Holding court in CdA

More than 80 people packed a downtown Coeur d’Alene restaurant Friday for a lively showdown between 1st District Judge John Mitchell and Rami Amaro, the Coeur d’Alene attorney trying to unseat him.

In a race that has supporters and opponents fired up, the candidates confronted each other with questions about their records and conduct. They also took questions from the Kootenai County Democrat Club, which hosted the event, and the audience at the Iron Horse Bar & Grill.

Mitchell asked Amaro about a contribution she made to a Republican party fundraiser that he said violated Idaho judicial code. And Amaro asked Mitchell why he had been “recused” from more cases – an average of about 200 a year – than any other judge in the district.

Mitchell said his opponent wrote a personal check to pay for a table at the fundraiser the same day she announced her candidacy, despite a rule saying judicial candidates can’t contribute to a political organization.

“If you’re unable to follow the rules that govern judicial conduct now, why should the voters believe you’ll follow them as a judge?” Mitchell asked.

Amaro said the issue was “blown out of proportion.” Her law office bought the table – not her – Amaro said. She said she committed to buying a table before declaring candidacy but didn’t pay at the time because she didn’t have the money.

She said the question was an attempt “to distract from the real issues at hand.” More relevant, Amaro said, was Mitchell’s record. “Seventy different attorneys recused him once or more,” Amaro said.

Recusal was the wrong term, Mitchell said. He said each attorney in a case is allowed to disqualify a judge “without cause.”

“I have had an awful lot of disqualifications,” Mitchell acknowledged. “It’s without cause so I don’t know what the cause is, and Ms. Amaro knows I don’t know what the cause is.”

Bob Siegwarth, the head of a political action committee endorsing Amaro, asked about the number of times Mitchell’s rulings had been overturned by the Idaho Supreme Court.

Though Siegwarth said Mitchell had been overturned in 13 of 15 cases, Mitchell said his own research shows he was overturned in 11 of 22 cases. He also said one other judge in the district had more cases appealed.

“That doesn’t mean he’s better or worse than me,” he said.

Amaro said she has proposed a system where judges “would be dinged financially” if a decision of theirs was reversed on appeal.

“Part of being a judge is being personally accountable for your decisions and making sure you get it right,” she said. “And if you keep getting it wrong, you’ve got to do something about it.”

Another member of the audience asked the candidates to comment on two driving under the influence cases Mitchell handled. Both involved men with multiple DUI convictions.

In one case, Mitchell said, he sentenced the offender to a fixed term of 1 1/2 years with the possibility of life in prison for his 10th DUI conviction. Mitchell said Friday he has a lot of “faith and confidence” in the Idaho Commission of Pardon and Parole and that they wouldn’t let the man out of prison if he hadn’t been rehabilitated.

Mitchell said he couldn’t recall the other case, noting he’s presided over more than 1,300 cases.

Amaro said Mitchell’s sentencing in both cases was one of the reasons she was running for judge. She said she believes in treatment and rehabilitation, but not in every case.

“When someone is on their sixth DUI or their 10th DUI … I’m not interested in putting that person back out on our streets to victimize again,” Amaro said.

Both candidates agreed the growing population of North Idaho is going to result in an increase in offenders.

While Mitchell said there’s a need for more jail space, Amaro said the state should look to privately run prisons or renting space from “other governments.”

Educating young people about drugs is one way to reduce the prison population, Mitchell said, noting that most state inmates are drug offenders. He said he also supports specialty courts, such as the Mental Health Drug Court he presides over, as an alternative to prison.

Amaro said she believes some offenders just need to be in jail because they are too dangerous.

“As a judge on the bench, prison overcrowding is not something I can consider when I’m sentencing an offender who has been sentenced by a jury or who has pled guilty,” she said.

Each candidate gave a closing statement after more than an hour of answering questions.

Mitchell urged voters to look at the Idaho State Bar’s poll regarding both candidates. He was rated above average in four areas. Amaro, who was rated slightly below average, has said the poll is flawed and only a small percentage of attorneys responded.

“I know in my heart that I do a good job, and I take into account all aspects of what’s in front of me,” Mitchell said.

Amaro said she’s going to be accountable if she’s elected judge: “If I start getting appealed a number of times, if I’m being recused by hundreds and hundreds of attorneys, I’m going to find out why and I’m going to fix it.”

After Friday’s forum, Amaro appeared before Magistrate Benjamin Simpson to face a contempt of court charge. She said during the forum she believed Simpson’s actions might have been politically motivated.

Simpson asked Amaro to explain why she and her client didn’t show for a March 23 hearing in a divorce and custody case. Amaro said she was on vacation, and she had filed appropriate papers to postpone the hearing.

Characterizing the incident as a misunderstanding, Simpson said Friday he wouldn’t pursue contempt charges against Amaro or her client.