Measuring Influence in Death Penalty Cases – Which Justices Were Most Often in the Majority (Part 2)?

Yesterday, we began our review of the individual Justices’ voting records in death penalty cases, discussing the data on the percentage of the time each Justice voted with the majority in death penalty appeals for the years 1994 through 2005.  Today, we address the second half of our study period, 2006 through 2017.

Incredibly, for the years 2006 through 2011, four members of the Court – Chief Justice George (116 cases), his successor Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye (21 cases), and Justices Corrigan (138 cases) and Liu (4 cases) voted with the majority in 100% of the death penalty appeals in which they participated.  Justice Baxter was in the minority only twice in 142 cases – 98.59%.  Justice Chin also was in the minority only twice in 141 cases – 98.58%.  Justice Werdegar voted with the majority in 95.8% of her 143 cases and Justice Moreno 95.73% of the time (117 cases).  Pro Tem designees voted with the majority in 26 of 28 cases, for a percentage of 92.86%.

In Table 298, we report the data for the years 2012 to the present.  Justices Baxter and Kruger have voted with the majority in every death penalty case in which each Justice has participated.  Justice Kennard voted with the majority in 98.91% of her 92 cases during these years.  Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye voted with the majority in 97.46% of her 118 cases.  After voting with the majority in 117 consecutive cases stretching back to 2011, the Chief Justice dissented in part in August 2016 in People v. Grimes.  Justice Chin has voted with the majority in 97.39% of his 115 death penalty cases.  Justice Werdegar did so 95.65% of the time and Justice Corrigan 95.61%.  Justice Cuellar has voted with the majority in 44 of 47 death penalty cases, or 93.62%.  Justice Liu is the most frequent dissenter among the permanent Justices, having joined the majority in 104 of 114 cases, or 91.23%.  Designated pro tem Justices have voted with the majority in 89.47% of their 19 cases.

Join us back here next Thursday as we continue our analysis of the individual Justices’ voting patterns in death penalty cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Giuseppe Milo (no changes).

Measuring Influence in Death Penalty Cases – Which Justices Were Most Often in the Majority (Part 1)?

Earlier this week, we reviewed the data on the percentage of the time each Justice of the Illinois Supreme Court voted with the majority in death penalty cases.  Today and tomorrow, we’ll be reviewing the same measure for the California Supreme Court during the years 1994 through 2017.

We begin with the years 1994 through 1999.  For these years, Justice Arabian voted with the majority in all his death penalty decisions – 24 of 24.  Chief Justice George voted with the majority in 98.46% of his death penalty cases.  Justice Chin voted with the majority in 40 of his 41 death penalty cases – 97.56%.  Justice Baxter voted with the majority in 62 of 64 death penalty cases – 96.88%.  Chief Justice Lucas voted with the majority in 23 of 24 cases – 95.83%.  Justice Werdegar voted with the majority 95.16%.  Justice Brown did so 94.87% of the time.  Justice Kennard did 90.77% of the time.  Justice Mosk voted with the majority only 48 of his 65 cases – 73.86%.  Finally, pro tem Justices sitting by designation voted with the majority half the time – three of six cases.

In Table 296, we report the data for the years 2000 through 2005.  Designee Justices voted with the majority in all seven of their death penalty cases.  Justices Baxter and Werdegar both voted with the majority in 106 of 107 cases – 99.07%.  Justice Chin voted with the majority in 98.13% of his 107 cases.  Justice Janice Rogers Brown voted with the majority in 90 of her 92 cases – 97.83%.  Chief Justice George voted with the majority in 97.14% of his 105 cases.  Justice Moreno did so 96.3% of the time.  Justice Kennard did in 90.65% of her cases.  Once again, Justice Mosk dissented the most, voting with the majority in 83.33% of his 81 death penalty cases.

Join us back here tomorrow as we review the Justices’ voting records for the years 2006 through 2017.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Kevin Stanchfield (no changes).

Were Majority Opinions in Death Penalty Cases Longer or Shorter When the Court Reversed?

