Stopping Crime

Harris County, Texas—where Houston is located—is currently a poster example of crime rising for known reasons.

This past Saturday at our local Tea Party meeting, we heard from Andy Kahan of Crime Stoppers. Crime Stoppers is a big, nationwide organization. But Houston is one of the few places where they have a building of their own, because it’s that big, and that necessary. Most of us know about them as a place to call with anonymous tips. That is still true. Crime Stoppers does information and community outreach and education. But their third floor is manned by local law enforcement, who actually take the crime tips.

Kahan (pronounced Kahn) has been fighting crime for some 30 years, just a few of those at Crime Stoppers. He notices trends, and he talked with us about a few of those.

Andy Kahan points out Rosalee Cook, one of 181 victims
of violent felons out on multiple PR bonds in Harris County.

Back in 2018 Harris County had a shift from Republican to Democrat. Votes matter. In that shift we got a Democrat DA, a Democrat County Judge and Democrat-majority Commissioners Court, and a sweep of Democrat judges. All of those are bad. But the biggest effect on crime was the changeout from experienced Republican judges to inexperienced Democrat judges with a penchant to be against incarceration of criminals.

Kahan, talking about his 30 years involved in crime fighting, says this:

I frankly have not seen what I’m seeing, involving the crime rate and what's happening in the courthouse. And I've seen it all. I've been through it all. I've done 27 pieces of legislation to enhance victims’ rights and public safety. But what we are seeing is extremely disturbing.

Here, specifically, is the heart of the problem:

Individuals who have been released on felony bonds are charged with additional crimes have doubled since 2018.

He said it used to be unheard of for violent offenders to “get out of jail free” with a personal recognizance bond. He gives us some numbers:

In 2018 there were 12 defendants who were given PR bonds, charged for violent offenses. 2021 we managed to improve that to 1283. We're talking murder and robbery, assault with a deadly weapon.

Let me do the math for you. That’s 107 times more—not a 100% increase; that would be only two-fold. This is 107-fold more. For every single criminal we used to face back out on the streets, we now face 107 dangerous criminals. Many are released with multiple PR bonds. And they’re set free even when they offend while on parole.

110 of the 1283 violent criminals are capital murderers. Capital murder is the one crime where judges are given the option of no bond—where the judge can refuse to release them for any amount. The assumption is that, even if they could come up with a $1 billion bond, they still shouldn’t be released onto the streets; they should be kept incarcerated up through their trial. But even these known deadly felons are being released among us.

In case we think these violent felons are all hanging around some seedy neighborhood far from our homes, Kahan enlightens us.

He started noticing a trend, that a lot of defendants charged with murder in Harris County had been released on multiple felony bonds. He put together a collection of 181 photos of victims killed by violent felons out on multiple PR bonds—known repeat offenders who were told essentially to “please return to court and behave yourself and don't re-offend again.” Each victim has a story. Here are just a few.

Rosalee Cook

Rosalie Cook right here, 80-year-old grandma who was going to Walgreens on Saturday morning in Meyerland, and she stumbled upon a guy named Randy Lewis. Randy Lewis had over 60 convictions in Harris County. I don't know what he had elsewhere. He was out on not one, but two felony PR bonds, despite having over 60 convictions. He was told to go and live in a facility as a condition of his bond, which he did for a day. Then he walked out, and nobody did anything. Nobody reported it. Nobody told the court, “Hey, this guy is gone. We might want to put, like, a warrant out for his arrest.” Two weeks Randy Lewis whereabouts are unknown. He stumbles upon Rosalee Cook coming into the parking lot. Tries to carjack her. Stabs her to death in the parking lot at 10:00 AM in Walgreens. Rosalee Cook paid the price for discretionary felony bond reform.

 

Martha Medina

Martha Medina coming out of McDonald's. I remember her case. She was followed from a bank, coming in to go to McDonald's, getting her breakfast, walks out. Two guys struck and carjack her and killed her. One of the guys charged with her murder was on bond for capital murder already. Martha Medina paid the price for this.

