What goals do you have in mind, if you are elected, and to which you want to be measured against in the coming term?

I’m seeking this bench because I believe it’s the right thing to do.  By that I mean that I sincerely and honestly believe that of the citizens of this county who are willing to take up this incredibly important responsibility, I am the best qualified to do so.  My qualifications consist primarily of my experience, my formal and informal training, my strong sense of duty and public service, my commitment to integrity, and my desire to serve this community in a fashion worthy of the community, the State of Texas, and the United States of America.

With regard to the three goals I want to be measured by if elected, they are as follows:

1.  Restraint:  Did I follow the law consistently and faithfully?  Whether or not I’m consistently reversed by higher courts will be a good indicator of this goal.

2.  Availability:  Was I available to parties, court staff, and law enforcement?  Whether or not my dockets move in an efficient and fair manner, whether I am present in court working hard like many other people in Montgomery County, and whether I am available for law enforcement for review of warrant applications will be something that will be obvious, known, and I hope noted.

3.  Impartiality:  Will I do justice and be seen to do justice?  Whether or not my rulings show no partiality toward particular parties, individuals, or ideas other than my own governing judicial philosophy is important to me personally and to the County.  A judge must be above reproach, and I intend to be that type of judge.

Please describe what you believe are the most significant issues in this race and why.

There are many issues significant to this race, but here are three that bear mention.

1.  Will the judge who takes the bench of the 9th District Court follow the law?  Case was successfully mandamused 5 times and there may be more before his term is through. I want to restore trust and respect for the judicial system and for the 9th District Court. Judicial activism is a creeping threat in Texas. We need a judge who will follow a strict interpretation of the constitution. The constitution is not a living breathing document and it needs to be followed. That seems like a basic, obvious consideration, but we have seen over the last 3 years that it is not to be taken for granted.  Adherence and faithfulness to “the rule of law” requires a principled commitment from the person who takes this bench.  That type of commitment requires a particular strength of character, a certain type of humility, and a clear resolve to be faithful to “the rule of law” regardless of outside pressure or personal preference. 

2.   Will the judge who takes this bench work hard?  Again, it probably seems like the most basic consideration to the hard-working people of Montgomery County that a judge would work as equally hard at his or her job as would anyone else in their job.  Again, though, we have seen that this is not the case.  The judge of the 9th District Court must be ready to be available, be engaged, and be consistently present to move the docket along at reasonable pace and in an efficient manner. 

3.  Will the judge who takes this bench be dedicated to public service or themselves?  I am willing to take up this tremendous responsibility not because of the benefit to me, but to the benefit to the community.  Will the person who seeks this office actually served the community or seek to be served by the position they obtain as a result of the faith entrusted to them by the community?

Are the United States and Texas constitutions living documents?  Please answer in the context of Progressivism versus Originalism.   

The simple truth is that it comes down to the question of whether a judge is willing to honor the law or their own desires.  In my mind, “Originalism” is the obvious and most reasonable way to serve as a judge since in the most basic form it requires a judge to interpret the law by looking at the plain words of the law and the obvious intent or “original” meaning of the law at the time it was created by the legislature.  “Progressivism” is a cloak for a judge to decide what he or she wants the law to be according to his or her ideas of what the “evolving standards” of society are.  The problems with this approach are obvious to every good citizen.  Who decides what these new standards are?  The judge?  Foreign laws?  Opinion polls?  When a judge characterizes either the United States or Texas Constitutions as “living,” usually what they are saying is that the Constitution needs to bend or adapt to that judge’s view of what the law needs to be in order to satisfy the judge’s inclinations. That’s wrong and violates my belief that the founders of the Constitution expected it to be strictly adhered to.  If a person or entity desires that the US or Texas Constitutions change, there are clearly established procedures they can follow to make that change.  Using the phrase “living document” is an obvious attempt to circumvent those procedures.

Please describe the best way for the average voter to determine which candidate for this office is best.

Like anything else, the best way to judge someone’s suitability for a job is to both listen to what they say and to watch what they do.  For a judge’s position, first listen to whether that judge has an agenda that conflicts with following the law.  If so, that’s a red flag.  That’s a problem because if a judge is willing to go beyond the law to follow an agenda, even one that you are in favor of, that is an indicator that the judge may change his agenda and go in a direction that you do not agree with.  Look for a judge who is committed first to following the law, and you can do this by listening to what he or she has to say.

Second, watch what the person does and see what they have done.  The judge is primarily a servant of the community, and not the other way around.  Has this person served the community in the past? How?  Have they been faithful in doing so?  Have they done so for a short time or for a long time?  Have they made the community a better place?  Have they put the community before themselves?  Does their prior work and their prior positions reflect a personal integrity and honest character? These are all good indicators of which judicial candidate is the best.  I believe the answers to those questions clearly support that I am that candidate.

