Judge Aaron Persky Loses Appellate Bid to Block Recall Effort
The Sixth District Court of Appeal found "no constitutional basis on which to delay the processing of the current recall petition."
March 26, 2018 at 06:26 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Santa Clara Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky. (Photo: Jason Doiy/ALM)
A state appellate court has turned back Santa Clara Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky's bid to derail a June 5 election aimed at unseating him.
The Sixth District Court of Appeal on Monday found that the group collecting signatures petitioning for the recall vote were correct to submit them for review with the local county registrar's office. Persky's lawyers at McManis Faulkner had contended that as a trial judge, he is considered a “state officer” under the California Constitution, and therefore any petition to recall him should go through the Secretary of State's Office.
“There is no provision in the California Constitution that defines “state officer” to include a superior court judge, either directly or implicitly, for purposes of the state's recall procedure—or, for that matter, for all purposes, even while it is used in a variety of contexts,” wrote Sixth District Justice Franklin Elia. “We therefore find no constitutional basis on which to delay the processing of the current recall petition.”
Elia's unanimous opinion was joined by Justice Adrienne Grover and retired Justice Wendy Duffy, sitting by assignment.
Stanford professor Michele Dauber, the chair of the Committee to Recall Judge Persky, said in a press release that the group was thankful the court rejected the judge's bid to stop the recall.
“His decision to appeal the original court decision is part of a long line of terrible decisions by Judge Persky, who seems to be putting his own personal, financial, and political interests ahead of that of the voters and taxpayers,” she said. “We believe that voters will ultimately decide to recall Judge Persky on June 5.”
Persky, who now presides over civil matters, drew international attention when he sentenced ex-Stanford University swimmer Brock Turner to six months jail time for a sexual assault conviction. Persky's opponents in January turned in 94,527 signatures calling for a recall vote, nearly double the amount required to put the matter on the ballot for election this summer.
One of Persky's lawyer, Elizabeth Pipkin of McManis Faulkner said in an emailed statement that judges “should not have to be concerned about community opinion or social media hostility.”
“Judges are officers of the court, and should be free to make thoughtful and independent rulings without fear of the sort of backlash that has been heaped on Judge Persky,” she said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Travis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Understanding the HEMS Standard in Trusts
- 2Mergers Are About People, Not Paperwork: Here’s Why
- 3Wachtell Partner Leaves to Chair Latham's Liability Management Practice
- 4Morris Nichols Partners to Be Involved With PLI Program
- 5How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'Cultivating a Culture of Mutual Trust Is Essential,' Says Gina Piazza of Tarter Krinsky & Drogin
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250