 

Chi Le

Chi Le, whose body was found stuffed in a freezer off of the Beltway and Hammerly. The individual charged with her murder was on two PR bonds: for violating a protective order and family assault. I could go on and on and on talking about some of these cases here.

 

Stanley Iscovitz

This is Mike Iscovitz’s [the chief meteorologist for Fox 26 in Houston] dad, Stanley. Stanley's an 80-year-old Air Force veteran who was just simply taking a walk in his neighborhood. He was murdered by a guy out on a felony PR bond. You would think maybe that's kind of like the end of the story, right? Now he's charged with murder, right? Guess what? He's back out. On a bond.

 

Summer Chester

Jonathan Vera was booked and charged with capital murder, shot and killed a 55-year-old homeowner in his sleep during a home invasion in the Greenpoint area. And he shot at another person that was trying to flee the scene. Vera was booked, charged with capital murder, was given a $250,000 bond, which he couldn't make. So for several years, he was actually in the county jail where he belonged. While in a county jail, he was charged with assault of a public servant, when he decided to do several things to one of the officers…. So now he's charged with another felony. Okay. He also racked up 90 pages worth of infractions while behind bars, which kind of, you know, in my experience, that kind of leads you to the conclusion that he's not exactly behaving himself to do that. But, you know, what do I know?

So this particular court ignored all that and lowered his capital murder bond from $250 to $50 [thousand]. He makes the $50 [thousand]; he gets out, despite again being charged with another felony while in custody and 90 pages worth of infractions. Six months later, he's speeding, runs a red light, kills Summer Chester, a 23-year-old TSU graduate student. Summer Chester paid the price for that.

Andy Kahan points out Summer Chester, one of 181 victims
of violent felons out on multiple PR bonds in Harris County.

Whose fault is this? The courts.

We haven’t had a lot good to say about District Attorney Kim Ogg; she campaigned on no jail time for drug offenses. But Kahan defended her. She actually was a part of Crime Stoppers a few years back. And she has been pushing to stop the PR bonds for violent felons, to no avail. In fact, there are a number of things where she and our incompetent County Judge are at odds. My theory is that many of the drug offenses are plea deals down from larger offenses, so you can’t ignore them. And if you ignore them, bigger stuff happens. But at least she is recognizing the violent crime problem.

Some of the problem is policy pushed by the radical County Judge Lina Hidalgo and those who control her on the County Commission. But, really, it comes down to the individual judges.

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo, at fault for policies
leading to rising crime. Photo by Van Williams, found
in The Texan news story.

Kahan pointed out that, historically, incumbent judges don’t get primary opponents—unless they’re really bad. This year a majority of the judges had opponents in the Democrat primary. Six or seven were voted out in the primary. He adds, “This upcoming election cycle, you're going to see an emphasis on judicial races like you've never seen before.”

I know in the Republican Party we worked very hard to get candidates to run in every race. I signed petitions for most of them. Of particular importance are the criminal courts, which we’re talking about today. But people in civil and family courts have suffered from incompetent non-law-abiding judges as well.

We need to remember to vote all the way down the ballot—and get friends to do that as well. These judges got in with a “Beto” sweep, with lots of out-of-state money, when we still had straight-ticket voting. It takes some time to actually vote for nearly 100 races, with names you’re not familiar with. Trust us; this year just vote Republican. We were better off when we had mostly Republican judges. We can be better off again.

Sorry the photo’s blurry, but I was pleased to see this sign, across a six-lane road from our favorite little neighborhood restaurant a few days ago.

Besides voting, what can we do about crime? Bond reform is a legislative priority, so we’ll be working with the legislature in just a few months.

Kahan talked a bit about legislation. Last session weird stuff happened, and then the Democrats fled the state for the entirety of one of the special sessions. They eventually got a bill through called the Damon Allen Act, based on a trooper who was shot and killed by a criminal out on multiple felony bonds. The bill makes it so murderers can no longer get on a “get out of jail free” PR bond.

