There are many reasons why we often point with pride to New Jersey’s judicial system. We were reminded yet again of that pride when recently it was reported that a California judge had been recalled by the citizenry because of dissatisfaction with a sentence he imposed upon a person who had been convicted of sexual assault. Apparently the defendant was facing a maximum term of 14 years in prison, and the prosecution had requested a term of six years. The sentence, however, after a recommendation by the county probation department, was six months in jail.

There was no question that the judge had the authority to impose the sentence of six months. However, it generated an outcry from many members of the public, and the result, pursuant to California law, was a recall election which saw the end of the judge’s judicial career, which began in 2003 and which, according to reports, had not involved prior negative publicity. The judge was quoted as saying that to have imposed a sentence longer than six months “would have a severe impact on” the defendant.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]