Three candidates with diverse backgrounds and beliefs vie for Kenosha County Branch 6 bench

Three candidates are are running for the Kenosha County Circuit Court Branch 6 bench being vacated by Circuit Judge Mary K. Wagner, who is not seeking re-election. The top two finishers in the Feb. 16 primary election will advance to the April 6 election. 

Angela Cunningham is a private attorney in Kenosha who has worked as a Milwaukee County assistant district attorney and as a staff attorney for Legal Action of Wisconsin. Angelina Gabriele is a Kenosha County assistant district attorney who also worked as an assistant state attorney general for former State Attorney General Brad Schimel.  Kenosha County Court Commissioner Elizabeth Pfeuffer has worked in private practice, taught and held posts in universities, and worked as a prosecutor in Colorado.

Cunningham's resume is here, Gabriele's is here, and Pfeuffer's is here. The three have very different approaches to the law and the job they seek. 

WJI asked each of the three candidates to answer a series of questions. All three responded. The questions are patterned after some of those on the job application Gov. Evers uses when he is considering judicial appointments.

Cunningham

Gabriele

Pfeuffer

Why do you want to become a judge?

Several months into my employment as an Assistant District Attorney I walked into the preliminary hearing courtroom and had a moment of revelation. The people waiting in the gallery for cases to be called were primarily Black. On the other side of the glass were lawyers, police officers, the commissioner, clerks and bailiffs…they were all White (and primarily male). It was at that moment I knew I wanted to be a judge. I want to be a judge so the courtroom, and the bench, can reflect the diversity of my community.
​
I want to use my breadth of personal and professional experience to ensure justice for everyone who appears before me in the courtroom. Circuit Court judges deal with the day-to-day messiness of people’s lives. Trying to make sense of that messiness is what motivated me to pursue a career in law.

My varied career and volunteer experiences allowed me insight into people’s fears, motivations and goals. I worked with people from all walks of life, including homeless families, business leaders and elected officials. I worked with, and can relate to, people of different races, ethnicities, gender, sexual orientation and socioeconomic status. I have a calm demeanor, am able to listen to opposing points of view and can make unbiased decisions that are rooted in law and ensures justice for all.

Name one of the best United States or Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last thirty years and explain why you feel that way. 

 One of the best Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last thirty years is State v. Wayerski. This case overruled prior rulings and clarified the prosecutor’s responsibility under Brady. The court held that nondisclosure of evidence to the defense is a violation and the prosecutor’s state of mind or public availability of the evidence is irrelevant to the inquiry.  

This case realigned Wisconsin law “to return to the principles of Brady.”

Name one of the worst United States or Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last thirty years and explain why you feel that way. 

One of the worst Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last thirty years was State v. Mitchell. In this case, the Wisconsin Supreme Court found that an enhanced penalty for committing a crime against a victim who was selected based on his or her race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry was unconstitutional because the enhancer violates the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

While I agree everyone has a right to freedom of speech, there is a limit to that freedom when it is used to physically assault another person. The Court’s decision essentially says that a person’s right to freedom of speech takes precedence over another’s equal rights and protection against crime. As Justice Abrahamson noted in her dissent, the hate crime enhancer did not punish beliefs or speech, it punished criminal conduct in furtherance of those beliefs.
 
Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the decision.

Describe your judicial philosophy. 

I believe, first and foremost, that judges should treat everyone who appears before him or her with dignity and respect. Litigants should be heard without bias or personal judgment from the judge. This requires judges to have a calm and patient demeanor. Judges must have good interpersonal skills and the ability to relate to people from all walks of life.

It is also the judge’s responsibility to apply the law to the facts of each case and make decisions that are fair and just. The circuit court judge’s role is not to legislate from the bench, but rather to adhere to the constitution, legislative text and judicial precedent. Judges must be intelligent. They must have the ability to comprehend the law and apply it to facts in a predictable manner, instilling confidence in litigants who appear in his or her court.

Finally, Judges must exercise discretion in matters that are not a pure question of law. Matters of discretion are decided based on a judge’s ethics, values and worldview. Given the latitude afforded circuit court judges in mat-ters that require discretion, they must be ethical and have a balanced head when it comes to issues of social significance.

Describe the two most significant cases in which you were involved as either an attorney or a judicial officer.

