3 County Judgeships, 3 Types of Campaigns

Only three Orange County judgeships will be on the June 7 ballot, but they are notable because of their distinct differences: One is a heated race, another is friendly and the third appears to be based to some extent on vengeance.

The heated race is between an incumbent in North Orange County Municipal Court, Sidney Maleck, and a well-known private attorney, Michael A. Leversen of Anaheim.

Leversen, 40, has called Maleck incompetent and has criticized him as a purely political appointee who practiced law outside Orange County.

Maleck, in response, says he has a proven record of experience and has accused Leversen of “the sleaziest campaign you can imagine.”

Maleck, 64, was appointed to the bench in West Orange County Municipal Court by Gov. George Deukmejian two years ago and then accepted a transfer by the governor to North Court in Fullerton last October. Maleck has lived in Fullerton for 21 years.

Leversen claims that Maleck should spend more time worrying about what goes on in his courtroom and less on how long it takes him to drive to work.

“I would never challenge an incumbent who was doing a good job,” Leversen said. “But Maleck is incompetent. He’s constantly being papered (taken off cases through peremptory challenges) by both the defense and the prosecution.”

Maleck was the city attorney in El Monte for 10 years and an assistant city attorney in Burbank and San Bernardino before that.

“His legal experience has been outside of Orange County,” Leversen argued. “When he was appointed, he did not know the attorneys here or anything about Orange County’s judicial system.”

Maleck responded that he was in private practice in Santa Ana before becoming a government lawyer.

He acknowledged that both defense lawyers and prosecutors have been taking cases out of his courtroom by using peremptory challenges against him, but he claimed that has been happening mostly in recent months.

“My opponent’s lawyer friends are doing it to show support for him,” Maleck said.

Leversen has specialized in criminal law in Orange County for 15 years. He is on the county’s appointment panel for homicide cases.

“I’m not going to say that I will give the maximum sentence to everybody who appears before me, but I will be fair and open-minded,” Leversen said.

But Maleck said he has already proven to be fair-minded on the bench. In his statement to voters, he encouraged them to sit in his courtroom and see for themselves.

Leversen’s primary problem is that incumbent judges in Orange County are almost never unseated in an election unless they have been at the center of a controversy, or the challenger has raised a substantial amount of campaign money. Leversen’s contributions totaled less than $5,000 as of his last campaign finance report in March.

The only other Municipal Court race on the June ballot is much less heated. Gerald L. Klein, 45, a private attorney and sometimes substitute judge, is running against Deputy Dist. Atty. Brett G. London, 36, for a seat being vacated by West Municipal Judge Kenneth M. Smith, who is retiring.

The most stinging arrow from Klein at his opponent is that London “only has 10% of the experience I have.” London’s only counter shot is that his experience has been in criminal law, while Klein’s has been mostly civil.

“We know each other and like each other. I’ve made it clear to my supporters that I want to run on what I can offer,” London said. “I am not going to say anything bad about my opponent.”

The same goes for Klein.

“I’ve been interested in a judgeship for some time, but I did not want to run against an incumbent,” Klein said. “When Ken Smith decided to retire, I thought it was a good opportunity for me.”

Klein is a former president of the Orange County Bar Assn. Since 1981, he has served occasionally as a judge pro tem and a Juvenile Court referee. London currently works in the writs and appeals section of the district attorney’s office.

The only incumbent in Superior Court to face a challenger is Robert A. Knox, 60, who is opposed by Newport Beach attorney James E. Wilkoski, 48.

Wilkoski, who ran a dismally distant second to another incumbent judge two years ago, says he looked down the list of incumbents to see who should be challenged and chose Knox.

“He is arrogant and insensitive,” Wilkoski said.

In 1983, Wilkoski appeared before Knox in a case in which he was named as a defendant. He was facing a possible jail term for contempt of court from Harbor Municipal Judge Christopher W. Strople. Wilkoski was being evicted from a house for being behind in payments.

Knox was assigned to hear Wilkoski’s appeal.

“I stayed his jail sentence until he could have a hearing,” Knox said, “but he also wanted me to order that he be allowed to return to the premises where he had been evicted. I wouldn’t do that. He’s apparently quite angry about it.”

Wilkoski admits that he was upset at Knox’s decision and considered him “quite arrogant about the whole thing.” But Wilkoski claims he was even more upset with Knox when the judge decided against a Wilkoski client in a divorce action.

Knox was appointed to West Municipal Court in 1976 and won election on his own there in 1978. He ran against three others for a Superior Court seat in 1982 and won handily without a runoff.

Wilkoski’s primary campaign issue is that Knox has accepted $10,000 from a group of attorneys for his reelection campaign. Wilkoski believes that it is unethical for Knox to accept money from a bloc of attorneys who have a vested interest in keeping incumbents on the bench.

Knox says he was surprised by Wilkoski’s decision to run against him.

“But that’s his right--there isn’t anything wrong with it,” Knox said.

Knox is a civil trial judge sitting on a special panel designed to help reduce the backlog of civil cases.