"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.
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: 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. "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: Sandra Giernoth Appointed to: Washington County Circuit Court Appointment date: Feb. 21, 2020 (effective March 28, 2020, and elected to a six-year term on April 6, 2021) Education: Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Undergraduate – Carroll College, Waukesha, Wisconsin High School – Watertown High, Watertown, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: July 2019-present – Deputy district attorney, Washington County District Attorney’s Office October 2010-July 2019 – Assistant district attorney, Washington County District Attorney’s Office May 2009-October 2010 – Associate attorney, Kim & LaVoy, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin General character of practice: I currently serve as a prosecutor, specifically the Deputy District Attorney, in the Washington County District Attorney's Office. I represent the State of Wisconsin in misdemeanor and felony criminal cases, juvenile cases, CHIPS matters, and civil forfeiture actions. I represent Washington County in ordinance violations. Describe typical clients: Since obtaining my law degree, I have practiced exclusively in criminal law. For approximately sixteen months I practiced criminal defense with Kim & LaVoy and represented clients charged with crimes and forfeitures and in injunction matters. Since joining the Washington County District Attorney's Office, I have represented the State of Wisconsin and Washington County in criminal, traffic, and forfeiture proceedings. My entire practice consists of litigation. Number of cases tried to verdict: 44 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: State of Wisconsin v. Michael Kemmeter I represented the State of Wisconsin in State v. Kemmeter, Washington County Circuit Court case 11CF434. …The State charged Michael Kemmeter with Physical Abuse of a Child – Recklessly Cause Great Bodily Harm for causing fractures in both arms of [redacted]. The criminal complaint was filed on November 11, 2011, and a three-day jury trial occurred October 8, 2012, through October 10, 2012. This case is a significant accomplishment for me in a number of respects. First, at the time I charged the case, I had been a prosecutor for a little over a year. By the time the case proceeded to trial, I had been a prosecutor for a little under two years. Attorney [Alex] Flynn was (and is) a formidable and experienced defense attorney; on paper I appeared out matched. As a young prosecutor, this case felt like a test of my skill, potential, and abilities, and it very much was. Second, Wisconsin Statutes section 907.02 had recently been amended to adopt the Daubert standard for expert testimony, and the defense filed a Daubert challenge to my expert's opinion. It was my first Daubert hearing, and I believe the first Daubert hearing for my office. In that regard, I was navigating uncharted territory. Third, the subject matter—child abuse—is complex and relies heavily on expert testimony. This case was my first significant endeavor into presenting significant expert testimony to a jury. I also faced the challenge of cross-examining an opposing expert offering competing conclusions. Fourth, I dealt with complicated victim dynamics in that [the child’s] mother … opposed the prosecution and did not believe the expert’s conclusion that Kemmeter had inflicted harm. … She was a reluctant but necessary witness for the State, but did not subscribe to the State's theory. Not one single victim sat on the State's side of the courtroom. I learned the importance of a cohesive trial theory, and in this case it had to reflect the reality that no victim was asking the jury to hold the defendant accountable. In sum, this case—and the litigation it involved—was in many ways a test of my measure as an attorney and specifically, as a prosecutor. I certainly gained confidence in my trial skills, but more importantly, what I learned set the bar for how I would handle every case to come thereafter. State of Wisconsin v. Bartelt I represented the State of Wisconsin in State v. Bartelt, Washington County Circuit Court case 13CF276, filed July 18, 2013. …The State charged Daniel J. H. Bartelt with First-Degree Intentional Homicide for causing the death of a nineteen-year-old young woman who was found deceased in her Hartford, Wisconsin residence, on July 12, 2013. I participated heavily in the initial investigation, including authoring affidavits to support search warrants and advising law enforcement regarding legal issues that arose during the investigation. … Once charged, this case involved significant litigation, including Motions for Severance, to Suppress Evidence, and to Change Venue. The jury trial occurred August 11, 2014, through August 19, 2014. The State introduced multiple types of forensic evidence at trial, including DNA, fingerprint, forensic pathology, and computer forensic analysis, which necessitated myself and District Attorney Bensen becoming well-versed in these areas. This case is significant to me as I tackled many unique legal challenges and complicated forensic evidence. On a personal level, [redacted] was a beloved member of Hartford whose death was shocking and left the rural community of Hartford shaken. It was an honor to have represented the community in seeking justice … and to have helped her family navigate through the criminal justice system. Implementation of Washington County Drug Treatment Court Throughout 2019 I have participated as a team member on the Washington County Drug Treatment Court Implementation Team. In early 2019, the judges of the Washington County Circuit Court agreed to pilot an Opiate Drug Treatment Court. As the member of the District Attorney's Office who handles the largest portion of drug cases, I have served, along with DA Bensen, on the implementation team, which has been tasked with developing a pilot Drug Treatment Court in Washington County. As a member of this team, I have participated in grant applications and developing policies and procedures for the drug court. I have also worked to develop partnerships with other community stakeholders to incorporate services and resources into the drug court. Washington County has been substantially affected by the opiate crisis, and the drug treatment court presents an opportunity for the criminal justice system to partner with community stakeholders to bring resources to Washington County to address the treatment needs of drug-addicted criminal defendants while offering the community protection through the monitoring and accountability of the drug treatment court. I am proud to be part of the team that is working to bring this important resource to Washington County. My participation on this team reflects my interest in bringing resources to the Washington County justice system to use as alternatives to incarceration. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: In private practice, l represented clients at administrative hearings held by the Department of Transportation regarding consequences for alleged operating while intoxicated offenses. Since becoming a prosecutor, on one occasion I appeared at an administrative hearing before the Department of Transportation that was related to a pending criminal case for which I was the assigned prosecutor. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). To date, my practice has consisted entirely of litigation. However, I have extensive experience in negotiating stemming from the thousands of criminal cases I have prosecuted. In my role as a prosecutor, I strive to reach a fair resolution to both sides, which requires a meaningful exchange of information. an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of each side's position, and exercise of professional judgment. I believe these skills are applicable to non-litigation legal experience such as arbitration and mediation. 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: Todd K. Martens, Washington County Circuit Court, 2010 and 2017 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: Through my membership in Emerging Leaders of Washington County, I have engaged in volunteer service at non-profit agencies in Washington County and United Way of Washington County. This volunteer service has most recently consisted of: donating and collecting personal care supplies and housing supplies for Karl's Place, a homeless program in Washington County; collecting school supplies for United Way's annual school supply drive; serving as team lead for the annual United Way of Washington County Campaign Kick-Off Event; fundraising via the Emerging Leader's Charity Golf Outing that benefits the United Way Campaign; serving as discussion facilitator at On The Table, an annual event to address community issues. I currently serve as a board member on the Board of Directors for United Way of Washington County, a board member on the Froedtert West Bend Community Hospital Board of Directors, as Co-Chair for Emerging Leaders of Washington County, and as a committee member for the Kettle Moraine YMCA Membership and Program Committee. I currently do not engage in pro bono legal work due to the nature of my employment. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge -- The opportunity to serve as a Circuit Court Judge in Washington County aligns with my strong desire to positively contribute to the community in which I live and allows me to use my education and skill set to do so. My decisions to obtain a law degree and practice criminal law were purposeful, and in the nearly ten years I have served as a prosecutor I have fortunate that my employment has allowed me to positively impact my community. Serving as a Circuit Court Judge in Washington County would be an opportunity to continue that journey by a means that represents a new professional endeavor. 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. Gill v. Whitford is an important decision to the people of Wisconsin because it effects the value of every citizen’s vote. While the United States Supreme Court did not decide the issue of partisan gerrymandering of Wisconsin districts because it remanded to the district court on the issue of standing, Gill represents an opportunity to create a workable definition of unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering. The United States Supreme Court’s decision to remand the case on the issue of standing had a short-term negative effect on the people of Wisconsin insofar as the present district boundaries survive. However, future decisions of both the district courts and the United States Supreme Court in Gill and similar cases that address partisan gerrymandering are important to prevent the partisan watering down of an individual citizen’s vote. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Honorable Todd K. Martens – Washington County Circuit Court Branch III I admire the Honorable Todd K. Martens, who I consider a professional mentor. I have known Judge Martens in a professional capacity for over ten years, and I admire his legal abilities and service to Washington County. I first met Judge Martens in 2008 when he served as Washington County District Attorney; I was a second-year law student at Marquette and had been assigned to his Office for an internship. During that internship I had the opportunity to observe how then-DA Martens lead the District Attorney’s Office and practiced as a prosecutor. I admired his leadership, his extensive knowledge of criminal law, and his litigation skills. In the sixteen months I practiced as a criminal defense attorney I handled several cases with the Washington County District Attorney’s Office, some of which were specifically with then-DA Martens. Switching from his intern to an adversary was a character-building experience, but once on opposite sides I gained a deeper perspective of the importance of candor and credibility between opposing attorneys. In 2010, then-DA Martens was appointed to the circuit court and I was hired by District Attorney Bensen as the newest Assistant District Attorney in the Washington County District Attorney’s Office. In the past nearly ten years, I have appeared before Judge Martens in hundreds of cases. As a judge, I admire his decisive nature and mastery of the law and procedure. He runs an efficient courtroom in which those who appear are expected to be prepared and productive. I have also witnessed and admire his community engagement outside the courtroom. In sum, I admire Judge Martens’ leadership in Washington County, his legal skills, and service as a prosecutor and judge. Justice Rebecca Dallet – Wisconsin Supreme Court I met Justice Dallet in my third year of law school as she was my professor in Trial Advocacy at Marquette University Law School. At that time Justice Dallet, a former prosecutor in the Milwaukee District Attorney’s Office, had recently become a court commissioner, and was actively campaigning for election to the Milwaukee County Circuit Court. Thereafter I have witnessed her service as a judge and ultimately as a Justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Justice Dallet represents an individual who I have admired from afar because of her continual pursuit of professional development and service to both her immediate community and the State of Wisconsin. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor – United States Supreme Court (1981-2006) I admire Justice Sandra Day O’Connor as the first female justice appointed to the United States Supreme Court and an authentic, moderate, and candid jurist who played an integral role in a number of Supreme Court decisions during her twenty-four years on the Court. After retiring from the Court, Justice O’Connor has engaged in her community through programs aimed at civic awareness. Her commitment to educate and engage the public in civics aligns with my opinion that an informed and engaged citizenry is best for all. The proper role of a judge: The proper role of a circuit court judge is to interpret the law as written and apply it to the facts of a case to render a decision. Judges are not permitted to interpret the law to advance a social or political agenda. Circuit Court judges are responsible for a number of decisions that are vested heavily in an exercise of professional judgment. In this regard, a judge must employ a strong sense of judgment grounded in the law and based on reason, prudence, and common sense. A circuit court judge also has a role within both the legal community and the community at large. Especially within a close-knit county such as Washington County, a circuit court judge serves to shape the nature of the legal community practicing in the jurisdiction. The way in which a judge conducts himself or herself within the courtroom, their procedures and practices, and the manner in which they engage with the parties and lawyers have a great effect on the norms of the jurisdiction. A circuit court judge also serves a natural leadership role within the community at large by bringing attention to needs and issues of the justice system, raising public awareness and engagement, and by actively seeking resources to improve the justice system. "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: John R. Remington Appointed to: Milwaukee County Circuit Court Appointment date: Feb. 15, 2024, effective May 3 (term ending July 31, 2025) Education: Law School – Washington University School of Law, St. Louis, Missouri Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Madison High School – New Richmond High, New Richmond, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: September 2007-present – Partner, Quarles & Brady LLP, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: Wisconsin Supreme Court U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit District Court of New Jersey District Court of Kansas General character of practice: I have spent the past sixteen years, my entire legal career, at Quarles & Brady in its commercial litigation group. Almost 100% of my practice has been in civil litigation, though I have been involved in a few criminal matters and some transactional work. My practice focuses on unfair competition (including non-compete claims), creditor-debtor law, and healthcare related litigation. I have also taken on court appointments and pro bono matters (see below) which has broadened my experience to include Sec 1983 claims, municipal ordinance violations, and termination of parental rights. Describe typical clients: My clients have ranged from indigent pro bono clients to large multi-national corporations. I have most commonly represented health care providers, financial institutions, and a broad base of clients that utilize restrictive covenants. Number of cases tried to verdict: 4; does not include injunctions or restraining orders 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: Biomin America, Inc. v. Lesaffre Yeast Corporation, et al., 20-cv-2109 (D.Kan.); 20cv2216 (Johnson Co, KS). Lead counsel for Lesaffre Yeast Corporation, the world’s largest yeast producer. We defended the company and two of its employees from allegations of trade secret misappropriation and breach of restrictive covenants, among related claims, in federal and state court in Kansas and prevailed in three successive stages: defeated a motion for temporary restraining order; prevailed on a motion to dismiss in federal court; and prevailed on motion to dismiss in state court. … I stands out in my mind because of the wide-ranging number of issues we briefed and argued in a compressed time frame. USA v. O’Rourke, 17-cr-495 (N.D.Ill.). In this matter, I represented Dura-Bar, a corporate victim of trade secret theft and coordinated with the United States Attorney and FBI to support the prosecution. The Defendant, our client’s former metallurgical engineer, downloaded company property to a thumb drive and was stopped by the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol as he attempted to board a flight to China. … Dates of my involvement were 2018 to 2020. This representation stands out to me because it was a criminal case and I was able to observe and participate in a three week jury trial. Staffworks Group-Wisconsin Inc. v. Service First Staffing Inc., 18-cv-392 (E.D.Wis). I was lead counsel in heavily contested non-competition claims, breach of fiduciary duty claims, and trade secret theft claims. The case settled following a favorable summary judgment ruling. Significant because of the depth of the litigation, including the opposing party’s summary judgment submission that exceeded 2200 pages. Dates of my involvement were 2018-2020. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: None Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). I have been involved in dozens of arbitrations with FINRA (Financial Regulatory Authority) including several to final award. Likewise, I have had three substantive arbitration matters in front of the AAA (American Arbitration Association). I have participated in many mediations, including with former Milwaukee County Judges Charles Kahn, Richard Sankovitz, William Jennaro, and Michael Brennan. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Jeff Davis, Court of Appeals, District II, 2021 Molly Gena, Milwaukee Municipal Court, 2023 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Lake Park Little League, coach, 2022-2023 University of Wisconsin “W” Club, member, 2002-present Catholic East Elementary School, School Advisory Committee, 2022-present St. Thomas More Lawyers’ Society, board member and past president, 2018-present Enderis Park Neighborhood Association, member, 2009-present Milwaukee Rowing Club, member, 2007-present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: I’ve kept a robust pro bono practice during my career, including most notably: Representing the birth mother in a Termination of Parental Rights jury trial in front of Judge Christopher Foley; handling several other TPR cases in Milwaukee County. Representing high school students charged with truancy in court appearances in Outagamie County as a core member of the Quarles & Brady truancy court project. First chairing a federal jury trial in front of Judge Adelman in the E.D. Wis., representing an inmate pursuing a Sec. 1983 claim; representing other inmates in similar cases that resolved short of trial. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I view this appointment as the best use of my talents to serve the public. My background as a civil litigator with sixteen years’ experience in a large law firm setting is helpful background to both the breadth of issues that come in front of the court and considerations that are typically outside the court’s view (such as client dynamics and discovery). I am applying to serve because I believe that I have the combination of intellectual curiosity, work ethic, and common sense to be a credit to this Court. I have been interested in a circuit court role for a long time, dating back to an internship at the Polk County Circuit Court in Balsam Lake during law school. I enjoy the range of the work—from esoteric to practical. Practice in a large firm setting has treated me well. It has been rewarding to solve problems for our clients and I have greatly enjoyed the collegiality of the firm. But this opportunity to serve the state and justice system, to use talents more directly to serve the public, is something I have always found attractive. People are at their best when doing work that is meaningful and challenging. For me, a circuit court position presents that opportunity. 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 my view, the Citizens United v. Federal Exchange Commission case has unfortunately had a significant negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. It is a case that presents difficult legal questions because it addresses a restraint on free speech; there are powerful arguments on both sides. However, the practical effects of equating the free speech rights of individuals and corporate entities are problematic (to say nothing about the competing lines of precedent implicated in the decision). The political process in this country has become more chaotic and public confidence in the democratic process continues to wane. Reasonable restrictions on election spending have, in the past, garnered wide support. Unfortunately, those efforts are likely non-starters under the current framework. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Justice Byron White. I have always had a deep respect for people who perform at a high level in different arenas of academics, athletics, and professional accomplishment. From a farming background in Colorado, Justice White worked his way to the highest accomplishments in sports and the law: Rhodes Scholar, Heisman runner-up, NFL star, and John F. Kennedy’s first appointment to the Supreme Court. Though I do not agree with all of his opinions (there are nearly a thousand of them) he was pragmatic and his analyses were often fact-driven. The work ethic he demonstrated in his life is reflected in his writings. I highly recommend his biography, “The Man Who Was Once Whizzer White” which I read the summer of 2005 as I entered law school. Judge Molly GaleWyrick. I interned with Judge GaleWyrick in Polk County Circuit Court (Balsam Lake, WI) the summer after my first year of law school through a State Bar program. I spent that summer in the courthouse, reviewing pleadings with her, and discussing her decisions. It left a lasting impression on me how she treated each litigant and attorney with the same respect and seriousness in cases ranging from complex injury cases to fishing without a license. I observed how a good judge can impress on all parties that they had been heard and considered before reaching a decision. The proper role of a judge: A judge must discern the mandates of the legislature and apply discretion as appropriate within the legislative framework. That said, it is not a mechanical job. With all the talk of artificial intelligence, judging is an inherently human endeavor and every case presents its own considerations. A judge’s impartiality is critical and every judge must thoroughly and honestly reflect on not only on decisions but the decision-making process. A judge must also communicate competence and respect to all involved. A judge is a primary point of contact with the justice system for a litigant or criminal defendant. How they view the court system, and the fairness of a decision, is greatly influenced by how effectively a judge communicates and the strength of his or her reasoning. "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. Bold type within italicized answers comes from the original 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: Lena C. Taylor Appointed