Kahan talked about the testimony in Austin on that bill. The opposition is well organized and well funded—and they show up. They had 80 people there in Austin to testify against the bill. The proponents had 10; 7 were from Crime Stoppers.

He talked about another bill that unfortunately didn’t pass. It was for a constitutional amendment—which means it would be voted on by the people—to allow discretion for judges to withhold bond from certain violent felons in addition to capital murder. The proposal related to the Paul Castro case from Houston. A man and his son were leaving a Houston Astros game last summer when the son was shot in what was called a road-rage case. People were rightfully ticked off when the judge granted a bond to the murderer. The way the statute currently reads, the only offense in which a judge has discretion to not give a bond is for capital murder. Other levels of murder and violent crimes must be given a bond, and if the criminal meets it, he’s out on the streets. And with the backlog in the courts right now, it could be years before his case is heard.

So the law was to allow denying bond in certain egregious cases that don’t happen to qualify as capital murder.

The bill passed in the Senate 27-2. In the House, because it was for a constitutional amendment, a two-thirds majority was required. The vote fell short by 12 votes. Kahan notes that every Democrat representative from Harris County voted against allowing the voter to decide whether to give judges discretion.

It’s interesting that the Harris County District Attorney’s Office testified in favor of the bill—presenting supporting documentation and data showing why we needed it. It’s rare for government entities to disagree on a bill, especially when led by the same party. But the Harris County Commissioners Court sent someone to testify against it. The guy they sent—his Twitter feed’s opening statement said, “Abolish Prisons.” Now you know the ultimate game plan of the radicals running the county.

So this is a bill to look for again next session.

Stopping crime isn’t supposed to be a partisan thing. Our Commissioners Court and our judges seem to have made it that way. The Commissioners Court has been rather put out with Crime Stoppers, and with Kahan in particular. They called him an “ax-grinding fearmonger.” Kahan says he’s embraced that. They put up a picture of him grinding an ax at Crime Stoppers. But about the partisanship, he says,

I don't understand why public safety has become partisan, but I can guarantee you every people person on that, with a picture here, didn't care if they were Republican, Democrat, independent, or what.

If we get in the right judges, who abide by the law instead of letting criminals go free, and if we get the right laws, will crime go down? Chances are it will. Here’s a story out of Miami, where they fought the trend of defunding police (which is the bad policy Harris County has been attempting to inflict on us), and they're seeing lower crime rates. Murders are at a decades-long low, and overall crime is the lowest it has been since the 1930s. (Video of that story below.)

 

Primarily Speaking, Part III

We’re going through the long ballot for the Texas Primary, where we vote for judges, in addition to the more typical elected positions. In Part I, we got through the statewide races. In Part II, we covered the statewide judicial races and a few local races. I expect we’ll finish today, with district (Harris County) judicial races and whatever we’ve else is left (county party leadership). Today covers a few of the more interesting races I’ve been wanting to think through. We’ll go in order, however, rather than just most interesting first.

Gaahhh!!! This additional avalanche showed up
in the mail while I was writing Part III

 

District Judge 246^th Family Court:

This is an open bench (no incumbent) with two candidates, Angelina Gooden and Charley Prine. I heard both of them briefly. Gooden has 24+ years of experience in family law, appointed by the court to represent children. Prine has been an associate judge in the county, for Judge Sheri Dean. His work as a grassroots Republican go back to working for Phil Gramm, and campaigning for Reagan. Both candidates get 50% support from CCHC. Prine gets the nod from TCR, HRBC, DA, and PC. Considering his judicial experience, I’m going with Charley Prine.