Yesterday, we began our review of the Court’s majority opinions in death penalty appeals between 1994 and 2017, focusing on complete affirmances and partial reversals where the sentence was affirmed.  Today, we review the second half of our analysis: partial reversals where the sentence was vacated, and complete reversals.

In Table 291, we report the data on partial reversals where the sentence was vacated.  Justice Kennard wrote five majority opinions in such cases.  Chief Justice George and Justices Corrigan and Werdegar wrote three each, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Justices Chin and Moreno wrote two apiece, and Justices Kruger, Baxter, Cuellar and Liu have written one each.

We report the average length of majority opinions in partial reversals with the sentence vacated in Table 292.  Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye’s two majority opinions averaged 117.5 pages.  Chief Justice George’s three opinions averaged 80 pages.  Justice Liu averaged 78 pages, Justice Werdegar 70,33 pages, Justice Baxter 64, Justice Kruger 54, Justice Cuellar 53, Justice Chin 51.5, Justice Corrigan 50.67, Justice Kennard 44.6 and Justice Moreno 38 pages.

We report the Justice-by-Justice data for the Court’s eleven reversals in Table 293;  Justice Corrigan has written the majority opinion in four such cases.  Justices Werdegar and Baxter have written two and Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Justices Brown and Kennard have written one apiece.

In Table 294, we report the average length of the Court’s outright reversals in death penalty cases.  Justice Werdegar’s majority opinions have averaged 69.5 pages.  Justice Kennard averaged 40 pages.  Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye has averaged 35 pages, Justice Baxter has averaged 31.5 pages, Justice Corrigan 16.75 pages, and Justice Brown’s majority opinions have averaged 12 pages.

Join us back here next Thursday as we turn to a new subject in our ongoing analysis of the California Supreme Court’s decision making.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Marc Cooper (no changes).

 

Who Has Written the Court’s Majority Opinions in Death Penalty Cases?

For the past few weeks, we’ve been reviewing the death penalty jurisprudence of the Illinois and California Supreme Courts on this blog and the Illinois Supreme Court Review.  This week, we’re reviewing the Court’s majority opinions.

In Table 287, we report the data on majority opinions in death penalty affirmances.  Justice Chin has written 51 majority opinions in death penalty affirmances.  Justice Werdegar has written 44, Justice Kennard 39, Justice Baxter 38, Chief Justice George 36, Justice Corrigan 28, Justice Moreno 25, Justice Brown and Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye 19 each, Justice Mosk 12 and Justice Liu 8.  Seven majority opinions have been per curiam.  Chief Justice Lucas wrote five majority opinion, Justice Arabian wrote 4, Justice Kruger has written 3 and Justice Cuellar has written two.

We discovered reviewing the Illinois Supreme Court’s experience with death penalty cases that cases in which the death penalty was vacated, whether partial or complete reversals, tended to be shorter than affirmances.  The result is the same in California.  The Court entirely affirmed in 340 death penalty cases between 1994 and 2017, averaging 76.594 pages.  The Court has partially reversed while affirming the sentence in 51 cases, with the majority opinions averaging 77.568 pages.  The Court has partially reversed with the sentence vacated in 24 cases, with the majority opinions averaging 62.042 pages.  Finally, the Court has entirely reversed in 11 cases.  The majority opinions averaged 32.36 pages.

In Table 288, we report the average length of majority opinions Justice-by-Justice in death penalty affirmances.  Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye wrote the longest opinions, averaging 102.58 pages.  Chief Justice George averaged 98.22 pages.  Justice Baxter averaged 95.658 pages.  Justice Liu has averaged 86.375 pages, Justice Mosk averaged 82.167 pages, Justice Werdegar 79.509, Justice Arabian 76 pages, Justice Moreno 71.32 pages, Justice Corrigan 67.07 pages, Justice Kruger 65 pages, Chief Justice Lucas 64 pages, Justice Kennard 63.64 pages, Justice Chin 62.373 pages, per curiam majority opinions have averaged 58.857 pages, Justice Brown averaged 57.947 pages, and Justice Cuellar has averaged 57.5 pages.