to: Milwaukee County Circuit Court Appointment date: Jan. 26, 2024, to a term ending July 31, 2025 Education: Law School – Southern Illinois University-Carbondale, Carbondale, Illinois Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee High School – Rufus King, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: January 2005-present – Wisconsin Legislator/State Senator, Wisconsin State Senate September 2013-December 2016 – Attorney, Pitman, Kyle, Sicula & Dentice, Milwaukee, Wisconsin April 2003-January 2005 – Wisconsin Legislator/State Representative, Wisconsin State Assembly Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin General character of practice: When I began my career, I worked as a public defender for the State of Wisconsin, for 2 1/2 years. I represented indigent individuals in both misdemeanor and felony cases. In 1996, I opened my own legal practice. Leveraging my experience with the Public Defenders Office, my practice began with a fixed fee contract with a public defender’s office and concurrent hourly engagements with Attorney Anne Bowe. The scope of my firm encompassed a diverse array of legal areas, including business and real estate contracts, family law, personal injury, guardian ad litem, and bankruptcy. Predominantly, my focus resided in the realm of criminal law, encompassing federal and state jurisdictions. Within this domain, I adeptly navigated dismissals, negotiated deferred prosecution agreements, participated in pre-trial hearings, and engaged in the full spectrum of courtroom proceedings, from bail hearings and motion hearings to trials, sentencing hearings, and revocation hearings. Over time, my practice expanded to include three lawyers and a dedicated support staff. In 2004, I ran for public office. After securing an electoral victory, I reduced my practice’s caseload, completed pending cases, and turned my attention to my duties as an elected member of the Wisconsin State Legislature. Since that initial election, I have been elected to the Wisconsin State Senate in 2005, where I am currently serving my 5th, four-year term. In 2016, I rekindled my involvement in personal injury law. Subsequently, I collaborated as co-counsel with the Hausmann McNally law firm, where I had previously interned during my legal education. Later, I transitioned to a role with PKSD, assuming responsibilities in outreach and personal injury. However, the inherent challenges of balancing legal practice, with legislative duties, compelled me to reassess and prioritize my commitments. Over the past five years, my professional endeavors have shifted towards consulting in various domains, including real estate, business development, personal injury, and probate. This period has seen a limited caseload, predominantly centered on advisory roles with minimal courtroom obligations. Describe typical clients: The majority of my clientele has been comprised of businesses & individuals from diverse economic backgrounds. A significant number have been financially disadvantaged, from the greater Milwaukee area. They often hail from the community where I have resided my entire life. It has been important to me, to provide legal representation, guidance and advocacy to the community that helped nurture and support me over the course of my life. Originally my practice was litigation and general practice. More recently, I have done more consulting and little, to no, litigation. Number of cases tried to verdict: Two cases have been tried to verdict. One as counsel and one as co-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 participated as a judge or lawyer in significant trials in the past 7 years, due to my role as a state legislator for the past 20 years. In addition, my limited practice has not included litigation. However, in the legislature, I have been appointed as a member of the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Joint Committee of Criminal Penalties Review, Judicial Council, and the Uniform Law Committee, in the last 7 years. In 2010, I blazed a trail as the 1st woman and Black person to be Chair of the Judiciary, Joint Committee on Criminal Penalties Review, and the Justice Reinvestment Oversight Committee, all of which have a direct impact on Wisconsin’s judicial system. Through those chairmanships, I led profound justice reform in Wisconsin, as outlined in the attached 2009-2010 report card. Since, I have authored and passed into law, more than 120 pieces of legislation during my legislative career. Below are examples that illustrate my work, in this area: 1. Redistricting - My legislative work on redistricting demanded extensive research, analysis, bill drafting, and negotiations. Furthermore, it exerted a substantial influence on the research, case law, legal arguments, and the subsequent decision of the US Supreme Court. This decision identified instances of voter rights violations within the Wisconsin maps, particularly against the black community, as outlined in the Court’s order. 2. Independent Criminal Investigations - Crafting legislation for Independent Criminal Investigations, in cases of police-involved deaths serves as an illustration of my legislative work. This involved collaborative drafting and negotiations across party lines, particularly with Representative Gary Bies. The foundation for this legislation was laid upon the groundwork established by Representative A. Polly Williams, who initially advocated for inquests in police officer-involved deaths. While not entirely originating from my efforts, I, as the Lead Senate author, collaborated with Representative Bies to establish the nation’s first accountability process for officer-involved deaths. Similar to the rigor of the practice of law, research, drafting, and negotiation, my work, passage of legislation, and contributions influenced decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: In my capacity as a legislator, serving on both the Judiciary and Joint Committee on Finance, I actively engaged in hearings with Cabinet Secretaries and staff from administrative agencies. These proceedings necessitated thorough preparation of pertinent questions and the extraction of information from those appearing before the committees. Additionally, during my time in private practice, I provided legal representation to individuals involved in revocation and unemployment hearings. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). My legal experience, outside of litigation, is predominantly practice, at present. While the majority of my consultations are pro bono, the skills employed are akin to those utilized in legislative negotiations. I assist in elucidating processes, drafting documents, clarifying legal principles, and guiding parties through challenging landlord-tenant or family law issues. Additionally, I engage in negotiations to reach settlements in personal injury claims or business transactions. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: I have not held an official position in a judicial, non-partisan, or partisan, political campaign, to my recollection. My engagement in political activities encompasses providing guidance to candidates and volunteering in various capacities such as door knocking, fundraising, and making calls for both local and out-of-state races. This involvement spans partisan and nonpartisan races at the local, state, and federal levels. Previous runs for public office: Wisconsin State Senate, elected, 2005-present Wisconsin State Representative, elected, 2003-2005 Milwaukee County Executive, lost, 2008 Mayor of Milwaukee, lost, 2020 and 2022 Lt. Governor, withdrew before primary, 2022 Milwaukee Municipal Court, lost, 2023 All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Everett Mitchell, State Supreme Court, 2023 Aisha Carr, MPS School Board, 2021 Shandowlynn Hendricks-Williams, MPS School Board, 2023 Pedro Colon, Circuit Court Judge, 2011, 2017 Deb Kerr, DPI State Superintendent, 2021 Rebecca Dallet, State Supreme Court, 2018 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Wisconsin State Bar, 1996-present National Organization of Black Elected Legislative Women, 2004-present National Black Caucus of State Legislators, 2004-present Rodel Fellow, 2013-present NAACP, 1993-present Alpha Kappa Alpha, Sorority, Inc., 1989-present Rainbow Push Coalition, 2008-present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: I have engaged in a considerable amount of volunteer work, and while it’s challenging to recall every instance, I have selected three endeavors that I believe exemplify my dedication and compassion towards others. 1. Free Legal Clinic - For two decades ago, I initiated a free monthly legal clinic at Greater New Birth church. This clinic facilitated on-site driver’s license assistance, featuring the collaboration of municipal court judges, DMV staff, and legal professionals to guide individuals through immediate challenges. Additionally, we extended support for various issues and provided referrals as needed. 2. USDA Farmers to Families Food Boxes - For several years, I coordinated the distribution of 30,000 food boxes per month in collaboration with USDA partners. During this time, I also played a role in inspiring and mentoring others to participate in food distribution activities according to their capacity. Notably, the initiative spearheaded by Farina Brooks, which evolved into the Dream Team, now conducts pop-up events across the city, delivering essential food supplies. 3. Housing for Homeless - My commitment to aiding the homeless aligns with the legacies of my mother and grandmother, both of whom dedicated themselves to this cause. I have contributed by providing real estate at below-market rates, and in some instances, at no cost, to men, women, and families facing housing insecurity due to a variety of reasons to include re-entering citizens, addiction, domestic violence, unemployment, and mental health. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: When I made the decision to attend law school, I had a very singular focus. I wanted to see corrections in our judicial system that created disparities in the treatment of our citizens. As a student of history, I understood, in particular, that many of the seismic shifts in behavior along racial and gender lines, started with changes to the laws. It’s never lost on me that I am just 2 years older than the 1965 Voting Rights Act, 3 years older than the 1964 Civil Rights Act, a few years older than Affirmative Action, 6 years older than the right for women to have control over their reproductive health, and 13 years older than Brown v. Board of Education. These changes to law made monumental differences between my life and that of my parents. While slow to be implemented and accepted, the rule of law still stood. It was a starting point to push back, challenge, and enforce fair treatment. What I would later learn is that “fair” is not always “equitable”. Yet like a dependable friend, the law could be counted on to be responsive to the will of the people. Lady Justice, often accused of not being so blind in the dispensation of justice, was a symbol of what we aspired to be. The law dictates what we are and what we do. Understanding the inherent power and opportunity to affect our community, I knew that I wanted a seat at the table. Whether at a defendants table, legislative desk, or judicial chamber, my career path has been about serving the needs of this community. I have been committed to ensuring a justice system that is responsive, representative, and above reproach in the application 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. Without hesitation, I believe that the 2011 redistricting case has had the most detrimental impact on Wisconsin’s legislative process and voters. The historic lawsuit before the U.S. Supreme Court involving Gill v. Whitford spoke to the harmful effects of partisan gerrymandering, that deprived residents the rights to representation. The state’s constitution is very intentional about compact districts, maintaining communities of interest, and requires that districts be bound by county, precinct, town or ward lines. In November 2016, the 2011 maps were deemed an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander that violated both the Equal Protection Clause and the plaintiffs’ First Amendment freedom of association. We know, ultimately, how the case played out. Appeals ensued, motions to stay the case were granted, and the case was drug out until the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on partisan gerrymandering appeals in other states. In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court’s held that partisan gerrymandering claims were not capable of being decided by legal principles or by a court of justice and the Wisconsin case was dismissed. In the meantime, we have held elections in the state in which Democrats have won a majority of the statewide Assembly vote, but Republicans have walked away with 2/3 of the Assembly seats. In my home county, Milwaukee, 70% of the state’s Black population lives here. Yet, Milwaukee County voters were spread across 8 predominantly white Assembly districts, in effect cracking or diluting the Milwaukee County (black vote) The legislation that we see every day in the halls of the Capitol are impacted by this unfair advantage. Bills that address interests of concern to liberal leaning concerns, Black voters, urban residents, and others are difficult to get passed into law when conservatives have a super-majority. The positive aspect of negotiation and compromise is also adversely impacted. However, it is in compromise that the needs of most residents are met. We have furthered racial, regional, resource, and political divides because of unfair redistricting processes. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: 1. Judge Everett Mitchell – I value his life story and determination to complete his education and care for his family. I appreciate how he sees the humanity in many individuals and families that come through his court. I like that he connects with them, and while administering his role as judge, he incorporates hope, reconciliation, and change where possible. I am thrilled that he is representative of the community he serves and an example of what can be. 2. Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson – She was a trailblazer, much like Judge Vel Phillips, whom I also admired. As the first female Justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the first female Chief Justice in state history, I had a front row seat to it all. Watching her in the Capitol, I was struck that she was often one of the last people out of the building at night. She remembered her roots and the people who helped her along the way. Aside from being a brilliant legal mind, she was humble and kind. Never too busy to talk or offer guidance, I was enamored by her style as much as I was her substance. 3. Chief Judge Maxine White – Judge White represents the dreams of my ancestors. Often it is said in the Black community that enslaved people endured and sharecroppers toiled, because they could see the future. They believed in the power of education and what was possible. Judge White often talks with great affection and stark reality about the challenges her family faced. Her story is not that different from a lot of Black people from the South, but her outcomes have been significant. She is a powerful example of brilliance nurtured, mentors engaged, and opportunities provided and taken. Her practical approach to justice is inspiring. Her even-handed application of the law is admirable and her connection to this community in invaluable. The proper role of a judge: Aside from the obvious, of leading court proceedings, using established laws and guidance to determine sentencing, and ruling on the constitutionality of various laws and legal precedents, depending on the type of judge you are, there is also a practical role of a judge. A judge should be an independent thinker, who respects and is knowledgeable of the law. A judge should be neutral and able to listen to all involved. The judge’s decisions should be reasonable and fair minded. A judge must assure that all parties have appropriate representation, because they also have a role to protect the integrity of the legal system. I also believe that judges are role models and should educate the community on how the legal system works. As a result, I believe their roles are not limited to the courthouse. There is a role and place to engage in and with the community, to create and champion innovative initiatives that can bring about tangible reforms in addressing systemic issues impacting the courts and community. "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. Bold type within italicized answers comes from the original 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: Frank Gagliardi Appointed to: Kenosha County Circuit Court Appointment date: Nov. 30, 2023, to term ending July 31, 2024 (running on April 2, 2024 ballot for 6-year term) Education: Law School – Thomas M. Cooley Law School, Lansing, Michigan (now Western Michigan University Cooley Law School) Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Kenosha, WI High School – St. Joseph’s High, Kenosha, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: October 2006-present – Attorney/partner, Gagliardi Law, LLP, Salem, Wisconsin August 2021-November 2023 – Commissioner, Branch 1, Kenosha County Courthouse October 2012-January 2020 – Commissioner, Branch 1, Kenosha County Courthouse Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin General character of practice: I practice law in Kenosha County, where we help people in various areas of the law. We have a smaller size firm but work as a team to help our community members when they have legal needs. The environment in which I practice allows me the ability to help make a difference to the people we grew up with and those that now call our great County home - which I see on a routine basis. Regardless of the area of law that we are helping someone with, I am always trying to find alternative ways to resolve disputes. When you seek alternative ways and are successful, the clients appreciate your efforts to minimize costs and stress. While sometimes you cannot avoid the courtroom, there is always a need to limit unnecessary litigation and other collateral damage. Describe typical clients: Our typical clients are the people of the community. Your every day person that we call our neighbors. We service a few companies, but most of those are run by someone we have a prior relationship with. The area that I specialize in is Litigation. My focus has been in the areas of Personal Injury and Family Law. However, I have also handled: Medical Malpractice, Probates, Contested Estate Litigation, Estate Planning, Civil Litigation, Real Estate Litigation and Real Estate Transactions. Number of cases tried to verdict: Four jury trials and approximately 10 bench trials per year for the past 15 years List up to five significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: David J. Duncan vs. Dana R. Duncan 15-FA-288 I have represented David Duncan in his Divorce and Post Judgment Matters. This has been on ongoing litigation. There are many challenging factors to it on the family side and Attorney Anderson and I are working hard to minimize the collateral damage that results too often in these family law cases. Attorney Anderson and I have worked against each other in many cases throughout the years of my career. Dale Schramm et. al. vs. Ivan Jovicic et. al. 17-CV-7 I represented Plaintiff, Dale Schramm, in an Auto Accident/Trucking Accident case. This litigation was extensive. Fault was not an issue, but finding an ability to make the Defendant financially responsible was a challenging task. This case settled in Mediation. Debra Gilley et al vs. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. et al 16-CV-1263 I represented Plaintiff, Debra Gilley, In her Auto Accident case. We went through extensive discovery and ultimately reached a resolution in Mediation. Attorney Alia and I have worked on cases together for quite a few years. We regularly conduct discovery and are both reasonable in attempting to reach resolution versus wasting client funds and Court time. Estate of Arthur B. Bushing 12-PR-65 I represented Co-Personal Representative of the Estate: Carol Husnick in a very complex Probate Litigation. I cannot even begin to explain the process that we went through in this case as it was contested from every side and aspect you can imagine. Attorney Geraghty and I had to navigate this case with the assistance of Judge Bruce Schroeder to the end. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: N/A (I have only assisted in a couple of Worker’s Compensation cases in my career. I was not the attorney at our firm appearing at the hearings for these cases, however, I have assisted in the preparation for hearings before the ALJ.) Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). I am a certified mediator which certification was obtained in Law School. The skills that I learned from that training were great and have developed over the years. Almost every area of law that I practice has some form of ADR that is used to complete or attempt to complete the case. I have done several three panel Arbitrations (these were all day presentations to the panel that followed the submission of our case summary packets). I have participated in countless Mediations using a variety of Mediators throughout the State (where I have mediated small claims issues with the volunteer Mediators at the courthouses, family law issues and have mediated cases that involved over a million dollars in settlement funds). Overall ADR is a great process that should be seriously considered by every attorney not just a process that they have to get over and done with before they get a chance to try the case. Too many attorneys do not prepare for the mediation in a proper way. Whether they do not prepare their client with reasonable expectations or ranges of settlement. Or they do not communicate with the other involuntary parties (subrogation) to talk about global settlement. Regardless it is disappointing to see other attorneys in our local area not want to use a valuable tool the way ii should be used. The question that I always have a problem with when the other side Is not prepared or taking this seriously is: "Is the decision to not sit down and talk fueled by the client?" (If so. we cannot force them to give up their day in Court as everyone should have access to the Court for legitimate disputes/claims.) Or, "Is the decision fueled by the attorney so that they can run up a trial bill for fees?" Some of the most difficult cases I have ever had (and some of my best results for the client) have been completed through the process of ADR. 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: Lakeland Little League, roles including clinic director, safety officer and former president, 2006-present Westosha-Salem Kiwanis Club, member at large, 2006-2010 VA Glory Fastpitch Softball, coach/mentor, 2020-present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: Our firm, including myself do legal pro bono work on a yearly basis. … My most significant legal pro bono work has been done through Westosha-Salem Kiwanis Club where I got them qualified as a 501c3 organization … This process took over 50 hours .... The other significant volunteer work that I have done relates to our local Little League, “Lakeland.” I cannot quantify how many hours I have volunteered to this organization or to our schools in Kenosha County. … I have personally been involved in building our Brightondale Complex and the recent upgrades. ... I feel very passionately about our youth and their future. If you are someone who thinks that coaching youth sports is just about teaching them the game, then you are sadly blind! Volunteering in youth sports and seeing the children grow (mentally and skill wise) is more rewarding than anything else I have ever done (aside from raising my own children and family). … Baseball is a game of failure and to be prepared for life you need to be prepared to compete and fail at times, but then have the strength to pick yourself back up and try again! THE LAST FOUR YEARS I HAVE COMMITTED MYSELFTO AN ADDITIONAL VOLUNTEER ROLE AS A COACH FOR VA GLORY WHERE I HELP STUDENT ATHLETES IN THEIR JOURNEY TO GET SCHOLORSHIPS TO PLAY SOFTBALL WHILE OBTAINING A COLLEGE EDUCATION! Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: Since I started Law School, the idea of becoming a Judge has intrigued me. I also have strong feelings about giving back to our community. I began with what I could control, which was moving back home, to Kenosha County, to start a family. When we got back home, I started volunteering and coaching. For me it is not just giving back to our community, but more of being a part of what molds our future. As a Judge I would have an opportunity to participate in a different role in the current system, which needs to be continually modified to get better with the times and what is happening all around us. I will be seeking equality in the system if I receive this privilege. I have many friends and family that have different ethnic back grounds, religious beliefs and sexual orientations – some have not been treated fairly based on their beliefs or skin color. We need to ensure every person with a legitimate claim gets access to our Court system and that the People are heard! Faced with the fact that I am not a Criminal Law attorney (and having an ultimate goal of being a Judge), I sought out the Branch 1 Commissioner position. Through this position I have covered the bench in areas I did not practice. To prepare, I was required to do six days of courtroom observation before the Judges would let me hear a full calendar. Through these experiences I was able to get familiar with some of the proceeding in cases such as: criminal intake court, juvenile citations, commitments, TRO hearings, setting bonds and having probable cause hearings. Although the criminal side of law is not as familiar as civil for me, it will be a challenge I am willing to accept and thrive at when I have that opportunity in the rotation. I am aware that the idea of a perfect person does not exist! That fact does not mean we have to turn our backs on someone who has made mistakes – everyone makes them. Wisconsin already has a problem with over populated jails and prisons. We need to continue exploring alternative ways to rehabilitate the people that make mistakes or those who are ill. Possibly consider a mental illness court, or systems to get these people helps versus incarceration. People who are ill with mental disease or addictions can still be productive, if they get the tools needed to rehabilitate and have the desire to apply them. Not everyone will be a candidate for these programs and some will need to be confined but that is what it is important to listen and think out the box when being in the position of the Judge. Do not just be a Judge – BE HUMAN TOO! I am confident in my abilities, experiences and courtroom temperament to give this great State a lifelong commitment that will make a difference! 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 of Wisconsin vs Gerald Mitchell … (2019), which is a Fourth Amendment case. There have been a string of Fourth Amendment cases that have been coming through the system as of late. These cases include (Birchfield v. North Dakota … and Missouri v. McNeely …) but are not limited to the ones I am listing. The Mitchell case is a Wisconsin case where Mitchell was intoxicated and arrested for an OWI after he blew a .24 during a traffic stop. He was then taken to the police station and put in a holding cell. Mitchell then passes out in the cell, and the officer cannot perform the more reliable OWI test using better equipment. The officer takes Mitchell to the hospital and still not conscious they draw his blood (without a warrant). Mitchell moved to suppress the evidence of the blood draw and the appeals followed. This case went all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. The issues relate to protections of the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as warrant exceptions. Ultimately the USSC determined that such a method of extracting an individual’s blood does not violate the Fourth Amendment and was therefore lawful. There are many ways that these cases impact the People, the Courts and Law Enforcement. The decision (regardless of the USSC reasoning or the reasoning of the Wisconsin Supreme Court) impacts the People as it alters the understanding or protections that the Fourth Amendment stands for. It also puts more discretion in the law enforcement officer, without checks and balances of obtaining a warrant. That will lead to additional litigation, which the Court will have to determine if the officer used proper discretion to determine the admission of evidence collected. It also creates some additional questions that many need to be dealt with in the higher levels of Court as the USSC addressed issues that the Wisconsin Supreme Court did not even raise. Upholding the Constitution and the Law is part of the role of a Judge. Judges do not make Legislation, however, the decisions that are being made by the Courts (lower and upper) are having direct impact on the rights that the People have stemming from our Constitution. Where do we begin and where do we stop when it comes to clarifying these rules so that we do not strip away all of its protections, while at the same time weighing the safety of the public? That is not a decision I have to make but it is a decision that will continue to impact our People and State. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Hon. Judge Mary Wagner — I have known Judge Wagner since I was young. I had my very first hearing before her in my first months of practice. She let me put in my questions as it was an uncontested guardianship. Then she followed up with a few questions that I had forgotten to ask out of nervousness. She detoured making comments of being proud of me for becoming an attorney going into some history about my family. She went on to tell a story of remembering me running around my Father’s office in diapers! (Yes she did and it is probably on that record from 2006.) Why am I bringing up this story? Because I am giving you an example of the most caring and loving person we have on the bench in the State of Wisconsin. If I can sit on the bench and have a fraction of the amount of passion for our youth and community as that great woman has – I will consider myself blessed. She is really a role model for Judges as it relates to the more complex, abstract and indirect impacts someone in this position can have on the community. She has always been there for me as well! Giving me guidance and insight when all I could see was walls around me. These gifts are valuable when you are a young attorney and feel somewhat lost or overwhelmed. She is truly a very special person and that is why I admire here so dearly! Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson — Justice Abrahamson’s reputation speaks for itself. However, the reasons that I admire her is her relentless and endless pursuit for justice to all victims! On a personal side of things she took the time to have a dinner with my Nana (Carolyn Gagliardi) at an event. To this day my Nana appreciates the time and conversations that she shared with her. She was a special person to our great State and to those who she got to have personal contact and relationships with. I can hope to be more, but I will likely only be a fraction of the person she has demonstrated. She was a special Justice in our system! The proper role of a judge: The Judge plays an important role in our court system. You can start by considering the description in a simple manner focusing on the daily tasks of the Judge in the courtroom. However, you must consider the greater impact that a Judge has on the community as a whole. I will start on the simple, then conclude with the complex, abstract and indirect impact that Judges have on our community. As a Judge you are tasked with the daily duties of operating your courtroom in a systematic manner: getting through your daily calendar, being prepared to hear motions, researching issues that are presented to your court, ensuring that your courtroom is one of open access where people get their day in court — so they are heard and being a decision maker (deciding issues on: evidence, motions, bench trials, commitments and sentencing etc.). There are also other duties such as granting marriages or annulments. There are even more difficult issues of considering juvenile petitions for potential abortions or petitions relating to abuse. Part of the role is to also make timely, clear and balanced decisions. When I say balanced I am referring to being the gate keeper of evidence and objectively listening to the evidence presented, thereby weighing the same while making unbiased decisions. These decisions also need to be made in a timely manner. Holding parties hostage for a ruling only frustrates their situation and fuels the desire for the parties to negatively interact as they are stuck in turmoil until you make a decision. Being human, having empathy and being considerate of all those in the process (the parties, clerk, bailiff, court reporter, courthouse staff and your judicial peers), also play a significant role in being a Judge. The Judge also had an additional role outside the courtroom. As a Judge you are a member of the community who is often held to a higher standard. Whether that is fair or not – it is a reality. So as a Judge you can do one of two things. You can go to the courthouse and run your courtroom efficiently and honorably, then go home. Or you can continue your public service outside the courtroom. You can go out into the community and make a difference. Making a difference comes in many forms and cannot be defined because the trigger causing the need to do something resulting in making a difference almost always presents itself in unexpected and unique ways. When those situations present themselves all you can do is “the next right thing!” Bottom line is that a Judge needs to step up and accept the fact that they have more than one hat that needs to be worn at all times. "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. Bold type within italicized answers comes from the original 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: Toni L. Young Appointed to: Racine County Circuit Court Appointment date: Nov. 30, 2023, to term ending July 31, 2024 (running on April 2, 2024 ballot for a six-year term) Education: Law School – Thomas M. Cooley Law School, Lansing, Michigan (now Western Michigan University Cooley Law School) Undergraduate – Grambling State University, Grambling, Louisiana High School – Armijo High, Fairfield, California Recent legal employment: October 2009-February 2014 – Attorney, private practice, Racine, Wisconsin March 2014-February 2015 – Judicial clerk, State of Hawaii Judiciary, Wailuku, Hawaii March 2015-April 2016 – Attorney, private practice, Racine, Wisconsin April 2016-January 2020 – Staff attorney, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Janesville region, Wisconsin February 2020-present – Attorney, private practice, Racine, Wisconsin May 2021-present – Local attorney manager, Janesville region (Rock, Green and Lafayette counties), Wisconsin State Public Defender Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin General character of practice: (No answer) Describe typical clients: In my criminal practice I represent the client that has been marginalized, disenfranchised, or just simply abandoned. It is my goal to provide clients with fervent representation. I listen to my clients and advocate for them to reach the goals that we set together. I intentionally seek to represent clients that have had attorneys that have withdrawn from their cases. Until recently, I never in my eleven year career withdrew from a case (with the exception of a forced withdrawal due to conflict or when a client has asked me to withdrawn). The instances of when a client has asked me to withdraw are roughly about 10 clients. In most, if not all, of those cases the client asked me to reinstate my representation after the withdrawal. I have worked on over 800 cases. To date, I have only withdrawn from one case in eleven years of practice. I also work as a Guardian ad Litem. In my role as Guardian ad Litem I have many responsibilities. Injunctions/TROs: As GAL I Interview all parties to determine if there is merit to the Petition and I report my findings that to the Court. Child Welfare Cases (Adoption, Chips, TPRs): As GAL I have an understanding of ICWA and WICWA and apply the Law Accordingly. I work with various agencies to achieve permanency goals for the child. I advocate for timely permanence for the child(ren) that I represent as GAL. Absent a compelling reason or circumstance, if a child is out of home 15 or the most recent 22 months, following through on the presumption that exists that the agency and state must file for termination of parental rights; I investigate, write and state my report on the record with my recommendation to the court to assist with final Court orders for permanency goals. As GAL, there is an expectation that I be prepared for trial or to litigate contested matters and proceed accordingly with an understanding of the rules of evidence and trial procedure. Guardianships, Protective Placement of an Adult: As GAL I review paperwork associated with the WARD'S case (Petition for Guardianship and Petition for Protective Placement, Statement of Act(s), Examining Physician or Psychologist's Report, Comprehensive Evaluation, Healthcare and other advanced directives, etc.); I send written notices to the WARD, I speak with the WARD and explain the WARD'S rights to him or her, I read the Petition and Physician's report to the WARD. I draft a report for the court inclusive of my impressions and opinions. I consider the "least restrictive” means for placement consistent with the needs of the Ward. I gather additional documentation as needed, such as, additional medical records. I interview the Proposed Guardian (and standby guardians) to determine their fitness. I prepare written reports and call witnesses when the hearing is conducted. 