How many days off per year should the officeholder of this position take to learn (seminars & workshops) or teach (give educational or motivational talks) or network with other county officials?

The bottom line here is that judges who are hired to do a job have to do that job first.  Period.  The work required to be the 9th District Court Judge is significant, and will take a great deal of time, effort, and thought.  This work needs to be done before other things are addressed.  The starting position for training is that required by the State Bar for all attorneys.  After that, invitations for training or talks ought to be addressed after asking these two key questions.  The first question would be “have I satisfied the requirements that the voters hired me to do right now?”  If the answer to that question is “no,” the opportunity ought to be declined or postponed.  The second question would be “does this training or speaking opportunity benefit just me or the community?”  If the opportunity is mainly for my benefit, then the opportunity ought to be declined or postponed.

The judge who seeks a position promises to work for the people of the community.  They ought to honor that promise not just at the beginning of the term, but throughout their time on the bench.

I am currently eligible for three weeks of vacation a year in my county job.  I do not plan on exceeding that amount as a District Court Judge.

Who is endorsing you and what is their relationship to you?

The Court is supposed to be blind to political parties. That said, we are called to run in a two party system. Criminal justice is an area where establishment and conservative Republicans come together. For that reason I've earned respect from both camps. For example, then State Representative, Steve Toth called me almost daily during the 83rd Session. Steve served on the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee and often hit heads with the liberal lobbyists representing special interests groups that undermine effective criminal justice legislation. My goal in helping Steve, was to insure that the only thing that came out of the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee was legislation that was constitutionally sound and limited the reach of government.  Nonetheless, even though I have always been an advocate of restraint and common sense in law enforcement, I have received and believe I will receive the endorsement of many law enforcement entities and officials.  Their relationship to me is that I have worked closely with them and they respect the work I have done and my availability at all hours to help them during critical incidents.

Please describe the qualifications and experience that make you the best candidate for the office you are seeking. 

The 9th District Court is a full time felony criminal court.  I have been a full time felony prosecutor for almost 20 years.  I have tried every type of case from drug offenses to capital murder and handled a variety of complex motions related to these cases.  I have been exposed to nearly every legal issue that can arise in such a court, so I will not be surprised by what happens in the courtroom.  I am also the only candidate that is Board Certified in Criminal Law, an extra level of specialization demonstrating my commitment to being one of the most knowledgeable attorneys in the field of Criminal Justice.

What are the top 3 areas where the budget for this office needs to be adjusted?

The 9th District Court has one of the leanest budgets of all the courts in the county, so there is not much, if any, room for reduction.  However, let me address three ways the 9th District Court can impact the county budget:

Reducing the jail population:  As of October 1st, the 9th District Court had the largest percentage of pretrial felons awaiting trial in the county jail (over 250) of all the District Courts.  At over 50 dollars a day to care for these inmates (this is conservative), that’s $12,500 a day that could be significantly reduced by simply having weekly trial dockets and everyday settings for pending cases.  It is almost unheard of in this county for a district court judge to have over 25 cases tried a year in their courtroom.  We can do better.

Court appointments:  When I decided to seek this bench, I met with several defense attorneys who believe our county is too generous with court appointed attorneys.  The percentage of felony criminal cases that obtain court appointed attorneys in our county is extremely high.  Many defendants claim to be indigent, but no one is checking to determine if this is accurate.  In other counties, investigators check into claims of indigency and have found that almost 40 percent of those that claim to be indigent are fully capable of hiring their own attorneys.  We need such a program in this county.

Wasted jury weeks – The 9th District Court has had more mistrials and dismissed jury panels that all of the other District Courts combined.  Juror’s time and county money is wasted when a judge fails to manage their courtroom in a way that minimizes these wasted weeks.  Simple judicial actions that are in practice in all the other courtrooms and exercising judicial restraint instead of judicial activism will eliminate this problem.

How will you improve the transparency and access to financial and other records for the public?

One of the most important issues related to the judiciary that needs to be addressed is transparency.  All information related to number of pending cases, trial frequency, time to disposition and other related topics should be available to the public at all times on the Office of Court Administration website.  Recently the Board of Judges voted not to publish their own reports regarding this information, and I believe that is wrong.  I will always vote to publish this type of information.  Nonetheless, my court’s information will always be available on my website so voters will be informed as to whether I am being a good steward of their tax dollars.

To what extent do you believe the state or federal government should be able to obtain court orders directing parents to do things for their children that the parent does not believe should be done?

I feel strongly that parents should be allowed to raise their children according to what they think is right and not what someone else thinks is right for them.  Government does best when it remains out of the business world and out of the family.  Judges, in particular, ought not to be substituting their judgment in situations where the law promises personal freedom.  Our founding fathers held to the belief that Government that governs least, governs best, and that applies most importantly to the sacred right of a parent to make the decisions they feel are best for their children.