In Table 289, we report the Court’s majority opinions in death penalty cases where it partially reversed while affirming the sentence.  Justice Chin has led the Court since 1994, writing the majority opinion in eight such cases.  Justice Werdegar has written seven majorities, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Justices Kennard and Baxter wrote six, Justices Moreno and Liu have written four apiece, Chief Justice George wrote three majorities, Justices Brown and Corrigan have written two apiece, and Justices Cuellar and Mosk have written one each.  Finally, the Court released one per curiam majority opinion in such a case.

Majority opinions in partial reversals where the sentence was overall averaged almost exactly the same length as affirmances.  Justice Cuellar’s single majority opinion was 162 pages long.  Chief Justice George averaged 97 pages.  Justice Liu averaged 92.5 pages, Justice Kennard 82.33 pages, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye 79.33 pages, Justice Baxter 78.5, Justice Chin 77, Justice Moreno 73.75, Justice Werdegar 73, Justice Brown 63, Justice Corrigan 50.5 pages and Justice Mosk 41 pages.  The Court’s sole per curiam opinion in this category was only two pages long.

Join us back here tomorrow as we continue our review of the Court’s death penalty jurisprudence.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Franco Folini (no changes).

Which Counties Had Lesser Affirmance Rates in Death Penalty Cases?

Yesterday, we reviewed the data for the year-by-year numbers of mandatory death penalty appeals decided by the California Supreme Court.  Today, we review the overall affirmance rates, county by county.

For the entire period, the Court has decided 425 death penalty appeals.  The Court has affirmed 342 in all respects.  The Court has partially reversed while leaving the penalty intact in another 45, partially reversed vacating the penalty in 25 cases, and reversed outright in 12 cases.  This translates to an affirmance rate of 80.47%.  The Court has partially reversed 10.59% with the penalty affirmed, partially reversed with penalty reversed another 5.88%; and reversed in all respects 2.82% of the death penalty cases.

Eleven counties had at least one of their cases reversed in part (with the penalty vacated) or reversed outright: Los Angeles (83.7%); San Mateo (87.5%); Alameda (96.3%); Riverside (90.91%); Kern (93.33%); Orange (94.29%); Stanislaus (88.89%); Ventura (85.71%); Shasta (75%); Monterey (80%) and Contra Costa (85.71%).

A total of twenty-four counties have had one hundred  percent of their death penalty appeals either affirmed outright, or affirmed in part with the penalty upheld: Placer, Sacramento, Butte, Merced, San Diego, San Bernardino, Santa Clara, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, Calveras, El Dorado, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare, San Luis Obispo, Sonoma, Humboldt, Solano, Santa Barbara, Napa, Lake, Marin and Tehana counties.

Join us back here tomorrow as we turn to another phase of our analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision making.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Chad McDonald (no changes).

Do Some Counties Have Higher Reversal Rates in Death Penalty Cases?

This week, we’re continuing our comparative analysis of the death penalty appeal cases, both here and over at the Illinois Supreme Court Review.  The discussion is particularly timely for California given the Supreme Court’s decision largely upholding the controversial death penalty initiative adopted in November by the voters.  This week, we disaggregate the Court’s overall reversal rate for death penalty cases to look at how the cases have gone, county by county.  First, let’s review the distribution of death penalty cases from around the State.

In Table 282, we report the county by county data for the years 1994 through 1999.  In 1994, the Court decided three cases originating in Los Angeles, and one each from Placer, San Mateo, Alameda and  Riverside counties.  In 1995, the Court decided six cases from Los Angeles, two from Alameda County, and one each from Riverside, Kern, Stanislaus, Sacramento, Butte and Ventura counties.  In 1996, Sacramento County led with three cases.  Los Angeles, Riverside, Kern, Stanislaus and Merced counties produced one apiece.  In 1997, Los Angeles was back at the top with seven cases.  Sacramento produced two, and San Mateo, Kern, Orange, San Diego and San Bernardino counties produced one each.  In 1998, Los Angeles led with three cases and Sacramento had two.  Riverside, Kern, Orange, Butte, San Diego, Santa Clara and San Francisco produced one case each.  In 1999, six counties produced one case apiece: Los Angeles, Alameda, Riverside, San Diego, Santa Cruz and Calaveras.