 In the first case, the defendant was charged with Arson and First Degree Recklessly Endangering Safety, both with domestic abuse repeater enhancers. The defendant and victim were married, but separated, with minor children in common. The defendant tried to set the victim’s home on fire. Thankfully, the victim quickly extinguished the fire and no one was hurt. The victim saw the defendant walking away from her home wearing a black leather jacket.
 
When officers went to the defendant’s home they found a black leather jacket hanging in a hall closet and it smelled strongly of gasoline. Several items on the passenger side floor of the defendant’s car was soaked in gasoline. The defendant denied trying to set the victim’s home on fire and the case went to trial.

The defendant testified at trial. When asked how he felt when he learned someone tried to set his estranged wife’s house on fire, the defendant said, “she could use a good whoopin’.” The defendant not only refused to admit to his crimes in the face of overwhelming evidence, but he showed utter disregard for his wife’s life.

The defendant was found guilty of both counts and sentenced to 10 years in custody and 6 years extended supervision. I am an advocate for reducing mass incarceration, but when it comes to violent offenders such as the defendant in this case, prison is appropriate and necessary to protect the public.

In the second significant case I represented a developmentally disabled mother in a custody / placement matter. My client had one child with her abusive ex-boyfriend. My client was afraid of her ex and the relationship had ended when he kicked my client out of their home. 

By the time I started working with my client, she had not seen her child or her ex-boyfriend in several years. My client had a difficult time relaying information to me about the whereabouts of her ex-boyfriend and the nature of their relationship. But one thing was clear, my client missed her child and wanted to be in the child’s life. After several months of working with my client, I found her ex-boyfriend and determined there was no formal custody / placement order in place. I filed an action for custody / placement in family court. My client’s ex-boyfriend initially contested her attempt to have visits with their child, but the case eventually settled. The parties agreed to my client having weekly supervised visits through a third party non-profit agency. 

The outcome of this case may appear to be a small victory, but it meant the world for my client. She had not seen her child in more than three years – the longest three years of her life. This case is an example of how the courts are for all people. Having access to a lawyer and the court system allowed my client to overcome her fear of her ex-boyfriend and assert her right as the mother of their child.

Describe your legal experience as an advocate in criminal litigation, civil litigation, and administra-tive proceedings.  

I am currently a private bar attorney with my own firm, ADC Law Office, LLC. I am a full-time guardian ad litem in Kenosha County and I handle primarily criminal defense cases. As guardian ad litem, I represent the best interest of children and vulnerable individuals in custody/placement matters, divorce cases, guardianships, children in need of pro-tection or services matters, termination of parental rights cases, truancy cases, and juvenile delinquency cases.

I previously served as an Assistant District Attorney in Milwaukee County where I prosecuted domestic abuse crimes, failure to support cases, and general crimes.

I also worked as Staff Attorney at Legal Action of Wisconsin, representing domestic abuse victims in divorce, custody/placement, child support and restrain- ing order matters.

I have conducted 20 jury trials and countless court trials and motion hearings in criminal, juvenile, and family court.

Have you ever been convicted of a crime, either misdemeanor or felony? If so, explain. When did the incident(s) occur?

No.

Have you ever been cited for a municipal offense? If so, explain. When did the incident(s) occur? 

Yes, I received a citation for speeding 10-20 mph over the speed limit in February 2016.

Do you support requiring any justice to recuse him/herself from cases involving donors and indirect supporters who contribute money or other resources to the judge's election? If not, why not? If so, why? What contribu- tion limits would you set?

I support requiring justices to recuse him/herself from cases involving donors and indirect supporters that contribute significant funds or assets to that judge’s campaign. Judges must be free from conflicts of interest and personal biases while on the bench. A significant campaign contribution in and of itself signals a potential conflict. The donor may expect special treatment or favor from the judge if the judge were to hear a case involving the donor. I believe judges should recuse him/herself from cases involving donors who contributed in excess of $500 to their campaign. 

What are the greatest obstacles judges face when trying to deliver true justice? What can or should be done about them?  

The greatest obstacles judges face when trying to deliver true justice are poverty, lack of mental health and substance abuse resources, and systemic racism. Judges should recognize these obstacles and the impact they have on the litigants who appear in their courts. Judges should also be actively involved with addressing these issues in the broader community by working with leaders and organizations to find solutions.