 

District Judge 247^th Family Court:

This is also an open bench, and one of the most difficult to decide—because there are good choices. We’ve been hearing from the candidates for this position since last spring, and they’ve been coming faithfully, so that we feel like they’re part of us. I’m not going to endorse, because I want to be open to change my mind up until the last, but I’ll give you some info about each. Melanie Flowers and MLWalker are both African American women—not what you’re told you find at Tea Party meetings. (If I recall correctly, Angelina Gooden fits that demographic as well, as does Governor candidate Lisa Fritsch.) Walker has been functioning as associate judge in this court for some time. Flowers has a certification in family law (the only candidate with this credential, but it isn’t a requirement to do the job).  John Schmude is the third candidate (there used to be a fourth, who dropped out). When he came to our Tea Party to introduce himself, he gave one of the best 10-minute speeches on Constitutional philosophy that I had heard. It was impassioned and memorable. If I were going just by my first impressions based on those 10-minute talks, he would have earned my vote. But there is more. Walker is currently doing the job, for example. And she gets support from my DA friends, as well as one of our regular Tea Party members who has a family law practice. She also has continued to come to our meetings, to become one of us. Only Melanie Flowers has done that more. I see her everywhere—she hands out flowers to remind voters of her name, and I’ve gotten a bouquet-ful.  

I got a heads up to ask the question about long-term conservative principles. Only Schmude voted against Obama in 2008. He has always been conservative. I asked Walker about her vote at a Tea Party meeting, and she answered with considerable grace. Up until that point in her life, she wasn’t political, didn’t pay attention to politics. She voted for Obama, caught up in the hype about it being a historic moment. But shortly into 2009 she realized what a mistake that was, started paying attention, became a Republican and hasn’t looked back. Someone asked Melanie Flowers that question at a forum elsewhere. She admitted she voted for Obama in 2009 (not 2012), because it was historic. She was at that time a GOP precinct chair, which strikes me as unacceptable. Disqualifying? Maybe. But I didn’t get to talk with her about it, and I don’t know of anything else I disagree with her on. Of all the candidates, I think I’d feel most comfortable going to lunch for fun with her, and I think she’d probably do well as a judge. But in this close race, not realizing what a disaster Obama would be is a significant problem. 

Schmude gets 89% support from CCHC, my guess is because conservative philosophy is his native language. He also gets support from PC. Walker gets support from DA, TCR, and HRBC. I hope this is enough info to help you make a decision. Fortunately, it looks like you can’t really make a terrible choice.

 

District Judge 263^rd Criminal Court:

The candidates are Jim Wallace and Robert Summerlin. Wallace has been the sitting judge on this court since 1994. DA as well as TCR support him. But Summerlin gets 100% support from CCHC, plus HRBC and PC. Hmm. I don’t know if the challenge is just because he’s been there so long. It’s odd to challenge a sitting judge. It does appear the challenger has conservative bonafides. He has experience as both a felony prosecutor and defense attorney. I’m not sure which way I’ll go, but the CCHC recommendation has me leaning toward Robert Summerlin.

 

District Judge 269^th Civil Court:

Dan Hinde is the sitting judge on this bench. He was appointed by Governor Perry in 2008 and was a number 1 target of democrats in 2010, but stayed put. He has reduced his docket backlog by 27%. His opponent is John Wittenmyer. All my resources except TCR are behind Hinde (including 100% from CCHC), which means he’s perceived as doing well as the sitting judge. Dan Hinde suggests you remember, “Be kind, vote Hinde, for 269.”

 

District Judge 311^th Family Court:

This is an interesting if confusing race. As an outsider, I’m uncertain if I have all the facts. Denise Pratt is the sitting judge. She has four challengers from her own party. That suggests there’s a problem in that court. The Houston Chronicle agrees the court has problems. In December, hundreds of cases were dismissed without a ruling. Pratt explains that the lawyers had been detaining and then failing to follow up and reschedule—some for years. She insists that she considers the child individually in each and every case. When she spoke at our Tea Party meeting, she seemed sensible, although I wondered about the defensiveness about not being pressured to rule, because we’re all aware of how inefficiency is a huge failure for justice. She was impressive enough that she won our straw poll by a single vote (a snapshot opinion of those attending that day, including candidates and their helpers if they choose to vote). I saw later one of her supporters citing that victory as if it were an endorsement from us. Not true. And we do not, as a group, endorse any candidates. She did not win the next straw poll. Denise Pratt got 65% from CCHC, which is not an endorsement, but a response to specific questions, which relate to conservative principles, not to orderly running of the court. I can see how that could happen in the absence of additional information. 