In Table 283, we report the data for the years 2000 through 2005.  In 2000, five cases from Los Angeles County were decided.  The Court decided four cases from San Diego and one each from Alameda, Orange, San Bernardino, El Dorado, Shasta and Madera counties.  In 2001, the Court decided four death penalty cases from Los Angeles, two each from Riverside and Kern, and one apiece from Orange, Shasta and Fresno counties.  In 2002, the Court decided two cases each from Los Angeles, Alameda and Stanislaus counties and one each from San Mateo, Sacramento, Butte, San Diego, San Bernardino, San Francisco, Shasta and Monterey counties.  In 2003, the Court decided seven cases from Los Angeles, four from Riverside, two from Santa Clara, and one each from Alameda, Stanislaus, Sacramento, San Bernardino, Shasta, Contra Costa and El Dorado counties.  In 2004, the Court decided six death penalty cases from Los Angeles, three each from Orange and San Bernardino, two from Contra Costa, and one apiece from Alameda, Kern, Stanislaus, Sacramento, Shasta, Fresno and San Joaquin counties.  Finally, in 2005, the Court decided fourteen death penalty cases from Los Angeles, three from Alameda, two from Sacramento, and one each from San Mateo, Kern, Stanislaus, Ventura, San Diego and Fresno counties.

We report the data for the years 2006 through 2011 in Table 284 below.  In 2006, the Court decided five death penalty cases from Los Angeles, two each from San Mateo, Alameda, Orange and Santa Clara counties, and one apiece from Riverside, Kern, San Diego, Fresno and Kings counties.  In 2007, the Court decided six cases from Los Angeles, four from Orange, three each from Alameda, San Diego and San Bernardino, and one case apiece from Sacramento, Ventura, Contra Costa and Tulare counties.  In 2008, the Court decided nine cases from Los Angeles, three from Riverside, two each from Orange, San Bernardino and Fresno counties, and one each from Placer, San Mateo, Sacramento, Ventura, Tulare, San Luis Obispo, Sonoma and Humboldt counties.  In 2009, the Court decided five cases originating from Los Angeles County, four from Riverside, three from Alameda and Santa Clara, two from Orange, San Diego and Fresno counties, and one apiece from San Mateo, Kern, Sacramento, San Bernardino and San Joaquin counties.  In 2010, six cases were decided from Los Angeles County, three cases from Riverside, two each from Alameda, Orange,  Sacramento and San Bernardino counties, and one each to Kern, San Diego, Tulare, Solano and Santa Barbara counties.  In 2011, the Supreme Court decided eight cases from Los Angeles county, five from Riverside, three from San Diego, two from Fresno and Monterey, and one apiece from Alameda, Kern, Orange, Sacramento, San Bernardino and Sonoma counties.

In 2012, Los Angeles County produced eleven death penalty cases.  The Court decided three cases from Alameda County, two each from Riverside, Orange, San Diego and San Bernardino counties, and one apiece from Kern, Ventura and Napa counties.  In 2013, the Court decided seven death penalty cases originating in Los Angeles County, three from Orange County, two each from Riverside, Kern and Contra Costa counties, and one apiece from Stanislaus, San Diego, Monterey and Tulare counties.  In 2014, the Court decided eight cases from Los Angeles, four from Riverside, three from Orange, two from Ventura, and one case apiece from Sacramento, San Diego, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Joaquin, Kings and Tulare counties.

In 2015, Riverside led with six death penalty cases.  The court decided three cases from Los Angeles, three from Orange and two from Shasta.  The Court decided one case each from Alameda, San Bernardino, Contra Costa and Lake counties.  In 2016, the Court decided five cases originating in Los Angeles County, three in Riverside, two apiece in Orange, Madera and San Joaquin counties, and one each in Alameda, Stanislaus, San Diego, San Bernardino, Santa Clara, Shasta, Monterey, Tulare, Marin and Tehama counties.  In 2017, the Court has to date decided three death penalty cases from Los Angeles, and one each from Alameda, Orange, Fresno and Kings counties.

Join us back here tomorrow as we address the second half of our question: whether any state’s death penalty appeals had an unusually high or low affirmance rate?