​Provide any other information you feel would be helpful to potential voters deciding whom to vote for.

I am a first-generation college student who grew up in a low-income, single parent household. And I, myself, became a single parent at a young age. Even with these obstacles, I persevered. I finished college and obtained a master’s degree. After working in social services for several years I attended one of the top law schools in the country and obtained a degree in two years. I worked hard to achieve my goals and will continue that work ethic and passion on the bench.

I have always been actively involved in my community as a volunteer and serving in leadership positions. I currently serve on the board of directors for Catholic Charities and Urban League of Racine and Kenosha, I previously served on the boards of HOPE Council, Kenosha Community Health Center and Peace Learning Circles. I participate in a number of coalitions and community groups and I was a 3rd grade reading tutor.

I have the personal, professional and educational traits needed to be a judge. As mentioned earlier, I worked with people from diverse backgrounds in various capacities. I have superior interpersonal skills and can communicate with anyone who would appear before me in court, from low-income, pro se litigants in family court to private attorneys representing fortune 500 companies, and everyone in between. I have a calm demeanor and patience to hear every case and issue fair and just decisions. I have experience handling large caseloads, both in family law and criminal law. My ability to efficiently manage cases while giving adequate time and attention to each is a skill that will allow me to effectively manage a courtroom.

Why do you want to become a judge?  

I want to be Judge to con-tinue and expand my work to protect and benefit Kenosha. I believe Kenosha deserves a judge who has 25 years of courtroom exper- ience who has a demon-strated ability to make sound decisions in court on serious issues. A judge needs extensive courtroom experience in order to be successful. My strong lifelong commitment and advocacy to protecting the Kenosha community both at the District Attorney’s Office and the Wisconsin Attorney General’s office is what Kenosha needs and what sets me apart from other candidates. 

Throughout my career, I have made the tough decisions that have sometimes been unpopular and have not bowed to popular opinion or political pressure – these are the qualities that a judge needs. I have also demonstrated an open mind to solutions that will best protect our community long term. 

I have been fair in exercising my discretion and given victims a voice in court - these are also qualities that a judge must have.
 
I have spoken to many attorneys - both civil and criminal - about what they most value in a judge. They say it is impossible for any person to be well versed in all issues - so what counts most is preparedness and strong desire to serve justice. I have demonstrated both those traits during my 25 year career. 

As a result, I believe I can bring all that I have accom- plished – my one on one experience with victims of crime – the understanding of their trauma – the understanding of the impact of crime & incar- ceration on families (I had a foster child whose parents had been in jail and strug- gled with drug issues) –  and continue to do my best to improve our community as judge. Because It’s always been about doing the right thing for our community – both in my professional life and personal life. 

Name one of the best United States or Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last thirty years and explain why you feel that way. 

The recent decision of State v. Angel Mercado by the Wisconsin Supreme Court is one of the best opinions in recent years. In that case, two children reported sexual abuse by an elderly man with whom they and their mother lived. The children were aged 4 through 7 at the time of the assaults. The children had a forensic interview which was video recorded. At trial, the videos of both were played for the jury and the children were made available for cross-examination pursuant to Wis. Stats. 

A unanimous court rejected the arguments made by Mercado in which he asserted that the judge was required to watch the entire recorded interview before allowing it to be shown to the jury and that the child hadn’t sufficiently asserted she knew the difference between the truth and a lie. This decision was important because the court rejected 1) a bright line rule limiting a judge’s discretion in which portions of the forensic interview were important to view in making the decision to admit it into evidence, and 2) unrealistic expecta- tions of young children to be able to specifically articulate a difference between a truth and a lie and the conse- quences of lying before their forensic interview could be shown to the jury. 

Young children who are victimized benefit from a forensic interview done in a non-leading and safe manner by trained individu- als to spare them the addi- tional trauma of repeated interviews, courts can allow those interviews to be heard by the jury by assessing other guarantees of trust- worthiness which is impor- tant in protecting children and keeping sex offender from harming other children. 

Name one of the worst United States or Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last thirty years and explain why you feel that way. 

