Mannie Arrieta
Generally, judicial races do not tend to generate as much interest as other political races in large part because judicial candidates cannot speak about the issues that might subsequently come before them in court. Where, however, an opponent misrepresents the qualifications of a judicial candidate, his record, or other material facts, the candidate is allowed to respond.
I am the current sitting judge for the Third Judicial District Court presiding over Division I, which is a civil division. I have 27 years of experience both as a lawyer and now as a judge, in civil law. Although I am the newest judge among the eight judges, I have the third largest caseload.
In a recent letter to a local paper, my opponent responded to the paper’s endorsement of my candidacy. He attempted to “clarify why the current caseload undermines public safety and effectiveness of our judicial system” and concluded that he is, “… the only candidate with extensive civil and criminal experience,” and is therefore the best qualified candidate for meeting the needs of the community.
On his website, my opponent contends that I am running a campaign to keep things the way they are and that “(h)e doesn’t want you to know that the Court’s workload is based on the needs of the community and the qualifications of the judge.”
The public should consider a few facts regarding the court and its caseload.
1) My opponent would have no direct authority to change the caseload. My opponent suggests that as a new judge, he could take over civil and criminal cases. The court is currently divisionalized, with the presiding senior judge having the statutory authority to assign the types of cases to the specific divisions. The position for which he is running for is a civil division.
2) The claim that criminal courts are overwhelmed by the caseloads is not supported by the facts. First, since 1996, the makeup of the total caseload for 3rd Judicial District has been 68 percent civil cases with 32 percent criminal and juvenile cases. In terms of trials, criminal filings have decreased over the past year.
Over the last year, I have received three times the number of civil cases that a full-time criminal judge receives for that same month, and based on statistics, civil cases tried (including bench trials) far outnumber criminal trials being held at this time. In a recent newspaper article, the district attorney commented that 90 percent of criminal cases are plea bargained out. That means that only 10 percent of the 32 percent criminal cases making the total caseload ever get tried.
3) The bulk of criminal cases don’t take as long to process as civil cases; criminal cases have a 6-month speedy trial rule. (There are exceptions to this, such as with more complicated murder trials, etc). Local rules allow for civil cases to be placed on 6-, 9- and 12-month dockets depending on complexity. Criminal trials often don’t require the extensive type of discovery allowed in civil trials: they don’t normally have depositions taken, written discovery exchanged, pre-trial conferences, settlement facilitations, or frequent motions hearings like civil cases.
4) My opponent contends that his election would result in a more efficient and effective operation of the court due to his experience in civil and criminal law. His election however, would likely result in delay and questionable effectiveness: Since he is a senior supervisor in the DA’s office, he would likely have to wait a least a year before all of the criminal cases he oversees would work themselves out of court to avoid a conflict of interest. (That’s assuming he could take over a civil division and immediately start working on criminal cases.)
Based on what little information he has publicly provided, it appears his “extensive civil experience” consists of about five years of private practice completed about 10 years ago in Tucumcari, where he apparently also handled public defender cases during the same period of time.
We are all busy at district court. With all due respect however, neither the facts nor the numbers support the claims of my opponent.
Arrieta is the Division I district judge in the 3rd Judicial District Court in Las Cruces.