Do parents have the right to block grandparent "rights" or doctor intervention? Why/not?

Parents have a non-negotiable responsibility to raise their children, and with that responsibility comes a great deal of authority in how to do so.  As I’ve said before, the government ought to have very limited say in how parents raise their children.  Exceptions start to arise when the child’s real welfare is at significant risk.  Then, and only then, should the courts interfere with a parent’s authority over their own child or interfere with an extended family’s personal dealings.

Where do you perceive the greatest corruption exists in Montgomery county courts?

The greatest corruption in the courts exists in a very few judges who do not show up for work or continue to be available outside work hours for emergencies when they are on call.  When they are there, they substitute their personal beliefs and judgment for the law instead of respecting legal precedent and the Constitution.  Our community expects their judges to work a full week, be available for emergencies after work hours and most importantly to follow the law.

How much of a problem is county hiring based on the "good old boy" / "loyalty to leadership" instead of one's ability to efficiently and ethically perform their tasks and functions? and what can realistically be done about it?

I have not observed this to be a significant problem, however county hiring is not something I have exposure to.  It has not been a problem in the District Attorney’s office and we have policies that prevent hiring family members and those with political affiliations.

What can you do in your court to protect citizens from harm by illegal aliens?

A judge ought to be doing whatever the law allows to protect the community from any citizen who threatens the community regardless of citizenship.  That being said, it seems reasonable to take into account that a person here illegally has, through their actions, made a statement about their willingness to follow the law.  These type of statements ought to be relevant in determining an appropriate punishment.  Also, being acutely aware that our federal government will not be aggressive in protecting our citizens from illegal aliens has to be considered in determining how to handle criminal cases.

Do the taxpayers have a responsibility to provide an interpreter for non-English speaking illegals?  As well, do taxpayers have-to-have one available during courtroom hours just in case someone might need their services?

Yes, to both, within the reason.  With regard to having an interpreter on hand available just in case someone needs them, it’s not reasonable to have an interpreter ready for any type of language.  That is simply not practical and rarely necessary.

It is necessary, however, to have an interpreter for non-English speaking illegals facing a criminal charge.  My preference would be that the person charged pay for this expense if at all possible.  Sometimes, however, that’s not possible.  It is still necessary, however, because ultimately the court system is about the community and fairness.  The community needs a system of justice that is fair, and in order for a system to be fair, the person charged with an offense must understand what is happening and why.  It’s a basic requirement of our Constitutional system of justice that someone accused of a crime be able to confront their accuser and a language barrier would prohibit that.  Again, my preference would be that the number of non-English speaking illegal aliens be reduced as much as possible, but these are primarily issues for the Executive and Legislative branches of government, and not the Judicial Branch.

What is the job of a judge?   What is your judicial philosophy?

The job of a Felony Criminal Judge, like the 9th District Court’s,  is to carefully and thoughtfully APPLY not REINVENT the existing law, both statutory and common, within the bounds of the Texas and US Constitutions to felony criminal cases.  Judicial activism is unacceptable.  My philosophy is as follows:

Fairness – Above all else, a judge must be a fair and neutral arbiter of the facts and the law. All decisions must be consistent with legal precedent and implemented without favoritism towards any party. A judge must be an expert in their field but be willing to patiently explore the unique circumstances of each case in order to make appropriate decisions.

Consistency – A fair judge is also a relatively predictable one. Each case will have its own facts and circumstances, but cases that have similar circumstances should be ruled on in the same way. Being consistent helps attorneys on both sides more efficiently resolve cases because they can accurately manage their client’s expectations and advise accordingly.

Efficiency – “Justice delayed is justice denied” is not just a catchy saying. As cases “age” both sides begin to lose the ability to present accurate and effective evidence. Witnesses become unavailable, forget crucial details, or develop biases. Evidence degrades. For incarcerated defendants, their life passes them by, they are unable to be contributing members of their family and society, and incarceration costs rise. Docket management and discovery control orders, as well as courtroom access, help resolve cases quickly.

Accessibility – Crime is a 24 hour a day activity. Law enforcement, attorneys, and defendants need judges who are present and engaged as much as possible. I will be available when needed. Additionally, my court staff and I will maximize courtroom access so that all parties can move their cases and investigations forward as efficiently as justice allows.

Community Values – A judge is a servant of their community. While sometimes called upon to make decisions that will be unpopular, a judge should strive to resolve cases in a balanced lawful manner which reflects the values of their jurisdiction. A judge should never let their personal biases or feelings interfere with those decisions.

What is the proper role of a lawyer?

All lawyers have a basic role, and then have additional specific roles depending on their responsibilities within the judicial system.