In 2014, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued its decision in State v. Samuel Johnson in which they had been asked to review a decision relating to a child victim’s refusal to sign a release allowing the court to review her otherwise confidential therapy records. Johnson was charged with sexual assault to this child who was his step-daughter. The child’s mother had refused to sign the release of treatment records when told to do so by the trial court. The trial court had decided that the child would still be allowed to testify but the jury would be told a presumption existed that the records would have been helpful to the defense. The Court of Appeals rejected that solution and held that the child could not testify because her mother had refused to allow the release of therapy records to the court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court was asked to review that decision but could not agree on an answer. Because no three justices had agreed whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the court of appeals decision then that decision remained the law of the case – the child would not be permit- ted to testify about the allegations of sexual assault her step-father. 

The law as it stands now does not allow judges to take into account that sometimes factors that do not weigh in the best interests of the child or society cause a case to be manipulated. In these cases, a uncooperative parent can manipulate the outcome of a criminal case simply by refusing to sign the consent – this is especially so when the parent is financially or emotionally dependent on the offender. This inability of the Wisconsin Supreme Court to reach a decision on this case was unfortunate. The solution crafted by the trial court, had it been approved by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, would have benefitted victims in not having to reveal confidential and potentially embar- rassing therapy records while still allowing a jury to hear the testimony of a child victim who had alleged sexual abuse while also balancing the right of the defendant to a defense. 

Describe your judicial philosophy. 

My judicial philosophy is one of respect and equity for all who appear in court while protecting our community. I believe that all proceedings be transparent and fair. While it is essential that the process be fair to all participants, from attorneys to parties to victims and witnesses, it is just as critical that the process be transparent to the public, who is not directly involved. Most people will not have first-hand experience in court, but they will see news reports and hear from friends and family about how they were treated during the process. While participants may not agree with the outcome in many cases, it is the judge's job to set and maintain the tone in court. I do not believe in making decisions based on politics, prejudice, or public opinion - instead the rule of law will prevail as well as the facts & circumstances of each case and each person before me. 

As judge, I believe it is important to explain what is happening in terms that all can understand, to set expectations that attorneys must be prepared for the court hearings as I myself will be prepared so as to not unnecessarily delay proceedings.

Giving victims a voice in court is equally important to me. Having spent so much time with victims of crime - in particular sexual assault, elder abuse, child abuse, and homicide, it is imprtant (sic) that they know that their opinions matter and that they will be safe in court and treated with respect. The passage of Marsy’s Law simply codifies what I have always believed and how I have treated victims of crime.

I also believe in looking for solutions to improve our justice system and protect our community including with treatment, rehabili- tation, drug courts, and other consequences. I have demonstrated this throughout my career by being a part of multi-disciplinary teams looking for solutions to child abuse, sexual assault, and neglect. 

Describe the two most significant cases in which you were involved as either an attorney or a judicial officer.  (Edited for length.)
​
The two most significant cases that I was involved in as an attorney were State v. Mark Jensen and State v. Everett Sennholz. 

In State v. Mark Jensen, Mark Jensen poisoned his wife with ethylene glycol, then smothered her with a pillow when she did not die quickly enough. They had two young sons and after he was arrested, he tried to destroy her image as a loving mother and friend to all who knew her, including their sons, by claiming she had killed herself and framed him for her death. The trial gained national attention because Julie, his wife, had feared that Jensen wanted her dead and she gave a letter to her neighbor for safekeeping where she tried to preserve her reputation in the event of her untimely death by declaring she would never commit harm herself and that she gave her reasons for suspecting her husband would be responsible for her death. The trial lasted over 6 weeks and involved issues of confrontation clause, forfeiture by wrongdoing, computer forensics, toxicology, and forensic pathology. Ultimately the jury convicted Mark Jensen bringing justice to her 4 surviving brothers and allowing her sons to know that their mother did not willingly leave them alone in this world. 

In State v. Sennholz, I prosecuted a grandfather who had repeatedly sexually assaulted his grand- daughter, EM, during her childhood from age 5 to the age of 15. This man did not fit the stereotype of a pedophile. He was married, a father, a business owner, owned his own home, liked to work on cars; but as a prosecutor, I’ve learned that there is no profile. Sexual offenders often hide behind the veneer of legitimacy that they create in their lives which enables them to have access to children.

