The Facts about Judge Williams
The People's Choice
1. Exceptional Record: Judge Williams has a record of making fair and legally correct decisions. Of the thousands of decisions Judge Williams has made in criminal and civil cases, only one has been overturned by the court of appeals - for giving too harsh a sentence. Prosecutors have never appealed a decision of Judge Williams. Not once.
2. Handles a full caseload: Judge Williams can handle more than a full load of cases. For various reasons, judges are not able to oversee 100% of the cases filed in their judicial district. Judge Williams is one of two judges that serve Union and Wallowa Counties. A full-time caseload would involve handling approximately 50% of the cases filed. Based on the Oregon Judicial Department’s latest statistics, Judge Williams can hear 80% of the cases. This is more than enough cases for a full caseload. See statistics on reverse side.
3. Strong community support: Judge Williams is supported by community leaders, small business owners, farmers, ranchers, two retired district attorneys, and other citizens throughout Union and Wallowa Counties. He is supported by the Presiding Judge of Harney and Grant Counties and two retired presiding judges from Umatilla County. Please go to weswilliamsforjudge.org to see the full list of supporters and to read the letters to the editor and testimonials in support of Judge Williams.
4. Experience: Judge Williams has extensive knowledge of criminal and civil litigation. As an attorney for 22 years, Judge Williams was involved in 100s of criminal and civil trials. As a judge for five years, he has overseen many more. He knows his way around a courtroom.
5. Politics: In 2018, Judge Williams ran against one of the two judges appointed by Governor Kate Brown. Two retired judges and the Union County district attorney endorsed and campaigned heavily for this judge. The voters rejected their candidate and elected Judge Williams. By disqualifying Judge Williams from criminal cases for the past four years, the district attorney ignored the will of the people and chose to have the criminal docket heard entirely by the other judge who was appointed by Governor Brown. This will change after the May election thanks to the bi-partisan efforts of the Oregon legislature to stop district attorneys from doing this. (Senate Bill 807). See the video below - The Facts about the DA.
"% Cases No Flag" (right hand column) shows the percentage of cases Judge Williams can hear. In 2023, in Union County, Judge Williams could hear 78.6% of the cases. In Wallowa County, he could hear 81.9% of the cases.
"% Cases No Flag" (right hand column) shows the percentage of cases Judge Williams can hear. In the first 42 days of 2024, in Union County, Judge Williams could hear 83.1% of the cases. In Wallowa County, he could hear 88.9% of the cases.
NEW STATISTICS PROVE ONCE AGAIN
JUDGE WILLIAMS HANDLES A FULL CASELOAD
New Oregon Judicial Department statistics compare
the amount of hours our judges spend in
the courtroom for hearings and trials.
In the past 16 months, Judge Williams and Judge Powers spent comparable time in courtrooms (958 hours for Judge Williams; 945 hours for Judge Powers). This data shows that - contrary to his opponent’s claim – the number of hearings does not equal workload. Because Judge Williams handles a civil caseload, his hearings are less frequent but often lengthier.
Judge Williams spent time not only in Union and Wallowa county courtrooms, but also in Baker, Malheur, Harney and Grant county courtrooms when judges there needed help. Judge trades are necessary and common in Eastern Oregon where most judicial districts have only 1 or 2 judges. When these other counties need a judge, Judge Williams fills in when he can.
At home in Union and Wallowa counties, in addition to spending many hours in the courtroom, Judge Williams spends considerable time outside-the-courtroom reading lengthy court filings, researching legal issues, writing opinions, and deciding cases where hearings are unnecessary.
This additional outside-the-courtroom work is less frequently required when handling the criminal docket.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS BOTH OUR JUDGES ARE WORKING HARD FOR US IN AND OUT OF THE COURTROOM – AS WELL AS HELPING OTHER EASTERN OREGON JUDGES.
- Senate Bill 807 -
(effective January 1, 2024)
After the election, Judge Williams will use a new law, Senate Bill 807, to challenge the DAs removal of him from criminal cases - the 20% of the court's total caseload he cannot currently handle.
