Advertisement

Bar Assn. Reportedly Alters Capizzi Ranking

Share
TIMES STAFF WRITER

An executive panel of the Orange County Bar Assn. this week changed the ranking of former Dist. Atty. Mike Capizzi, whom its own evaluators had rated as “not recommended” in his race for Superior Court judge, sources familiar with the process said.

Capizzi, who is running for one of seven open judgeships in the March 7 election, was originally given a “not recommended” ranking by the bar’s Judiciary Committee, charged with evaluating candidates, the sources said.

But the executive panel, made up of the bar’s highest officers, overrode the ranking and labeled him “qualified,” they said.

Advertisement

The ratings, made public Thursday, gave Capizzi a grade of 3.44 out of a possible 5. Another judicial candidate, Thomas Dunn, who scored 3.41, was ranked “not recommended.”

“It is not fair to the other candidates,” said one source who asked not to be identified but is familiar with the rankings.

“It undermines public confidence in the rankings. The people who were supposed to make an impartial finding were ignored.”

The bar sent 6,400 questionnaires to its members asking them to rate the candidates on criteria such as legal expertise, diligence, temperament and lack of bias. According to the bar, 515 of the mailers were returned. The Judiciary Committee, made up of close to 30 bar attorneys from different legal fields, ranked the candidates based on the survey and interviews with candidates, judges and attorneys.

“The Judiciary Committee does the investigations and makes the recommendations,” said committee Chairman Thomas Pistone, who would not confirm whether the rankings were reversed. “But the final rankings are decided by the whole bar. The procedure was followed.”

Capizzi, for his part, said he knew nothing about the change in the rankings and questioned the importance of the survey to begin with.

Advertisement

“It is a highly charged political matter, which makes the results highly suspect,” he said. “I know that I am qualified.”

Dunn, a senior judicial attorney with the California Court of Appeal who is running against two other candidates, agreed.

“The rankings are not worth the paper they are written on,” he said. “It is a political referendum and it shows. It is a popularity contest and has nothing to do with the qualifications of the candidates.”

Though judicial races usually don’t spark intense voter interest, this year’s contest stands out because of Capizzi and his clashes with his opponent and former underling, Deputy Dist. Atty. Stephanie George.

In December, Capizzi supporters tried to remove George from the race, arguing that she should have used her married, not maiden, name on the ballot. A judge eventually threw out the case and give George’s campaign a publicity boost.

Eighteen candidates are vying for the seven judgeships.

The OCBA rankings on Thursday rated five of them “highly qualified.” They were Deputy Dist. Atty. Marc Kelly, Deputy Dist. Atty. John Conley, court Commissioner Erick L. “Rick” Larsh, court Commissioner Sheila Fell and FBI agent Gary Paer.

Advertisement

Six candidates were rated “qualified,” including George, who scored 3.53. Seven others were “not recommended,” including sitting Superior Court Judge H. Warren Siegel.

Advertisement