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: State of WI v. HC 2016CM0753 (Kenosha County) My client was charged with Ct. 1 Disorderly Conduct, Domestic Abuse, Repeater: and Ct. 2 Disorderly Conduct, Domestic Abuse, Use of a Dangerous Weapon, Repeater. Although the two charges were Class B misdemeanors, due to the enhancers, my client was facing a tremendous amount of Prison time. Further, he was on supervision for Strangulation Suffocation with a repeater enhancer for which he was facing a revocation hearing. There was video of the altercation. The claim by the state was that my client had a knife and was being threatening and causing a disturbance. This was the classic story of he said she said. There were several flaws and inconsistencies in the complaining witness' statement. The criminal complaint stated that the officer reviewed a video provided by the complaining witness and he substantiated her claim of what happened during the altercation. I watched the video, reviewed the witness statements, our investigator interviewed the parties involved. I did not believe that the video captured what the complaining witness stated, nor was I able to understand why the officer stated that the incident occurred as the complaining witness described-- the video did not match her narration. The reason this case is significant is that a Jury was asked to decide my client's guilt or innocence. Not the police and certainly not the complaining witness. After hearing two sides of the same story with the truth somewhere in the middle, the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on both counts, which subsequently resulted in my client not being revoked and not being sentenced to Jail; he was released from jail within a few days of his trial. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: During my employment with the Wisconsin State Public Defenders Office, I have represented over 75 defendants that were facing revocation of their probation or extended supervision. During these hearings I examined witnesses both on direct and on cross examination. I am experienced with practicing according to the Division of Hearings and Appeals Wis. Statutes. 35.9, specifically Chapter HA 2 and HA 3. I am well versed in the State of Wisconsin Department of Corrections Manual-- Chapter 10 entitled "Revocation. I am equally versed in the Resource Handbook for Community Supervision Revocation Hearings. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). I am a certified mediator. I worked as a student intern while in Law School as a mediator for civil matters. Since practicing law, I have mediated several family matters prior to my employment with the Public Defender's office. While working for the Public Defender's office, I suspended my mediation practice. Having returned to private practice, I am working to expand my mediation practice to include both family matters and CHIPS and Terminating Parental Rights (TPR) matters. I have an upcoming mediation for a TPR. As a mediator, I serve as a neutral third party to facilitate the discussion surrounding a dispute. I firmly believe that alternative dispute resolution, both mediation and arbitration, are exceptional vehicles by which to give civil litigants a resolution to their dispute. Mediation is generally voluntary therefore litigants are more likely to reach a mutually satisfactory outcome when parties negotiate their own settlement. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: Angela Cunningham, 2021 Judicial Race, Kenosha County Circuit Court Branch 6 (Kitchen cabinet member) Previous runs for public office: None All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Jodi Meier, Kenosha County judge, 2016 Angela Cunningham, Kenosha County judge, 2020 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Alpha Kappa Alpha, 1991-current, including committee work on human trafficking Rotary, 2008-2010 Racine County Bar Association, 2010-2013, 2020 Milwaukee County Bar Association, 2010-2016, including Modest Means committee Wisconsin State Bar Association, 2015-2016, including Modest Means committee Wisconsin Association of Mediators, 2020 NAACP, 2009, 2010, 2015, 2020, including Legal Redress committee Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: I developed a Mock Trial program for one of the local neighborhood centers, John Bryant Community Center. The young girls that I worked with would likely never have been chosen for the statewide Mock Trial program. Not because they were not smart enough, but because they did not have the contacts or connections that other students may have had. I exposed them to a legal career in the law. The participants wrote their own fact pattern for the mock trial, which allowed them to exercise their writing skills. Most importantly they "played" all of the characters in the fact pattern, which I believe encouraged development of public speaking skills. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I want to serve the people of Wisconsin as a Judge in Kenosha County because our judicial system is under attack. Since I was a very young girl, I've admired our judicial system. No matter the infirmity we suffer or the kinks in the armor, our judicial system still remains the best system in theory. In practice however, we are tattered and torn and broken. There are many reasons for the malfunctioning of our system. I realize I am just one person and if appointed I would not be able to address a fragmented system alone. Being aligned with other Judges that are seeking to ratify the wrongs in our Judicial System in Kenosha County would lead to a restorative outcome. I'm reminded of what is sure to be one of the most notable quotes of our time, a statement by President Barack Obama, "Whatever you do won’t be enough, try anyway." Justice reform begins with one, then two, then fifteen, then hundreds; I'm elated that Governor Evers is working tirelessly to recalibrate our judicial system through Judicial appointments in favor of the people that it is called to serve. I'm reminded of something that renowned Attorney Bryan Stevenson stated, "the opposite of poor is not rich, it is justice." I want to be a Judge so that I may serve the citizens of Kenosha County in effort to standardize and attune our judiciary to its greatness—a greatness defined by a justice system that is impartial and equitable in practice and not just in theory. 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. Bostock v. Clayton County, No. 17-1618, 590 U.S. (2020) The Bostock case was recently decided in June 2020. Essentially, in each case, an employer fired employees simply for being homosexual or transgender. Gerald Bostock, an employee with Clayton County, started participating in a gay recreational softball league. His actions were deemed to be "conduct unbecoming a county employee," and he was subsequently fired. Donald Zarda worked for Altitude Express in New York, he mentioned that he was gay and was fired a few days later. Aimee Stephens presented as a man when she was interviewed and hired, she was fired after telling her employer that she was "going to begin to live and work as a woman." Each employee sued their employers for discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with various legal strategies in pursuit of a decision by the Court that their Employer discriminated against them on the basis of sex. In Gerald Bostock's case the Eleventh Circuit held that Title VII does not prohibit employers from firing employees for being gay, the Court went on to say, "therefore the Bostock case could be dismissed as a matter of law." The US Supreme got this one right Holding: "An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII. (a) Title VII makes it "unlawful... for an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual... because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex or national origin." Justice Gorsuch (delivered the opinion of the Court), joined by Justices: Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Dissenting were Justices: Thomas, Kavanaugh and Alito. The most notable words in the opinion are ''Only written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefits." Too much is left to subjective interpretation when we try to resolve what the "intent" of the drafters meant. Adhering to the written word of law disqualifies a more subjective interpretation that comes from trying to figure out the drafter's 'intent." The examine what "discriminate" meant in 1964 and concluded (sadly) that it roughly means what it means today "to make a difference in treatment or favor." It would be an extraordinary society when we get to the point when that word is a vague memory and people struggle to define it, when it becomes an "urban legend," or an archaic term like "adverse possession." The Supreme Court in Bostock did an amazing job at analyzing and observing that "the people are entitled to rely on the law as written, without fearing that courts might disregard it plain terms." Having the correct balance on the bench ensures the rise of spirited debates; it is essential to getting to equitable results. This case is important to the citizens of Wisconsin because it is another guidepost for what is discriminatory practice. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: The three Judges/ Justice that I admire the most are: Judge David Bastianelli (Kenosha County, Branch 1, Retired), Judge Jon Fredrickson (Racine County, Branch 7, 2018-Present, and Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren (United States Supreme Court 1953-1969). Judge Bastianelli is a Judge that I would pattern myself after. He is a superior example of who and what a Judge should be. His demeanor was steady, he ruled with an even hand and he was well versed in the law. He was extremely stern in a stoic way and fair. He understood the most complex issues of law; he listened intently and allowed attorneys for make their legal arguments. He was never afraid to admonish an attorney for what were inequitable practices before his court. He did not prefer one side of the "v" over the other. He allowed adversaries in court to be just that without taking sides; he refrained from being a "two against one" kind of Judge. I respect him most for his command of the law. It was astonishing to me how brilliant he was while balancing equity. There were some Attorneys or Parties that felt he sentenced too harshly. His rulings ALWAYS made sense to me; likely because he explained his rulings impeccably. His courtroom was maintained competently and efficiently. I distinctly remember getting into a verbal battle with Judge Bastianelli, he allowed me my row; but the moment he told me to "knock it off Counsel." I knew to contain myself. My colleagues mentioned that they thought I was going to keep going and ultimately end up being held in contempt. I have such a great respect for the bench and in particular Judge Bastianelli that when he ended my pontification I knew that it was time to stop talking; he allowed me enough time to speak on the record and he allowed me to do so with enough indignation to zealously represent my client.. Neither of us ever crossed the line of disrespect. My most memorable interaction with Judge Bastianelli is when he called me to his chambers to say to me what will likely be the most cherished comment that anyone will say to me. He told me "You should consider being a Judge." He went on to explain why, and he provided me with brief guidance and mentorship. His deep booming voice coming down from on high was never filled with blustering or nonsense, it was always rooted in equity and the law. I have the highest respect for his rulings from the bench. Judge Fredrickson is a Judge that I hold in high regard. I find him to be empathetic and patient. He is always prepared for court and basis his rulings on pr per procedures, statute and/ or case law. People are facing the most difficult times in their lives when they go before a Judge. He always finds a way to leave them with their dignity even when he is ruling against their personal interest(s) or position(s). He seems to be very aware of various demographics and their individual experiences. He interacts within the case and the issues at hand from a level of sensitivity that is very intentional. Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren had the characteristics of what we now call "progressive." When I think about Justice Warren, I am reminded that we are remiss as Attorneys (and Judges) when we coward and shy away from making the very difficult and equitable decisions, and instead align with what is prevalent unjust choices: oppressing the already disenfranchised. He could have a lived a life very comfortably situated behind his privilege. Instead he was a trailblazer; he was an innovator of change. He was the Chief Justice and wrote the majority decisions many landmark cases such as in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) which as you know banned segregation in public schools; Miranda v. Arizona (1966) requiring that criminal defendants be informed of their right to remain silent and to be represented by a lawyer; and Loving v. Virginia (1967), which struck down prohibitions on interracial marriage. The decisions he wrote in these cases were life altering but it is sobering to read the dissents in these cases as well. It is a reminder that without Judges and Justices like Warren, we are left with the dissent that could very easily (and has) become the majority in these types of cases that seek to abridge the rights of the poor and minorities. I admire Justice Warren for forging forward with an ideology that was very unpopular with his contemporaries. The proper role of a judge: A Judge has a multifaceted role. A Judge's role is tantamount to a referee. Not to diminish the sanctity of the Judiciary, but it is a great analogy. Webster defines referee as "(noun) an official who watches a game or match closely to ensure that the rules are adhered to and (in some sports) to arbitrate on matters arising from the play." The proper role of a Judge is to listen to the evidence, make appropriate rulings during the course of a trial or proceeding, and issue legally sound decisions and orders of the court. A Judge in Circuit Court has to preside over a hotchpotch of cases ranging from Family, to Criminal Misdemeanors and Felonies and everything in between such as guardianships, CHIPS/TPR, Juvenile, and an assortment of Civil cases. Judges are also presented with affidavits upon which a warrant is being sought by law enforcement. It is the role of the Judge to review an affidavit with discernment to ensure that the privacy rights of a citizen are not being abridged based on mere conjecture; there must be articulable facts and the Judge holds law enforcement to that standard. Judges, at times are called upon to vote for the use of implements such as the Detention Risk Assessment Instrument. The assessment determines the scale of an offense committed by a juvenile; for instance if a child has committed a technical violation or status offense, such as running away or truancy, they may fall below a certain score on the assessment and they will avoid jail as a result of their score. This tool is being successfully used in Milwaukee and LaCrosse. The Judges in Racine County voted against implementing the tool; however. there were three judges that did vote for the use of the tool. The three judges were not enough to carry the vote to majority. Months after the vote [redacted] committed suicide in a jail cell in 2017. It is reported that she was arrested for running away from home, it is always reported that she had been a victim of human trafficking. While in jail, she committed suicide. I believe if the Judges in Racine were called to vote now—after this tragic event, they would have likely vote in a different manner; or at the very least, a balance in who is voting will change the outcome. The position of a Judge is not a role that should be taken lightly or seen as a novelty or something to brag about — or be treated as an opportunity to berate attorneys and citizens. I think the very challenging job of having to permanently affect a person's life should be done so unpretentiously and with grave and solemn care. A Judge should read every document and pleading that comes across their desk with discernment, prudence, and with a spirit of equity. "Equity considers done that which ought be done" quoting Maxims of Equity. "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: Jorge R. Fragoso Appointed to: Milwaukee County Circuit Court Appointment date: Sept. 18, 2023, effective Nov. 4, 2023 (term ending July 31, 2024) (running unopposed in April 2024 election) Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin-Madison Undergraduate – University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana High School – Homer Hanna High, Brownsville, Texas Recent legal employment: April 2021-present – Defense attorney, Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, Milwaukee, Wisconsin September 2016-March 2021 – Appellate attorney, defense, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Milwaukee, Wisconsin January 2012-September 2016 – Trial attorney, defense, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Waukesha, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin Illinois State Bar General character of practice: I am an attorney in a well-regarded, mid-sized law firm founded over fifty years ago. I predominantly practice criminal law. My practice is evenly divided between trial and appellate cases, though I sometimes practice in other fields as well, including white collar defense, investigations by the Wisc. Dept. of Children and Families, Title IX, restraining orders, etc. Before joining GRGB, I spent almost five years as an appellate attorney for the Public Defender's Office, where I handled criminal appeals, as well as juvenile cases, CHIPS cases, protective placements, and termination of parental rights cases. I began my career as a trial attorney with the SPD in Waukesha County, where I worked for four years. I represented adults in criminal prosecutions, and I was a member of the drug and alcohol courts. Describe typical clients: I represent people who work hard to pay my legal fees. These people are often blue collar workers who are looking for the best defense they can afford. Before that, I defended indigent clients for nearly a decade. About 20-25% of my clients have been native Spanish speakers with little to no English language skills. I have specialized in cases involving research, writing, and litigation, including at the trial and appellate level. Number of cases tried to verdict: One as lead counsel, four total 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: My first argument before the Supreme Court happened on November 5, 2018, mere weeks after my first daughter was born. It was a challenging case that had been assigned to an experienced attorney shortly after I transferred to the appellate division of SPD. I was appointed as co-counsel so I could observe him and learn about juvenile cases, but he moved out of state shortly after I joined the case and I took on the case myself. The case—a state’s appeal from a decision by Judge T. Christopher Dee—was complicated. It involved the reinstatement of a juvenile delinquency proceeding after a juvenile had been found not competent and his JIPS case had lapsed. . . . (T)he decision, written by Justice Rebecca Dallet, was handed down on March 7, 2019. The decision was unanimous and was not in our favor. This case taught me a lot about a narrow area of the law, but more importantly, it made me realize that I could take on a difficult case, figure it out on my own, and become so familiar with the material that I could represent my client in front of the state’s highest court, even though it was the first juvenile case I had ever worked on. In February 2021, I was on the verge of winning a postconviction motion hearing in the courtroom of Judge Janet Protasiewicz. The case was almost 10 years old at that point, and my client had been in custody for its entirety. He was due to be released three years later. By then, this case had gone up to the court of appeals and back two times. We won the appeal the second time it went up, and Judge Brash remanded the case for a Machner hearing. The hearing went well, and it seemed clear the defense was headed for victory. At the conclusion of the hearing, Judge Protasiewicz brought us into chambers to let us know that she would be granting the defendant’s motion for a new trial unless we were willing to come to an agreement on the case. The state’s prosecutor . . . refused to make an offer that did not involve a 25-year mandatory minimum sentence, so my client was left to choose between risking a trial that could result in adding at least 13 years to his current sentence or waiting out the remainder of his sentence. He chose the latter, and after fighting the case consistently for ten years, he withdrew his postconviction motion. This case stands out to me as an example of the power of the prosecution. My client probably had a good chance of winning a trial, but when faced with the possibility of spending an additional ten years in prison, he chose not to take that chance. In February of 2022, I argued a motion to dismiss before Commissioner Daniel Rieck in Waukesha County. The state’s prosecutor . . . filed a long complaint on behalf of a wealthy family claiming that the house my client was gifted by the family’s deceased patriarch was obtained fraudulently. They claimed that she had tricked him into buying her a house and that he was too old to make that kind of decision with his own money. What stood out to me about that case was the way in which my client talked about the deceased man. She seemed to be the only one that saw him as a full and flawed person rather than just a benefactor with a high net worth. She had spent a lot of time with him before he passed away, and even though he was difficult at times and she was made to suffer by his family, she was very fond of him. She was also someone who had struggled with money her entire life. She was eccentric and did not live in the county. The man’s family was wealthy and well-established in the county. The commissioner really went out on a limb finding that the state had not borne its burden and dismissing the case. In May of 2022, Judge Bohren agreed and affirmed the judgment of dismissal on de novo review. The case was officially dismissed, and the dismissals were not appealed. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: For the most part, my experience in adversary proceedings before an administrative agency involves the revocation of supervision for clients convicted of criminal offenses. I have represented a client before the Dep't. of Children and Families, and I appealed a pro bono case in which a couple of prisoners challenged the restitution garnishment policies Dep't. of Corrections. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). Most of my non-litigation legal experience involves negotiating with prosecutors. I have also appeared at medical licensing hearings and represented clients during an SEC investigation, a Title IX investigation, and an investigation by the Dep't. of Children and Families. I've worked on drug and alcohol courts and volunteered with the Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic. In law school, I helped interview inmates at an ICE immigration detention center. