Numerous candidates vying for high court
Andress, who killed a man in a fight years ago, won a 2002 Supreme Court decision that struck down part of the state's felony-murder law — an unpopular ruling that has spurred a number of candidates to run for the state's highest court this year.
The decision has resulted in new trials for a number of prisoners, and scores more are expected to challenge their convictions.
Sitting Justice Barbara Madsen faces one challenger, Terry Lukens, for Position 5 on the court.
Lukens, a King County Superior Court judge since 1999 and a Bellevue City Council member and mayor, said Andress was part of the reason he decided to challenge an incumbent on the Supreme Court. Lukens was troubled, as well, by a decision that upset a provision allowing the Department of Licensing to suspend licenses and another that changed the way responsibility is divvied up in injury cases.
"There have been a number of decisions recently that are unclear, inconsistent and show insufficient concern for consequences," Lukens said. "Consequences have to be factored in as part of the deliberative process."
Madsen, who has been on the high bench for 12 years, stands by the Andress decision, which she authored. She counters that although consequences are important, that cannot be the driving force.
"That's antithetical to me and to what judges do," she said, noting that judges are sworn to uphold the law — not to base their decisions on what might be popular.
In the past, Madsen was a public defender, then an assistant city attorney for Seattle, where she helped develop a child-abuse unit. Elected in 1992 as the third woman on the high court, she has decided more than 1,500 cases, often as the swing vote, she said.
Madsen has the support of numerous judges around the state and was rated "well qualified" by the King County Bar Association. Lukens said he has been endorsed by every elected prosecutor in the state and was rated "exceptionally well qualified."
This race, as well as a King County position on the Court of Appeals, is likely to be decided in the nonpartisan primary. If a candidate for judge gets more than 50 percent of the vote in the primary, there is no general-election runoff.
Justice Richard B. Sanders faces five challengers: Terry Sebring, Steve Merrival, Doug Schafer, James White and Fred Stewart.
Sanders, who has served in Position 6 on the state Supreme Court for eight years, is also under fire for the Andress decision. A jurist who is both admired and criticized for his outspoken positions, Sanders supported that decision and others that have angered prosecutors.
He has had two scuffles with the Commission on Judicial Conduct. One, over a speech he made at an anti-abortion rally less than an hour after being sworn in, was eventually decided in his favor. Another complaint, concerning his discussions with sex offenders at McNeil Island, will be heard in December.
To Sanders, "The job description of a justice is to protect people's legal rights." That includes the criminals. "If they have no rights, the rest of us don't either," he said. He sees himself as a civil libertarian whose job is to "restrain the power of the state over our lives," according to his campaign literature, and is the most frequent dissenter on the court.
Terry Sebring, a judge in Pierce County Superior Court for 12 years who currently works in the Attorney General's office, finds fault with Sanders' concept of the role of judge.
"The purpose of the criminal law is for accountability," he said. "It's not all about the individual rights of the defendant; the public has rights, too."
Challenger Steve Merrival was born on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and overcame poverty to become a Pierce County prosecutor for 23 years. He, too, finds fault with Sanders' conception of the law, saying it "evidences an anti-government attitude."
Challenger Doug Schafer, a Pierce County lawyer specializing in tax law and estate planning, defines his platform around legal ethics — although some say he has hurt himself by going too far in that regard.
In this, his third run for Supreme Court, Schafer touts his role in exposing the shady dealings of Pierce County Superior Court Judge Grant Anderson, who was removed from the bench in 1999 for "a pattern of dishonest behavior." While going after Anderson, Schafer also revealed something a client told him in secret, thereby violating a rule of legal practice. Schafer's law license was suspended for six months as a result.
James White is a Seattle attorney in private practice for 20 years, a municipal court judge in Edmonds and a pro-tem judge around the region. He says the most important issues in the legal system are providing attorneys for poor litigants in civil cases and court funding, both of which have reached a crisis state.
Fred Stewart was a Superior Court judge in Eastern Washington for 12 years before retiring in 1997 and sailing to New Zealand. Prior to that, he was a prosecutor in Stevens County and currently lives in Olympia.
Six candidates are running for Position 1 on the state Supreme Court, which is currently held by Faith Ireland, who is retiring. The candidates are Robert Alsdorf, Mary Kay Becker, Jim Johnson, Maureen Hart, William "Bill" Murphy and Gary Carpenter.
Alsdorf, a King County Superior Court judge for 14 years, has consistently been ranked by lawyers as among the best judges in the county, getting high marks for his decision-making, demeanor and other qualities. He is perhaps best known for his 2000 ruling that the car-tab initiative was unconstitutional, a decision later upheld by the Washington Supreme Court.
"I have a proven track record for impartiality," he said, noting he is endorsed by a broad spectrum, including defense lawyers and police, Republicans and Democrats.
Mary Kay Becker started out with a teaching degree, but was elected to the state Legislature in 1975 and decided she wanted to be a lawyer. She worked her way through law school, went into private practice and won a seat on the Court of Appeals 10 years ago. She said she has written more than 600 opinions and that she not only looks at the law but also does a "reality check" before making a decision.
Olympia lawyer Jim Johnson is making his second run at the state Supreme Court and says he has more experience arguing cases on appeal than all his opponents combined. Much of his work has focused on "protecting people's rights," including the rights of taxpayers, farmers and cattlemen in all corners of the state.
He has helped Tim Eyman draft his initiatives, and tried, but failed, to convince the Supreme Court to overturn Alsdorf's ruling on the car-tab initiative. He broke campaign spending records in his last run but fell short by about 4,000 votes.
Maureen Hart has worked in the Attorney General's office for 26 years, much of that spent evaluating and trying cases, as well as thinking broadly about state laws — experience that she said gives her a depth of understanding that is unmatched. She succeeded at the U.S. Supreme Court in protecting Washington's landmark sexual-predator law, and has represented agencies as diverse as the Department of Agriculture and the state auditor's office.
Bill Murphy is an aeronautical-engineer-turned-lawyer who has represented businesses and individuals the past 15 years. He also studied health-care technology and software development, and believes his background will bring scientific expertise to the court, which is increasingly asked to decide technical issues, such as DNA analysis.
Gary Carpenter is a solo practitioner in Clarkston, Asotin County, who has been a lawyer for nearly 33 years. He is running a lower-profile campaign than his opponents, having filed notice with the Public Disclosure Commission that he will not spend more than $3,500.
Unlike the Supreme Court hopefuls, the candidates for Division 1 of the Court of Appeals don't differ so much in their views of the law. Instead, incumbent C. Kenneth Grosse and his challenger, William Fosbre, tout their respective résumés as the linchpin of the election.
"This race is about who has the experience," said Grosse, who has served on the appeals court nearly 20 years and has been rated "exceptionally well qualified" by the King County Bar Association.
Fosbre, who began practicing law six years ago but whose background is mainly in court administration, says the Court of Appeals isn't processing cases quickly enough, sometimes taking well more than a year. The Bar planned to issue ratings for Fosbre tomorrow.
|