As a child, EM tried to tell her grandmother but her grandmother called her a liar. 1 in 5 girls are the victim of child sexual abuse. 86% never disclose and only 6-15% of disclosures are made to legal authorities. As an adult, EM learned that her grandfather had also sexually assaulted EM’s mother and her much younger cousin when they were also children. This gave her the courage to report her assaults. Her extended family, including her grandmother ostracized her. At trial, her grandfather testified and called EM and her cousin (who also had the courage to testify against him) liars. These women did the most difficult thing victims of sexual assault can ever do, they sat in the same courtroom as their abuser and under oath, told a jury of 12 strangers about the most traumatic events of their childhood. EM has told me that the biggest issue in coming forward is trusting that the right thing will be done, she felt in meeting with me as the case progressed that I truly cared and that made her feel safe.

The jury found him guilty of every charge and after the trial, some of the jurors contacted me to express that they were so moved by what EM and her cousin had endured. 

Describe your legal experience as an advocate in criminal litigation, civil litigation, and administra-tive proceedings. 

As a prosecutor for 25 years, I have spent nearly every day of my career advocating for victims of crime and our community in court proceedings both civil and criminal. For many years, I handled cases involving juveniles accused of crime looking for ways to deter them from future crime by offering them treatment or a more stable and supportive place to live. Likewise, I was an advocate for children who were abused or neglected or at risk of being abused or neglected. I advocated for their safe placement with their families if that could be accomplished with assistance of social services. When that could not safely happen, I advocated for their placement in foster care. When needed, I advocated for pemenance (sic) and security in their lives through termination of parental rights when it became clear that their parents would not be able to provide them a safe and stable home to live in. As a child, having stability and the security of knowing where you will be living and that a family will care for you is critical for their physical and emotional wellbeing.

In criminal cases, I advocated for victims of sexual assault, child abuse, and homicide. I have had many jury trials in which the character and credibility of these victims were attacked by the defendants. These victims had the courage to come forward and testify before a roomful of strangers about some of the most traumatic experiences in their lives. I have worked hard to make sure that their voices were heard and believed. Victims of homicide don’t have the opportunity to defend attacks on their character, as a result, I have advocated for them at motion hearings and trials - seeking to prevent irrelevant and baseless attacks on their character and to remind the jury at trials that absent viable self-defense claims, our society does not permit a defendant to decide who lives or dies because of his/her perception of the character of the victim.

After convictions, I have continued to advocate for the protection of our community and victims of crime at restitution hearings, parole review hearings, and appeals. Even after a jury verdict and sentencing, a defendant has the right to appeal the conviction or sentence. This right to appeal is an important check against mistakes that can be made by the attorneys and the court. No one wants to wrongfully convicted another person. I have handled many of those cases which can consume as much time to prepare and litigate as a jury trial but as an advocate for our com- munity and the victims, it is important to have finality in convictions. This is why it is important to have a judge with experience with these serious legal issues so that convictions are not reversed and our society can have the security of knowing they are protected and the right people are held account-able.

Have you ever been convicted of a crime, either misdemeanor or felony? If so, explain. When did the incident(s) occur?

No.

Have you ever been cited for a municipal offense? If so, explain. When did the incident(s) occur?

No.

Do you support requiring any justice to recuse him/herself from cases involving donors and indirect supporters who contribute money or other resources to the judge's election? If not, why not? If so, why? What contribution limits would you set? 

It is important for judges to be impartial and to avoid the appearance of partiality. I believe that those who are elected take their oath and responsibilities seriously. As a result, I do not support requiring judges to recuse themselves from cases involving donors and indi-rect supporters. Campaigns can be expensive. Having the financial and indirect support of the people who best know the candidates qualifications, commitment, work ethic, and judgement is critical. Without that support, only candidates who can self fund their campaigns would be able to run for judge – leaving a disparity in that only the wealthy would be able to run for election. I trust the elected judges, subject to recall, sanctions by the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, or being voted out of office, will exercise their discretion and judgment in deciding which cases require recusal rather than having a blanket rule.
 
What are the greatest obstacles judges face when trying to deliver true justice? What can or should be done about them? 

The greatest obstacles judges face are a lack of information and unequal access to legal representa- tion. Lack of Information: Judges are asked to make important decisions about the future of people’s lives – this has an impact of the person before them, those families who might be left without a parent, caregiver, or financial provider, the victims, and our society. The best judges need to ask the parties more questions to get the information they need and not just accept things at face value. Finding out more about the individuals before them and what brought them to this place in their lives can help a judge craft a solution – one that would benefit everyone involved (including the safety of our community) in both the short and long term. 

