Two for Superior Court

In February, we recommended judicial candidates in seven Superior Court races. Of these, two offices were left unresolved when no candidate received more than 50% of the vote in the March election. The two candidates we preferred in those two races led the voting, and now face runoff elections in November with runners-up.

We see no reason to alter our choices of Sheila Fell for Office 7 and Dan McNerney for Office 30. Both are clear preferences, but the runoff between Fell, a court commissioner, and Tom Dunn, a research attorney in the 4th District Court of Appeal, merits some discussion.

Office 7: Sheila Fell. This court commissioner brings wide experience in civil law to the bench and would expand the ranks of judges beyond former prosecutors. She is widely respected by judges, lawyers and prosecutors for her care and temperament.

She has been a volunteer for the Family Violence Council, and worked as a judicial monitor in Peer Court, where high school students act as jurors in a program with a good record of keeping juveniles out of future trouble.

The county bar association rated her “highly qualified,” but listed her opponent, Dunn, as “not recommended,” which is a notable gap in assessment between the two by an important segment of the legal community.

Fell has been under fire from sheriff’s deputies during the runoff in light of an appellate court ruling in March. It overturned her decision that the mother and stepfather of a murdered child in South County should be allowed to see the Sheriff’s Department’s homicide file. No arrest had been made, and after being mentioned as possible suspects, the family claimed that their civil rights had been violated by investigators and that they had been defamed.

Fell’s ruling, made in uncharted legal territory, prompted the appellate court to issue needed guidance to lower courts. It spelled out that the interest in a confidential investigation outweighed a civil claim, such as that made by the parents. It said the proper thing to do would be, in effect, to freeze the file, allowing more time for a police inquiry. But the court also seemed to acknowledge that deciding when a file should be available was an inexact science. It concluded that the trial court eventually might decide that the trail had grown so cold that an argument for letting the family pursue its claim again could be made.

It was only a year and a half after the murder that Fell made the call. However, she worked in an area of law where the standard for a lower court was vague, and where the investigation may have appeared to be dormant. She took care, and conducted a confidential review of the homicide file, something the appellate court did not do itself.

But a broader observation about lower court judges is important too. This is not a commissioner who regularly is overruled. Performing many functions of a judge, she routinely would be called on to handle a steady stream of motions over the course of a year. There is a dynamic to the shaping of the law that makes being overturned on occasion part of the process for almost any judge. To reject good judges based on infrequent reversals would infringe on their independence.

Office No. 30. Dan McNerney. McNerney, a senior deputy district attorney, remains a strong choice over Jan Nolan, a former deputy district attorney. He has wide experience prosecuting crimes ranging from sexual violence to homicides, and is well respected.

*

A complete list of Times ballot choices appears in today’s Opinion section.