Image courtesy of Flickr by Stellbee (no changes).

How Often Did the California Supreme Court Reverse Death Penalty Judgments (Part 2)?

Earlier this week, we began analyzing the Illinois Supreme Court’s experience with automatic death penalty appeals.  Yesterday, we began our review of the California Supreme Court’s record, beginning with the year 1994.

In Table 279, we review the Court’s partial and complete reversal rate for the years 2002 through 2009.  In 2002, the Court affirmed in 78.57% of death penalty cases, partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 14.29% and partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in 7.14%.  In 2003, the Court affirmed in three-quarters of its death penalty cases.  It partially reversed with the penalty affirmed in 5%, partially reversed with the death penalty vacated 15% of the time, and completely reversed in 5%.  In 2004, the Court affirmed in 90.48% of its cases, and partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in the remaining 9.52%.  In 2005, the Court affirmed in 88.46% of its death penalty cases, and partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in the remaining 11.54%.  In 2006, the Court affirmed in 73.68% of its cases.  The Court partially reversed in each of the remaining cases, affirming the death penalty in 15.79% and vacating it in 10.53%.  In 2007, the Court affirmed in 82.61% of its death penalty cases.  The Court reversed in part while affirming the death penalty in 13.04%, and partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in the remaining 4.35%.  The Court affirmed completely in 76.92% of its death penalty cases in 2008.  The Court partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 15.38% of its cases.  It partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in 3.85% of its 2008 cases, and reversed entirely in the remaining 3.85%.  In 2009, the Court affirmed in 80% of its cases, partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 12%, and completely reversed in the remaining 8%.

We report the year-by-year data for the remaining years to the present in Table 280.  The Court decided 24 death penalty cases in 2010, 26 in 2011 and 25 in 2012.  In 2013, the Court decided 18 death penalty cases.  The Court decided 23 cases in 2014, 17 in 2015 and has decided 7 death penalty cases so far in 2017.

Finally, we review the year-by-year reversal rates in Table 281.  The Court affirmed entirely in 95.83% of its death penalty cases in 2010, and partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in the remaining 4.17%.  In 2011, the Court affirmed entirely in 88.46%, partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 7.69%, and reversed entirely in 3.85%.  In 2012, the Court affirmed in 72% of its death penalty cases, partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 12%, partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in 12%, and completely reversed in 4%.  In 2013, the Court completely affirmed in 94.44% of its death penalty cases, and partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 5.56%.

Since that time, there are indications that the Court is taking a harder look at death penalty cases.  The Court affirmed 60.87% of its death penalty cases in 2014.  The Court partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 30.43%, partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in 4.35% and completely reversed in 4.35%.  In 2015, the Court affirmed completely in only 52.94%.  The Court partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 29.41% and partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in the remaining 17.65%.  In 2016, the Court affirmed in 58.33% of its cases.  In partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed and partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in 16.67% each.  The Court reversed entirely in the remaining 8.33%.

So far in 2017, the Court has entirely affirmed in 85.71% of its death penalty cases.  It has partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in the remaining 14.29%.

Join us back here next Thursday as we continue our comparison of the death penalty records of the Illinois and California Supreme Courts.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Joe Wolf (no changes).

How Often Did the California Supreme Court Reverse Death Penalty Judgments (Part 1)?

Earlier this week, we began our review of the Illinois Supreme Court’s record with death penalty appeals between 1990 and the abolition of the death penalty in 2011.  Today and tomorrow, we’re comparing the California Supreme Court’s data on death penalty cases.

In Table 276, we report the number of death penalty appeals the Court decided, year-by-year.  In 1994, the Supreme Court decided seven death penalty appeals.  The following year, the Court decided fifteen death penalty appeals.  In 1996, the Court decided eight death penalty appeals.  In 1997, the Court decided fourteen death penalty appeals.  In 1998, the Court decided thirteen.  In 1999, the Court decided six death penalty appeals.  The following year, the Court decided fifteen cases, and the Court decided eleven in 2001.