Unequal access to attorneys: Not everyone has access to an attorney in court pro-ceedings. Those people who are “pro se”, self-represented often have difficulties  articulating their position in a courtroom setting. Judicial demeanor is key. My attitude and philosophy has always been to help people without regard to the side that they are on or what their legal education is. For example, I had a homicide case where the mother of the man accused of homicide so appreciated the time I took to explain what was happening that she continued to call me with other questions and concerns about her son even though she knew I was the one accusing her son of homicide. I continued to answer her questions because I knew she had no prior experience with the legal system and it was important that, as his mother, she understood what was happening and why. 

Providing information or explanation about the proceedings and explaining legal concepts in everyday language is one solution. A judge can assist, in a neutral way, the introduction of evidence and testimony. A judge can also refer the person to the resources available to assist in the preparation of the case or enforcement and compli-ance with any order. I would have a sheet ready with phone numbers and email addresses for easy reference.

A judge can also Inform the person what will be happening next in the case and what is expected of them. As judge, it is important to treat the unrepresented person as I would treat those with any attorney in terms of process and outcome.

Provide any other information you feel would be helpful to potential voters deciding whom to vote for. 

My campaign slogan is “Experience Counts - Great Lawyers Make Great Judges” but I ask that you look beyond the slogan for the substance behind those words. For 25 years, I have dedicated myself to protect-ing the most vulnerable in our community, working long hours to bring justice to victims and to protect our community. My experience handling these serious cases, the complicated legal issues that come with them, and with trials has given me the judgement to skillfully handle any kind of case.
 
I bring a unique perspective with my one on one expe-rience with victims of crime – the understanding of their trauma; my personal under-standing of the impact of crime & incarceration on families and implicit bias through discussions with my foster son, my experience and interest in serving justice, and my collaboration with stakeholders to solve problems. I will continue to do my best to improve our community and myself as a judge. 

My demonstrated commitment to these goals for our community’s benefit has earned the non-partisan and bipartisan support of many of our community leaders, those involved in criminal justice including District Attorney Michael Graveley, Representative Tip McGuire, Kenosha Pro-fessional Police Association, Pleasant Prairie Professional Police Association, retired Judge Wilbur W. Warren, retired Commissioner Jon Mason, my former boss – Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel, and many of the defense attorneys who I have had cases with during my career.

Why do you want to become a judge?  
​
As a current Kenosha County court commissioner, I am already making legal decisions and issuing court orders that impact people’s daily lives.  I am not an attorney making recommendations to the court or arguing as to why my client should prevail; I am the judicial official making legal decisions and issuing orders on a daily basis in contested and often complex legal disputes.  The judges in Kenosha County appointed me in 2016 as a full-time court commis-  sioner; I had the extensive legal background in different areas of law, including criminal, civil, family, paternity, guardianship, probate, juvenile, child abuse, children in need of protection and services and termination of parental rights that made me the best candidate for the position of court commissioner.

 When the pandemic hit last year, I transitioned from working in my courtroom to working at home, via Zoom and YouTube, to make sure open hearings were viewable by the public.  I made sure people’s rights were protected and their cases were heard in a timely fashion.  I was one of the first court officials in Wisconsin to resume the regular daily court docket after most courthouses were closed to the public.  I am very proud of the fact that my courtroom has no backlog of cases and Kenosha residents are having their cases handled in as a timely fashion just like before the pandemic. 
 
As a circuit court judge, I will continue to make sure that parties have fair and equal access to justice and will continue to incorporate technology, such as Zoom and YouTube, in the
courtroom so that everyone can effectively and safely participate in the judicial process. I will continue to work hard to ensure their cases are heard in a timely fashion because I under- stand and appreciate the need for the resolution of legal disputes.

 Since I am in my fifth year working as a court commissioner, I now have the judicial experience  necessary to be a fair, impartial, effective, and efficient judge.  I currently handle a court calendar of 80-100 cases each week but I still make sure that each case receives the time and attention to ensure the parties have equal and fair access to justice.   After working in the judicial system, I would like to take on the added responsibilities that come with being a judge.  When this opening was announced, it was the right time for me to take the next step in my judicial career; something I have been working towards since 1998.
 