First, all lawyers have a duty to uphold the law, and this is irrespective of their particular job.  Lawyers are to make the best use of the law to advance their client’s interests, but they are required to do so honestly and without violating the law that they all are sworn to serve.

Specifically, lawyers have additional roles depending on their position.  For example, a prosecutor has the role of serving the interests of the community, and they do this best by at all times and in all ways seeking justice.

Defense lawyers have the responsibility to advance their client’s interest, and do so by consistently and zealously ensuring that the law is applied fairly to their clients. 

Among the nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, which one do you respect the most, and why? Which one do you respect the least, and why?

Although I haven’t always agreed with his decisions or his reasoning, Justice Scalia is worthy of great respect.  Justice Scalia is a model for following the law rather than creating the law.  Justice Scalia shows the judiciary at its best when demonstrating restraint.  For example, Justice Scalia very strongly reinforced the right of a criminal defendants to be able to confront their accusers.  Justice Scalia took this position because he believed the Constitution compels that position.  Justice Scalia protects the country he loves by honoring the Constitution as it actually written and not as he would necessarily like it to be written.

In contrast, there are a number of Justices that do quite the opposite.  Rather than name them specifically, let me simply highlight the philosophy of several Justices, both current and past, that are harmful to freedom.  These justices create, often out of whole cloth, rights from the Constitution that are nowhere found in the text.  These justices look to foreign law for guidance (a recent development I find particularly offensive), for justification to act in a manner that the text clearly forbids.  Perhaps these Justices think that they are serving their Country.  In reality, though, they are harming their Country one ruling at a time.

What is the single most important action the county needs to do to keep this a great community to live in?

This is an easy question in my mind:  accountability.  Hold people accountable for their work (or lack of work).  Judges are public servants.  Servants are responsible to those who serve.  Hold elected officials, including judges, accountable to the taxpayer and to the community values that make this such a fantastic community.  Increase transparency within our government, including our judiciary.  If our officials are not putting this community and our values first, working hard and being accessible, promoting transparency in their daily activities, and being honest and demonstrating integrity then the voter needs to rectify that in the next election.

Please explain your view of recidivism and how it affects the sentences you given

Sentencing is one of the most important responsibilities a judge has.  One of the largest considerations during sentencing is what is the danger to the community in this particular set of facts and with this particular defendant?  This is where the issue of recidivism comes to play.  There are some defendants and some types of offenses where it likely, sometimes near certain, that future offenses will be committed again.  Will this person likely re-offend and therefore harm the community?  A judge has a responsibility to protect the community within the law, and very often this means ensuring that a defendant who has harmed and is likely to continue harming the community be put in a place where that harm is minimized or completely eliminated.  Those individuals that are at a low risk of recidivism should be back out in the community working and contributing to society as soon as possible.

Should the state license barbers?  Lawyers? Why or why not?

As a general rule, the less the State gets involved in business, the better the community is served.   Obviously some regulation is needed, but when it occurs it ought to be as limited as possible, as clear as possible, and be based on common sense.  The key to doing this is to ask “what is the possible harm here?”  The greater the harm, the more regulation is needed.  A man who sells explosive needs some rules to make sure the community is kept safe.    Lawyers are closer to the man who sells explosives than the man who cuts hair because lawyers deal with the freedoms of others which is just as important as the physical safety of others, and sometimes more so.  Lawyers ought to be licensed and held to a high, clear, understood standard of conduct.  Absent some clear showing that the health and safety of the community demands it, barbers should be free of governmental interference.

What carries the greatest influence on your ruling: case law, the Constitution, or other?

The practice of law itself requires a hierarchy of laws.  This is not something that each judge gets to decide for themselves, nor should they try to do so.  For example, the Constitution will take always precedence over a statute.  Case law, when correctly used, will clarify (but not contradict) a statute, unless that case law is faithfully following what a higher law, like the Constitution, requires.

Is there anything in your background of an embarrassing nature that should be explained before your election?

No

To what extent would you need to recuse yourself from cases because of conflicts of interest?

Recusal can sometimes be used as an excuse not avoid difficult situations.  I am committed to doing the job regardless of how hard or unpleasant it may be.  I will never use recusal as a means to avoid my duty as a judge.

Sometimes, rarely, a recusal is needed.  I am absolutely confident that I will be impartial regardless of the parties before me.  That said, should I somehow have some financial interest at stake, if a former law partner or family member be a material witness in the case, or if I previously participated in the case in a significant way, I will recuse myself as the law requires.  If I determined that my impartiality might reasonably questioned—not just potentially questioned—I will recuse myself.  I will also recuse myself if I have a personal bias or prejudice against the subject matter of the parties or if I have personal knowledge of any disputed facts.  In short, if the law requires recusal, I will follow the law.