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: n/a Previous runs for public office: n/a All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: n/a Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Milwaukee Young Lawyers Association, member, 2021-present Milwaukee County Bar Association, member, 2020-present Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, member, 2019-2022 Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic, volunteer, 2017-2022 Big Brothers, Big Sisters, volunteer, 2015-2016, 2021-2023 Waukesha County Bar, member, 2015-2016,2021-2023 Wisconsin Hispanic Lawyers Association, member, 2012-present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: I wrote the Respondent's Brief in Victor Ortiz, Jr. v. Kevin A. Carr, 2020AP1394 and Jacquese Harrell, Sr. v. Kevin A. Carr, 2020AP1601. Ortiz and Harrell were granted relief in the circuit court, and the state, by the Department of Corrections, appealed. The court of appeals reached out to Attorney Jason Luczak to brief the issue on behalf of the respondents, and he accepted the pro bono appointment. I was the lead writer of the briefs. We won in the court of appeals, and the state did not seek review by the Supreme Court. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I want to serve the people of Milwaukee County because I know that I can do an excellent job. I have over ten years of experience at the trial and appellate level, which has uniquely prepared to serve as judge. I want to be part of a court that treats people with dignity and works on behalf of the people it serves. Because of my formative experiences, I am well-positioned to do this. I have always been motivated to stand up for marginalized people. I was raised in Matamoros, Mexico, a mid-sized city on the border with South Texas where extreme poverty is ever-present. I spent the first five years of my school-aged life crossing the border every day to attend a Catholic school in Brownsville, Texas. I was raised in a Catholicism molded by the precepts of liberation theology and Catholic Social Teaching that had spread throughout Latin America. During the pandemic, a retired teacher from my former school regularly carted books across the border to hold classes for asylum-seeking children. That is the type of role model I had growing up. I moved to Brownsville at age 8 and enrolled in public school. The freshman class of my public high school had over 1,100 students, but only 500 of us graduated. I left Brownsville to attend the University of Notre Dame, but I did not lose sight of how privileged I was to graduate and be able to attend a good school. At Notre Dame, I became involved with the Center for Social Concerns, and through them, the Center for the Homeless, the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, and the Catholic Worker House. These experiences involved close contact with marginalized groups, and they informed my views. Working as a public defender was the culmination of these experiences. Every day presented an opportunity to show people respect and dignity where they may not expect it. I loved going to the courthouse every day and interacting with people from all socio-economic backgrounds, from clerks and bailiffs to prosecutors and judges and jurors and indigent clients. Leaving my job in Waukesha was difficult, but I knew I wanted to sharpen my legal skills. I learned to write and think through cases at the Milwaukee Appellate office. It was a tremendous opportunity. When I went to Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown in 2021, I was a much better writer and a much more confident attorney than when I arrived in 2016. In my years at GRGB, I’ve learned a lot about providing a thorough defense that leaves no stones unturned. I have worked on a variety of cases beyond criminal, and I have been given the opportunity to spend meaningful time on each case. I have also had the assistance of a fantastic support staff and the counsel of several attorneys with decades of experience. I’ve learned a lot from all of them. I want to be proud of the work that I do. I want the court to maintain its legitimacy and to protect the values I hold dear—e.g., voting rights, fair maps, strong public schools, people’s right to health care and privacy, a less vindictive criminal justice system—from encroachment by a legislature that seems determined to demean the state’s urban areas. I want my work to serve the people of Milwaukee County, and I know I can do a great job. 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. Before June 24, 2022, I would have said that Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee were the U.S. Supreme Court cases that most severely impacted the people of Wisconsin in a negative manner. They gutted the two most powerful weapons of the Voting Rights Act: preclearance for new voting changes in jurisdictions that have historically suppressed the vote of minority groups (Shelby County) and the results test targeting voting legislation that produces discriminatory results (Brnovich). In between these two, SCOTUS passed on a great opportunity to fix Wisconsin’s gerrymandered maps in Gill v. Whitford, but it refused to consider UW Law School professor Bill Whitford’s strong argument that the map was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. Instead, it decided the case on the issue of standing. After June 24, 2022, the clear answer is Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade, thereby allowing states to outlaw abortion. In Wisconsin, Dobbs may have activated Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban. For context, Zachary Taylor was president, and women were not permanently allowed to vote in Wisconsin until seventy years later. The questions and uncertainty around this issue led to a nearly 100% decrease in the number of legal abortions performed in the state following Dobbs. By all indications, people seeking abortions in Wisconsin have had to visit a surrounding state for abortions. Minnesota, which was not even admitted into the Union at the time Wisconsin legislators passed the abortion ban, has seen a 35% increase in abortions since Dobbs. As if that weren’t bad enough, Dobbs has called into question the entirety of the Court’s substantive due process jurisprudence. Justice Thomas, in his concurrence, called for a reexamination of the right to birth control and same-sex marriage. He even suggested the ban on criminalizing same-sex sexual relations should be reconsidered. Such drastic measures would likely worsen the Court’s crisis of legitimacy and weaken its standing with the American people. It’s no surprise the dissenting opinion, jointly written by Justices Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor, ended with a lamentation: “With sorrow—for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection—we dissent.” Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Republican presidents have appointed 19 of the last 25 SCOTUS justices. All but two have been staunchly conservative. Thus, the SCOTUS writing I have admired over the course of the past 50 years is in dissent. Justices Stevens and Ginsburg bore the burden most often in the nineties and early 2000’s. Justice Ginsburg described this responsibility as follows: Dissents speak to a future age. It’s not simply to say, “My colleagues are wrong and I would do it this way.” But the greatest dissents do become court opinions and gradually over time their views become the dominant view. So that’s the dissenter’s hope: that they are writing not for today, but for tomorrow. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Interview with Nina Totenberg (May 2, 2002). Justice Sotomayor has taken the role of the dissenter to heart, and I deeply admire her for that. She is a very persuasive writer, and she knows how to frame issues and highlight facts that are overlooked by the majority opinion. Through her dissents, she has been chronicling the right-ward slide of the court in a manner that will hopefully provide breadcrumbs for future societies looking for their way back. In Mullenix v. Luna, she called out an officer’s “rogue conduct” after he “fired six rounds in the dark at a car traveling 85 miles per hour … without any training in that tactic, against the wait order of his superior officer, and less than a second before the car hit spike strips deployed to stop it.” In Glossip v. Gross, which upheld the use of the sedative midazolam for lethal injections, she chastised the majority for “deferring to the District Court's decision to credit the scientifically unsupported and implausible testimony of a single expert witness; and second, by faulting petitioners for failing to satisfy the wholly novel requirement of proving the availability of an alternative means for their own executions.” In Utah v. Strieff, she recognized a reality that is often overlooked in police encounters, saying that “[a]lthough many Americans have been stopped for speeding or jaywalking, few may realize how degrading a stop can be when the officer is looking for more.” Justice Sotomayor is writing directly to our moment, and I admire her for that. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has had a number of justices whom I deeply admire and respect, among them Justices Shirley Abrahamson, A.W. Bradley, and Louis Butler. However, it is Justice Rebecca Dallet that has started writing the kind of dissents that Justice Ginsburg advocated and Justice Sotomayor writes so well. In a recent dissent, she took apart a concurring opinion by Justice Hagedorn in which he argued in favor of originalism. She argued that the originalism proposed by Justice Hagedorn would undermine significant rights that most people take for granted, including the right to unsegregated education, same-sex marriage, and virtually all rights of women and racial minorities, as these rights would be difficult, if not impossible, to justify on originalist grounds. I admire these jurists for remaining singularly focused on justice, even when in the minority. The proper role of a judge: On a day-to-day basis, the proper role of the judge is to treat people with dignity and respect, to make orders in accordance with the law, and to explain his decisions on the record. In the aggregate, the proper role of a judge is to uphold the constitution, to enforce the normative values of his constituents, and to ensure the people’s liberties are protected from the impulsive whims of a counter- majoritarian and unrepresentative legislature. People need to know that large, powerful, civic institutions like the court are working on their behalf and are not held captive by dark money interest groups. To that end, the proper role of the judge who is confronted with a hastily written law that limits the rights and invades the privacy of the people of Wisconsin is to approach the law with skepticism. Whether the law limits the rights of pregnant people to have medical care or of LGBTQ+ people to live their lives without unnecessary interference by the state, a judge should be open to hearing challenges to any new law that severely restricts people’s rights and, when faced with a close call, should err on the side of protecting the liberty interest of those he presides over. I believe a judge should have an overarching goal when it comes to incarceration and the protection of the public. When the legislature abolished the parole board and instituted truth in sentencing, the courts were infused with a mandate to exercise additional control over the amount of time defendants spend in prison. I believe we need to send fewer people to prison, and we need their prison sentences to be shorter. Sending one person to prison disrupts multiple lives in the community, and we should be more careful about how we cause those disruptions. I believe that the certainty of being caught is a vastly more powerful deterrent than severe punishment, and I believe we will not heal the ills of society by incarcerating more people. There are competing interests at hand and no easy solutions. However, the proper role of the judge involves taking a position on these issues and being mindful of the court’s responsibility to exercise additional control over the amount of time defendants spend in prison. Finally, the proper role of the judge involves recognizing the inherent advantage that repeat players have and listening with empathy and humility. Many of the people who access the court are indigent and unrepresented. They are novices within the system, and they lack the communication skills and social signifiers to show the court that they are doing the best with what they have got. They deserve a judge who will listen to what they have to say. |
Donate
Help WJI advocate for justice in Wisconsin
|