Name one of the best United States or Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last thirty years and explain why you feel that way. 

 As a former full-time professor of legal studies and current member of the judicial branch, when asked to name one of the “best” court opinions, I am always hesitant to do so.  These types of questions call for personal opinion, rather than legal or judicial opinion.  I believe in our judicial system as a system in which the lower courts are bound to follow the decisions and precedents of the higher courts, regardless of personal views.  Circuit courts are bound by the decisions of the appellate courts, which are bound by the decisions of the supreme courts.  
​
Regardless of my personal opinions, as a circuit court judge I will continue to apply the law as interpreted by higher courts.  

Name one of the worst United States or Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last thirty years and explain why you feel that way. 

As a former full-time professor of legal studies and current member of the judicial branch, when asked to name one of the “worst” court opinions, I am always hesitant to do so.  These types of questions call for personal opinion, rather than legal or judicial opinion.  I believe in our judicial system as a system in which the lower courts are bound to follow the decisions and precedents of the higher courts, regardless of personal views.  Circuit courts are bound by the decisions of the appellate courts, which are bound by the decisions of the supreme courts.  

 Regardless of my personal opinions, as a circuit court judge I will continue to apply the law as interpreted by higher courts.

Describe your judicial philosophy. 

I believe that everyone coming to court is entitled to fair and equal access to justice.  Courts cannot give legal advice but they should ensure every party, with or without an attorney, has the legal/procedural information necessary to effectively present their case.  Court officials, such as judges and commissioners, should ensure that stereotypes, implicit bias, and outside influences (e.g. politics) play no role in determining the outcome of cases. 

Describe the two most significant cases in which you were involved as either an attorney or a judicial officer.

 The two most significant cases in which I was involved in as a judicial officer are the last two cases I handled.  The reason I say that is because I handle important, life-changing cases each day.  Each case directly impacts the parties in a significant manner and has the potential to change their “world” forever.  

My Monday consists of deciding whether someone will get a sanction of incarceration for contempt of court.  My Tuesday consists of deciding important divorce, paternity, and protection issues, such as who has to move out of the home, who gets to spend time with the child(ren), and whether someone is granted a restraining order.  Wednesdays are paternity days – making sure that fathers and mothers have orders regarding custody, placement and support they are entitled to under the law. Thursdays are more contempt and review hearings for a multitude of issues.  Fridays are the default divorces for parties who have resolved all of their issues without a need for a court trial.

Mixed into the above schedule are the criminal, small claims, children in need of protection/services, juvenile delinquency and truancy and medical commitment cases that I handle as necessary. 
  
I will not state that one case is more important or significant/serious than another because to the people who are involved in each court case, their case is the most serious one.  What may seem like just another day in my courtroom might be the biggest day in someone’s life.  

Describe your legal experience as an advocate in criminal litigation, civil litigation, and administrative proceedings.   
​
I have extensive experience in criminal (both prosecution and defense) and civil litigation as well as administrative proceedings.  Starting in law school with internships, I worked for three district attorneys’ offices.  I got the bulk of my jury trial experience prosecuting cases as a deputy district attorney in Denver, Colorado.  I have successfully prosecuted misdemeanors and felonies, including violent crimes and sexual assault cases (sometimes involving children or vulnerable adults) and was also involved as a prosecutor in their juvenile unit and drug court, which is very similar to Kenosha County’s drug court.  While in the drug unit, I reviewed the police reports and decided whether to file charges and if so, what charges.  I also decided which cases would be sent to the drug court as an alternative to traditional prosecution.  I also worked closely with law enforce-ment, reviewing and approving search and arrest warrants. 

In addition to prosecuting cases, I have successfully defended misdemeanor, felony and juvenile criminal cases in Kenosha and Racine.  I also worked as an intern for the public defender’s office in Madison.

As for civil law, I worked at a law firm in Denver handling cases involving employment law issues, insurance and subrogation claims and workers’ compensation defense.  While practicing law in Kenosha, I also handled family law cases, paternity cases, civil restraining orders cases and worked as a mediator at the Kenosha County Small Claims Court.  As a Guardian ad Litem, I represented children and vulnerable adults in guardianships, termination of parental rights cases, children in need of protection and services cases, probate matters involving missing heirs, and family/paternity cases.

