backgrounds. My clients vary in terms of their race, ethnicity, level of education, employment status, physical abilities and income. I have clients who come from all neighborhoods and all walks of life. My clients have many different stories, and it is my job to understand their unique perspectives so that I can advocate on their behalf. Number of cases tried to verdict: Over 30 List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: Racine County personal injury case: [The client] sustained a severe pylon fracture of his heel and ankle when he fell from a roof while gratuitously cleaning his neighbor's gutters. [His] injury should have ended his job as an ironworker, but his wife's cancer diagnosis and his family's need for ongoing insurance required that he return to work, even before he was released by his doctor … [resulting] in daily and constant pain. His quality of life, as well as that of his wife, was significantly impacted by his injury. The liability for the incident was challenged by the neighbor's insurance company, whose counsel suggested … [it resulted from] his own carelessness. After a three-day trial [in 2014], the jury awarded damages … in excess of $1,000,000 and found him to be only 15% responsible for his fall. … It was my privilege and honor … to obtain a fair verdict for their losses. Racine County work injury case (2017): [The client was injured] at work when he was assisting a semi-truck driver backing his trailer into a loading dock. The trailer lurched suddenly, and its tire ran across [the worker’s] foot. Initially, his injury was not thought to be severe; however, over time his wound worsened. At first his toes, and eventually his lower leg, required amputation. I visited [him] and his girlfriend in their home over the years as we witnessed his health progressively decline. I watched in stunned silence as he navigated the steep front steps to his home by transferring out of his wheelchair and crawling up the steps to his front door. Limited worker's compensation benefits prevented [him] from finding a new home that accommodated his disability. His injuries took a significant emotional toll. In addition to a loss of dignity, he lost his sense of purpose in gainful employment, which caused a loss of confidence. … [His] case was eventually settled without a trial, and with the funds from the confidential settlement he achieved financial security and regained his sense of hope and purpose. Later, I was honored to preside over the marriage of [the couple in] a service conducted in their new disability-accommodating home. … Milwaukee County personal injury case: [The client] was severely injured in a roll-over car accident [in 2017] causing the car to start on fire. In addition to a fractured leg and other injuries, [she] sustained burns over 30% of her body … and accumulated over $1,000,000 in outstanding medical bills. The driver of the car falsely claimed that [the client] was driving. … [The client] explained that she had initially hired another lawyer, but had been dismissed as his client when the lawyer learned there was a dispute over who was driving the car and that there was limited insurance coverage. In addition to abandoning her case when it became challenging, her prior lawyer had not even assisted [her] in completing the simple paperwork that was required to have her health insurance process her medical bills. I assisted [her] … and also used this evidence to convince the driver’s insurance company to pay their policy limits. … I negotiated the health insurance liens to obtain a greater recovery … and worked with the district attorney and the driver’s defense attorney to enable [her] to seek additional restitution for future treatment that would not be covered by insurance. I attended the sentencing hearing with her to give emotional support while she read her victim impact statement. Competently resolving [her] case required a great deal of time and understanding of both civil and criminal processes, navigation of auto and health insurance issues, and knowledge of caselaw involving restitution and civil releases (an issue I had argued before the Wisconsin Supreme Court). … It was extremely rewarding to have been able to alleviate her burden of medical bills, to achieve a just result in the outcome of the civil and criminal cases, and to help [her] move forward with her life. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: My practice does not generally involve proceedings before an administrative agency or commission. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). Most courts now require some kind of alternative dispute resolution as part of the litigation process, so many of my cases involve a mediation. I estimate that I have participated in well over 100 civil mediations. I have participated in a few arbitrations over my career, but arbitration is not as popular for personal injury cases. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: I have held fundraisers for the following candidates: Governor Tony Evers, Attorney General Josh Kaul, 1st Congressional District Candidate Roger Polack, Judge Lisa Neubauer, Municipal Judge Rebecca Mason, Mayor John Dickert I have volunteered for the campaigns of President Barack Obama, Municipal Judge Rob Weber, Justice Rebecca Dallet and Justice Jill Karofsky. Previous runs for public office: n/a All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Judge Jack Jude, Circuit Court, 2004 Judge Faye Flancher, Circuit Court, 2003 Judge Gene Gasiorkiewicz, Circuit Court, 2010 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Wisconsin Association for Justice, 2007-present, including as president-elect Racine County Bar Association, 1997-present, including as president Racine Neighborhood Watch, 1998-2006, including as board member Conflict Resolution Center, 1996-2006, including as board member St. Joseph Parish, Parish Council, 2012-2019 St. Joseph School, Enhancement Committee, 2007-present Siena Catholic Schools, Education Committee, 2017-2019 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: I have been the volleyball coach for Racine Youth Sports spring volleyball league (coaching 2 teams) and for grade school volleyball teams through the Racine Parochial League/South Shore Parochial League since 2015. I have volunteered my time to do election protection for the Democratic party since 2008, at first being an election observer, and then working in the boiler room, most recently acting as County Counsel for Racine and Kenosha counties for the last few statewide elections. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: Serving the residents of Racine County as a Circuit Court judge will allow me an opportunity to demonstrate my gratitude and share my knowledge and experiences. The people of Racine have been wonderful to me and my family. My husband and I moved to Racine in 1995 to practice law. We chose to raise our four children in Racine. For twenty-five years, my family has been enriched by the relationships we have formed in our diverse community. Our Racine neighbors and friends have exposed us to traditions, languages, foods, and perspectives that have brought depth to our family's character. Unfortunately, our positive experience living in Racine is not universal. A 24/7 Wall St. article recently rated Racine as one of the worst cities in the United States for African Americans. Highlighting the race-based gaps facing Black Americans in education, income, health, incarceration and achievement, the article noted that Black residents earn half of white residents, are nearly 12 times more likely to be put in prison, and three times more likely to live in poverty. These statistics mirror my observations. I have witnessed the challenges that families of color face in Racine. I have fed, clothed, educated and cared for young Black men with amazing potential, and despite my best efforts, have lost them to violence and to the streets. Others have a fundamental mistrust of the legal system due to a history of mistreatment, and I have worked particularly hard to gain their trust. Serving Racine County as a Circuit Court judge would grant me an opportunity to ensure racial equality in my courtroom and to inspire trust and equity in the justice system. Racine's challenges extend far beyond race. I have helped clients dealing with homelessness, struggling with mental illness, and living in poverty. I have visited many of my clients in their homes (or in the jail) and read about their private challenges in their medical records. I have helped clients with basic skills like opening a bank account, requesting a birth certificate, obtaining health insurance, or explaining themselves to a medical professional. Some of my clients are disabled and live on limited income, many are working with no health insurance and others have exhausted their savings to pay for large health insurance deductibles. I have learned from these experiences to be mindful of the individual circumstances of the person sitting across from me. My desire is to treat everyone with respect and equity regardless of socioeconomic status. For many years I have reflected on how to use my skills to make a more meaningful impact on my community beyond just the lives of my clients. The following quotation encapsulates my desire to focus my energy on public service. Cornell West said, "Never forget that justice is what love looks like in public." I would be honored and humbled like to serve the people of Racine to return the love they have shown to me, through a justice system that is fair, compassionate, and independent. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. The U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), changed the landscape of campaign finance in the United States by invalidating federal and state limitations on corporate spending in elections. Campaign finance rules since Citizens United have been eroded and the power of the Federal Election Commission has been eviscerated. Large amounts of money from secret corporate donors has flooded into federal and state elections, including judicial races. Corporations are now significant, but anonymous, influencers in elections. By removing transparency in campaign funding, the U.S. Supreme Court has prevented the media, watchdog groups, and the public from critically analyzing campaign donations. This decision has had a profound negative effect on judicial campaigns and the integrity of the courts, particularly in Wisconsin. The Citizens United decision and its progeny have undermined the public's confidence in the independence of the Wisconsin judiciary. Prior to the Citizens United decision, spending in Wisconsin judicial elections by outside groups was rare. Terry and Bard, Judicial Elections and Issue Advertising: A Two-State Study, 39 U. ARK. LITTLE ROCK L. REV. 579 (2017). In the years since the opinion was released, however, Wisconsin has experienced exponential growth in election spending for judicial candidates to the Supreme Court. Id. Independent expenditures have often outweighed the spending of the candidates themselves. Id. The influx of money into all Wisconsin elections is troubling, but the consequences to the perceived independence of the judicial branch is extremely concerning. In 2015, the spotlight was on the Wisconsin Supreme Court when it ruled to close an investigation into coordination between the executive branch and outside interest groups. The Court ordered that the documents related to the investigation be destroyed. Two Unnamed Petitioners v. Peterson, 2015 WI 85. When probe documents were leaked to the press, international attention was directed to the impartiality of the Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices. Certain Justices came under scrutiny for this decision because their campaigns benefitted from the same dark money groups that were involved in the probe. Consequently, the legitimacy of the decision to close the investigation was clouded. The world asked the precise question asked by Justice Kennedy in the Citizens United decision; namely, whether the justices elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court with the assistance of dark money were subject to "disproportionate influence?" The worldwide focus on the lack of transparency and accountability in judicial campaign funding after Citizens United has created an impression of potential corruptibility of the Wisconsin judiciary. This perception tarnishes the people of Wisconsin and the entire American judicial branch. Influences of dark money persist, unchecked, under Citizens United. The scrutiny continues to this day as the Wisconsin Supreme Court makes rulings on issues of nationwide importance, such as election integrity. It is imperative that courts, both in Wisconsin and nationwide, regain the confidence of their constituents by attaining transparency in judicial campaign funding. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Justice Janine Geske When I was attending Marquette University Law School, Justice Janine Geske became the second woman to sit on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. At that time, she was a well-respected Milwaukee Circuit Court judge, generous with her time to law students and in the community. I knew her to be an empathetic, energetic, and introspective jurist. Justice Geske helped shape my view of justice through her efforts in promoting alternative conflict resolution. Her passion resonated with me as I served on the Board of the Racine Conflict Resolution Center. At the time, our Center offered free mediation services for small claims cases, a program which Justice Geske facilitated in Milwaukee. Sr. Lois Aceto, our Executive Director, was also an advocate for restorative justice, and she taught us how these critical programs bring healing to both the victim and perpetrator. I have often employed and relied on these skills throughout my career. In 1998, Justice Geske made a bold and courageous decision to step down from the Supreme Court to focus on restorative justice. She impressed upon me the need to discern the impact a lawyer wants to make on society, which often involves making difficult choices. Her brave decision involved forgoing professional achievement in order to pursue personal fulfillment. When contemplating this application, I recalled Justice Geske's encouragement to lawyers to follow their hearts. If chosen for this appointment, I, too, will be moving away from many opportunities I have worked hard to create, including leadership roles that are far too rare for women trial lawyers. I am fortunate to have the support of my family and the encouragement of my partners to take this step, and I thank Justice Geske for inspiring me to embark on this journey toward public service. Judge Stephen A. Simanek Judge Stephen A. Simanek has enjoyed a thirty-year career as a Racine County judge. He cares deeply about the Racine community and its citizens. He has presided over some of the County's highest profile cases with patience and grace. I have tried cases and argued motions before Judge Simanek and found him to be humble, measured, compassionate, and independent-minded. Although a gifted intellect, he has never insinuated that he is superior to any of the parties who appear before him. He is secure and confident in his convictions, but never considers himself to be beyond reproach. If he makes a mistake, he will recognize the error and remedy it. Above all, Judge Simanek retains his sense of humor even in difficult and stressful circumstances. Judge Simanek treats all litigants with respect, dignity, and kindness. He takes the time necessary to explain his decisions so that, regardless of the outcome, all will feel they have been heard. Regardless of the outcome in Judge Simanek's courtroom, all parties involved will leave knowing that the judge was prepared, engaged, and with an understanding of the judge's rationale. If am fortunate enough to receive this appointment, I aspire to be as prepared, confident, respectful and fair as Judge Simanek. The proper role of a judge: The coaches on my son's travel basketball team often told the boys to "Trust the Process." These devoted leaders encouraged the team to follow their plan in order to achieve success both on the court and in life. To many of the players on the team, the coaches were important role models who offered essential leadership, discipline and structure. The role of a Circuit Court judge is much the same as these coaches - to exemplify patience, to set expectations, to offer appropriate direction, and to facilitate respect - thereby instilling trust in the process. Appropriate judicial temperament is paramount to creating trust of the legal system. Judges should never be condescending to staff, attorneys, or the citizens who appear before them. This approach is especially critical when a case involves pro se litigants who do not understand the intricacies of the legal system. Circuit Court judges must always act with civility, as they are the face of the justice system and often the only decision-maker that many will ever encounter. A court's dehumanizing attitude toward a litigant (or an attorney) can make a person question their abilities and make them feel disrespected and unheard. The court has tremendous power to define a person's self-worth, which should be exercised to inspire and motivate, not to belittle and berate. A judge should set an example of excellence and define her expectations so that those who appear before her are likewise prepared and organized. A trial court judge must act with preparedness, intelligence, diligence, fairness, and decisiveness. Judges must issue timely and well-reasoned decisions to adequately serve the litigants. An efficient courtroom is essential to the fair administration of justice. A judge can earn credibility by facilitating equity. By exercising her discretion within the boundaries of the law, a judge can help others to believe the system is fair for all. A judge should explore evidence-based alternatives and study solutions to issues facing the system. For example, the creation of specialty courts helps to facilitate positive change from within and offers litigants specifically tailored results. A judge can also use her discretion in sentencing decisions, setting bail, and motion practice to promote the fair administration of justice. A judge who is willing to look to alternatives, focus on treatment over incarceration, or consider thoughtful approaches to resolution may be effective in establishing her credibility without going beyond her authority. When a judge sets reasonable and appropriate expectations for the parties and issues consistent, well-reasoned decisions, it permits lawyers to give reliable advice to their clients. This leads to a perception of fairness and confidence in the integrity of the judicial system. In America and Wisconsin, we must instill and nurture belief in the fairness of the judicial system for all who encounter it. We must continue to build and enhance the relationship between our citizens and their democracy. It is the role of a judge to restore that trust in the process. |
Donate
Help WJI advocate for justice in Wisconsin
|
RSS Feed