Monday, December 10, 2012

Sacramento Judge Jaime R. Roman Issues Illegal Blanket Order Exempting Government From State Court Rule in Child Support Cases

California Commission on Judicial Performance Director Victoria B. Henley Chief Council - CJP Chairperson Anthony P. Capozzi, Vice-Chairperson Justice Ignazio J. Ruvolo 1st District Court of Appeal California - California 3rd District Court of Appeal – Sacramento Justice Vance W. Raye – Justice Jonathan K. Renner - Justice Coleman A. Blease – Justice Ronald B. Robie – Justice William J. Murray Jr. – Justice George W. Nicolson – Justice M. Kathleen Butz – Justice Elena J. Duarte – Justice Harry E. Hull Jr. – Justice Louis R. Mauro – Justice Andrea Lynn Hoch – Justice Jonathan K. Renner Third District Court of Appeal California
Judge Jaime Roman (L) with Judge Matthew Gary.
Sacramento Superior Court Judge Jaime Roman last month issued an illegal, standing order exempting government attorneys from state court rule requirements in child support cases. 

Roman authorized an unlawful blanket order applicable to all child support cases in Sacramento County Superior Court where the Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) is directed by the court to prepare the proposed order after hearing.

To benefit the government, the order eliminates the order after hearing notice and approval requirements of Cal. Rules of Court rule 5.125. The rule specifies that modifications to the rule can only be made when appropriate to specific cases, not all cases on a blanket basis. 

The order also was issued more than a month before the rule takes effect. Both the order and rule 5.125 appear below. Judge Roman has been involved in a number of additional controversies reported by Sacramento Family Court News.   

Roman's unilateral action exceeds his authority and violates several sections of the California Code of Judicial Ethics, according to past judge misconduct prosecutions by the Commission on Judicial Performance. Among other ethical implications, providing preferential treatment to the government creates an impermissible two-track system of justice, according to the CJP. 

Roman has worked for the government most of his career, including eleven years as a Solano County prosecutor. 

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Sacramento County Family Court Hon. Peter J. McBrien Felony Charging Document from 2000

Sacramento County Family Court Judge Peter McBrien Charged with Felony Criminal Conduct 

Family Court Controversy Documents

Family court Judge Peter McBrien 2000 felony charging document with attached D.A. investigator report. Summons in lieu of arrest warrant charging Peter James McBrien with the commission of a violation of Penal Code section 594, a felony. With the five-page investigation report of Sacramento County District Attorney's Office Criminal Investigator Craig W. Tourte detailing Judge McBrien's responsibility for the destruction of public owned trees valued at more than $20,000 in the Ancil Hoffman Park Effie Yeaw Nature Center in Carmichael, California. Judge McBrien had the trees destroyed to improve the view from his home, according to the investigators report. 

The case was resolved when McBrien pleaded no contest to a reduced, misdemeanor charge. Click here for the full story. Click here for local coverage of Judge McBrien at Sacramento Family Court NewsHon. Peter J. McBrien, is a Sacramento County Superior Court, family court judge. California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye was a Sacramento Superior Court Judge from 1997-2005 and presided over the first court in Sacramento dedicated solely to domestic violence issues, working closely with Judge McBrien.

Monday, August 6, 2012

Sacramento County Family Court Presiding Judge Matthew J. Gary Provides Details On Court Cutbacks To Family Law Bar - Leaves Public In Dark

Court Earns FCAC Poster Child of the Month Award

Family Court Presiding Judge Matthew J. Gary recited a laundry list of family court services cuts in an exclusive, February 2012 presentation to attorneys from the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section. 


Gary has yet to provide the same statistics and data to the general public, including the 75 percent of family court users who don't have a lawyer. The March, 2012 issue of the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section newsletter, Family Law Counselor, reported what the presiding judge revealed to the for-profit attorneys who practice in family court:
  • Family Court Services (FCS) is down two mediators and has no ability to replace them.
  • Public counter wait times routinely exceed five hours.
  • Processing of drop box legal documents may be delayed for days or weeks due to lack of staff resources.
  • Court phones are shut off at noon for lack of staff to field calls.
  • The branch law library was closed.
  • The Computer Room at the Self-Help Center was closed.
  • The Self-Help Center itself is now serving 10,000 fewer litigants than in years past due to the lack of resources.
  • The court no longer pulls retention or related files for hearings because of the lack of staff in the court's records unit. This means that the court routinely does not have the entire file for review at a hearing.
In addressing the 75 percent of family court litigants who cannot afford legal representation, Judge Gary provided the following abridged version of his speech, which is posted throughout the public areas of the courthouse

For the full article, click Read more >> below...

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Tulare County Family Court Services

At this link, Tulare County Family Court provides the following services for families and children:

  • Child custody recommending counseling: It is mandated in Family Code section 3160 that parents be referred to mediation if they do not have a parenting plan for their child or children at the time of their court hearing. If you are referred to Family Court Services at the hearing and do not reach an agreement, the child custody recommending counselor will provide information and recommendations to the court in writing before your court hearing takes place.
  • Child custody mediation: this is a confidential process in which the parents are assisted in developing a plan of custody and visitation, but if there is no agreement, the mediator does not provide information to the court. Appointments for mediation are available in the afternoon in Family Court Services.
  • Juvenile dependency mediation: The juvenile court may refer cases to mediation for custody and visitation exit orders as well as discussion of of other issues as ordered. The mediator will send any agreements to the court or will let the court know if no agreement is made.
  • Limited investigation in child custody cases may be conducted when ordered by the court, as provided in Family Code section 3112. There may be a cost assessed for this investigation.
  • Pre-marital interviews for juveniles who petition for a marriage license, per Family Code sections 302 and 304.
  • Investigation of Guardianship and Conservatorship petitions pursuant to Probate Code sections 1513 and 1826.
  • Stepparent adoption investigations on requests for adoption, pursuant to Family Code section 9001. Click here for local forms and instructions for filing in Tulare County.