Have you ever been convicted of a crime, either misdemeanor or felony? If so, explain. When did the incident(s) occur?

 No charges or convictions. 

Have you ever been cited for a municipal offense? If so, explain. When did the incident(s) occur? 

 I have had 2 speeding tickets – one when I was 18 and the other when I was 25.  I paid the fines and learned my lesson!

Do you support requiring any justice to recuse him/herself from cases involving donors and
indirect supporters who contribute money or other resources to the judge's election? If not, why not? If so, why? What contribution limits would you set?

I will follow the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct and WI Statutes (Chapter 11 – Campaign Financing) regarding recusals and contribution limits.

What are the greatest obstacles judges face when trying to deliver true justice? What can or should be done about them?  

 Judges must apply the law, as passed by the legislative branch and enforced by the executive branch.  Judges should not permit any outside influences, including political and social, from improperly influencing their actions and decisions.  Judges have to make difficult and life-altering decisions in most of their cases; they cannot allow themselves to be swayed by public opinion, political pressure, or personal preferences.  As a court commissioner, I make sure that I base my actions and orders on the law and facts in each case.  I do not act upon likes or dislikes of attorneys, laws, or politics.  I do not base my decisions on parties’ characteristics or traits, e.g. race, gender, ethnicity, disability, etc.  Every person who comes into my courtroom has an equal and fair opportunity to present their side of the case without fear of prejudice or unequal treatment. 
   
As a commissioner, I have a patient yet firm judicial temperament.  I make difficult decisions in contentious cases and I have learned to maintain decorum in court and to make sure emotions do not derail the proceedings. I do not allow outside sources or bias to influence the outcomes of cases. 
  
Provide any other information you feel would be helpful to potential voters deciding whom to vote for.

I am the only candidate for Circuit Court Judge, Branch 6 in Kenosha County that has substantial judicial experience.  I am already a member of the judicial branch and have attended numerous judicial trainings and seminars since 2016, which provides me with extensive judicial knowl- edge.  As a commissioner, I am already making legal decisions and issuing court orders that impact people’s lives.  As a judge, I will be doing virtually the same things, with some added responsibilities.  

I also have the most diverse background in law – criminal law (both prosecution and defense) civil law, guardianships, termination of parental rights, paternity, divorce, custody/placement, children in need of protection or services, juvenile, and probate.  Branch 6 covers all of Kenosha County and can be assigned to handle any type of case, not just civil or criminal, and I am prepared to take on any case assign- ment that comes to my courtroom.  I do not need additional training to learn about different laws; I made sure to learn and train long before I decided to run for circuit court.  

I was a full-time professor of legal studies for six years; I taught numerous law classes including procedural and substantive criminal law, courts, business law, corporate law, constitutional law, environmental law, and administrative law.  I also worked as a part-time professor of law at Marquette Law School for five years where I taught Trial Advocacy to law students. This class prepares them to handle a jury trial and I wrote all of my own materials, including all mock trials used at the end of the semester as their final “exam.”  From jury selection to closing arguments and everything in between, I made sure my students were prepared to walk into any courtroom and handle a jury trial from start to finish.  

On a personal note, I grew up in Kenosha, attending St. Mark’s, Lincoln Jr. High and graduating from Tremper.  I graduated from UW-Madision with a double major in Political Science and Behavioral Science & Law and a certificate in Criminal Justice.  I then graduated from a nationally ranked, Top-10 law school – University of Virginia.  I live in Somers with my husband, our two children, and our pets.  My husband great (sic) up in Bristol and we have many family members throughout Kenosha County. 
   
I have been involved in our community and the following are some examples of my activities: 
Kenosha ELCA Outreach Center – provided free legal advice and developed Lunch, Learn and Law program to provide legal resources to underserved population.  

Wills for Heroes – drafted wills and powers of attorney for first responders in Kenosha County at no cost. 
 
Member – Kenosha County Judicial Engagement Team, Kenosha County Courthouse Security Committee, Kenosha County Bar Association, and Kenosha Women’s Network.  

Two-time recipient of the Wisconsin Pro Bono Honor Society Award.  

Wisconsin Preliminary Review Committee – appointed by the WI Supreme Court to represent our judicial district

I have legal, judicial and educational experience that make the most well-rounded and judicially prepared candidate for circuit court judge.