In Table 277, we report the results for the same years, divided into affirmances, partial reversals with the death penalty left in place, partial reversals with the death penalty vacated, and complete reversals.  In 1994, the Court affirmed in 100% of its death penalty cases.  In 1995, the Court affirmed in 86.67% of cases, partially reversed with the death penalty intact in 6.67%, and partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in the same fraction.

In 1996, the Court affirmed completely in 75% of its death penalty cases.  The Court partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in the remaining 25%.  In 1997, the Court affirmed in 71.43% of its death penalty cases.  The Court partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 14.29% of its cases, partially reversed with the death penalty vacated in 7.14% and completely reversed in 7.14%.  In 1998, the Court affirmed in 84.62% of its death penalty cases.  The Court partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in another 7.69%, and completely reversed in another 7.69%.

In 1999, the Court affirmed in 100% of its death penalty cases.  The following year, the Court affirmed 93.33% of the time, and partially reversed with the death penalty affirmed in 6.67% of its cases.  In 2001, the Court affirmed 90.91% of the time, and partially reversed with the death penalty vacated 9.09% of the time.

In Table 278, we report the number of death penalty appeals, year by year, for the next eight years.  In 2002, the Court decided fourteen death penalty appeals.  Each year following, the number increased – twenty decisions in 2003, 21 in 2004 and 26 in 2005.  The Court decided nineteen death penalty appeals in 2006, 23 in 2007, 26 in 2008 and 25 in 2009.

Join us back here tomorrow as we address the Court’s experience with death penalty cases in the most recent years.

Image courtesy of Flickr by PeaSap (no changes).

Tracking the Importance of Recusals in Criminal Cases (Part 2)

Yesterday, we began our review of the Court’s experience with recusals in criminal cases since 1994.  Today, we review the second half of the data.

In 2006, new Justice Corrigan recused in eleven criminal cases.  Justice Chin recused in three and Justice Baxter recused twice.  In 2007, Justices Corrigan and Baxter recused once each.  In 2008, the only recusal in a criminal case was by Chief Justice George.  In 2009, Justice Baxter recused three times, and Justice Kennard once.

In 2010, there was only one recusal in a criminal case, by Justice Kennard.  In 2011, the new Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye recused in twelve criminal cases, and Justice Werdegar recused in one.  In 2012, the Chief Justice recused three times and Justice Liu once.  There were no recusals in criminal cases in 2013.

In 2014, there were two recusals in criminal cases – one by Justice Kennard, and one by Justice Liu.  In 2015, Justices Kruger and Cuellar recused in eight criminal cases apiece, and Justice Corrigan recused once.  There have been no recusals in criminal cases since 2015.

Join us back here next week as we turn our attention on both our data analytics blogs to the death penalty.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Charlie Day (no changes).

Tracking the Importance of Recusals in Criminal Cases (Part 1)

Last week on both the Illinois Supreme Court Review and this blog, we tracked recusals, year-by-year in civil cases.  This week on both blogs, we’re tracking the importance of recusals in criminal cases.  While recusals in civil cases are often caused by a Justice’s personal or financial interest in a party, the most common cause of recusals on the criminal side is that the case was argued and essentially decided before the Justice joined the Court, or because the case was decided by the Court of Appeal from which the Justice came.

In 1994, there were only two recusals in criminal cases at the Court, both by Justice Werdegar.  In 1995, Justice Werdegar recused twice, and Justices Arabian and Baxter once apiece.  In 1996, new Justice Janice Rogers Brown recused in seven criminal cases.  Justice Baxter recused in three, and Justice Chin recused once.  In 1997, there were no recusals in criminal cases.

In 1998, Chief Justice George recused in two criminal cases, and that was all.  There were no recusals in criminal cases in either 1999 or 2000. In 2001, new Justice Carlos Moreno recused in four criminal cases, and Chief Justice George recused once.

In 2002, Justice Baxter recused in five criminal cases, and Justice Brown recused once.  In 2003, Justices Baxter and Kennard recused once each.  In 2004, Chief Justice George recused in one criminal case, and that was all.  Again in 2005, there was only recusal – Justice Baxter.

Join us back here tomorrow as we wrap up our look at the importance of recusals in the California Supreme Court.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Dennis Jarvis (no changes).

LexBlog