His challenge will trigger a process leading to a hearing set within about a month. Before the hearing, both the DA and Judge Williams may submit factual and legal arguments. During this time, it is possible the parties will resolve the impasse. It is always better to resolve matters without a contested hearing, especially when the parties work together, because hearings often increase hard feelings between the parties, whereas settlements can ease tensions.
If, however, the parties cannot resolve the matter, a disinterested judge will conduct the Senate Bill 807 hearing and make a decision. Judge Williams is confident he will be hearing criminal cases again.
Why is Judge Williams waiting until after the election to challenge the DAs removal of him from criminal cases? This process will be the first of its kind. Judge Williams needs time to thoroughly prepare his arguments and presentation. He knows from 22 years as a successful trial attorney that you take the time necessary to fully prepare for every case. He has no time to do this while he's working and campaigning full time.
Judge Williams handles a full caseload. Number of hearings does not equal workload.
Jennifer Williams' Letter to the Editor, published in The Observer on April 20, 2024 in response to Russ West's "Other views" column of April 6, 2024.
WEST'S COLUMN MADE FALSE CLAIMS
Russ West’s “Other views” column of April 6, 2024, failed to provide a fact-based opinion as to why he endorses Jared Boyd for judge. He does not offer a single virtue of Mr. Boyd. Rather, he simply attacked Judge Wes Williams and based his claim that Williams cannot hear a full caseload on Judicial Department statistics he manipulated to fit his agenda.
Mr. West ignored thousands of cases Judge Williams handles – because, West said, “in my opinion” they require only a “brief hearing.” Judge Williams will address this and other matters in his own response.
I will address two issues. Mr. West falsely claimed the people who submitted letters to the editor in support of Judge Williams only did so because Williams is “friendly and a good politician.” But these people never characterized Judge Williams as a politician. Rather, they praised Williams for his judicial demeanor, love of the law and strong work ethic. Many wrote their letters because of their positive experiences with Judge Williams in court. In contrast, Mr. West, prior to disparaging Judge Williams, never observed Judge Williams holding court.
Second, I helped get Senate Bill 807 passed with support from Republicans and Democrats, including our representative Bobby Levy and Sen. Bill Hansell. Fifty-five retired judges from around the state and several retired district attorneys testified in support of the bill because of the misuse by some district attorneys of ORS 14.260, the statute allowing lawyers to remove judges. Mr. West gathered a handful of judges, including himself, to try to block the bill. Our local district attorneys opposed the bill. The Oregon Legislature rejected their efforts.
I can only conclude Mr. West’s opposition to this reasonable bill was to prevent Judge Williams from having the ability to challenge the local district attorney’s removal of him from criminal cases. I am confident that should Judge Williams need to challenge the removal after the election - after having been elected twice by the citizens of Union and Wallowa counties - he will prevail.
Jennifer Williams
Retired attorney and wife of Judge Wes Williams
La Grande
Nod Palmer's Letter to the Editor, published in The Observer on April 29, 2024 in response to Eric Valentine's letter to the editor on April 2, 2024.
CRITICISM OF JUDGE WILLIAMS LACKS CONTEXT
With all due respect to retired Judge Valentine, my perspective on the candidate forum in Union was quite different. I thought Judge Williams handled himself calmly and with dignity. This is particularly true after Judge Powers described running to Judge Williams’ courtroom, interrupting what he was doing, to hear a juvenile dependency hearing Judge Williams was disqualified from. Powers implied it was just another one of many disqualifications of Judge Williams.
In fact, my understanding is that no one is removing Judge Williams from juvenile dependency cases except his opponent, who filed the disqualification motion at issue right before the juvenile dependency hearing. Judge Powers knew this and should have disclosed that. It would have changed the context of the disruption to the court: i.e., it was caused by Jared Boyd whose campaign platform is prefaced on Judge Williams’ alleged inability to hear a full caseload. He removed Judge Williams for no reason other than to make Judge Williams look bad.
In his closing, Judge Williams calmly but sternly corrected the record and rightly said that Judge Powers did not tell the whole truth. As noted above, the audience would have had an entirely different perspective had Powers prefaced his story on the fact that Mr. Boyd, Judge Williams’ opponent, issued the disqualification right before the juvenile dependency hearing.
Nod Palmer
Union
-