I had heard about this court previously, but I didn’t immediately make the connection, since there are so many courts, and we’ve met so many candidates, in pretty random order. But what we hear from people dealing with this court is that it’s a huge problem. They say the judge comes in late, leaves early, and simply fails to make rulings. Some have speculated either unadmitted health issues or mental issues, although I don’t see evidence of that from Judge Pratt in person. But there’s enough rumbling that I think it’s fair to say she isn’t doing a good job of managing her court. The challengers have gone as far as to say, “I don’t even care which one of us you vote for; we just have to get someone who will do the job.” Wow!  

So the challengers are Donna Detamore, Alicia Franklin, Philip Placzek, and Anthony Magdaleno. I tend to lean toward whomever I’ve heard from lately. Donna Detamore is supported by PC. Alicia Franklin is supported by DA (which might sway me) and TCR. Anthony Magdaleno is also supported by PC. In straw polls I’ve voted once for Detamore and once for Magdaleno. And there’s a good chance I’d support Franklin as well. Without additional info or support for Placzek, I guess I’ll eliminate him. But otherwise I think the choice is anyone but Pratt.

 

Judge County Criminal Court 10:

There are four candidates for this open bench. Dan Spjut brings experience from 27 years at the Houston Police Department with 14 years as an attorney. (He doesn’t seem old enough, so I’m not sure if the attorney years are included in the other.) Mary Heafner has been a private detective, and worked for the FBI, and in real estate, plus 30 years as a defense attorney. (I’m often amazed at the impossibly long careers of judicial candidates, and wonder if I’ve gotten numbers wrong. Similarly, I fail to understand billable hours.) Tonya Rolland McLaughlin has been a Harris County prosecutor and defense attorney. She points out that she has been through hundreds of trials, while her opponents combined have tried less than 10 cases. The other candidate, Ken Wenzel, I have not met. Spjut gets support from TCR and HRBC. But McLaughlin gets 60% (less than an endorsement) from CCHC, plus DA and PC. I think I’ll go with Tonya Rolland McLaughlin. She suggests you remember, “Tonya for the 10^th.”

 

Justice First Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 3:

The candidates for this bench are Dan Linebaugh, Chad Bridges, and Russell Lloyd. Lloyd has been an assistant DA and has 31 years of civil practice before becoming a civil district judge. He was first vetted by Phil Gram for appointment by Governor George Bush (not approved by the then-liberal legislature, however). David Linebaugh is appeals board certified, and was name a Texas Superlawyer every year since 2008. He has spent 15 years on the jury charge committee, training judges on how to give jury charges. He did litigation for 18 years. Chad Bridges spent 11 years as a prosecutor, and has experience in both small and large counties, covering a large variety of cases.  CCHC gave 90% support to Lloyd, and NRBC, DA, and PC also support him. Linebaugh got support from TCR. I think I’ll go with Russell Lloyd.

 

Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4, Place 2:

A justice of the peace does not have to have a law degree, but it helps. This bench just came open after 30 or so years, so this opening is a great opportunity. The candidates are Lena Engelage, Layssa Korduba, Nasir Malik, Dean Combs, and Louis Guthrie. The first three have come to our Tea Party to introduce themselves. Both Engelage and Korduba have returned and made themselves at home. Korduba also showed up at the King Street Patriots judicial candidate forum.  She has ten years of practice, and 5 years as a judge—in the City of Tomball since 2008, the first woman judge there. She seems to understand the way this court is run, and has ideas for improved efficiency. Nasir Malik is running as an outsider, claiming the other candidates are party insiders. He’s a businessman. I’m unconvinced about his claims of conservatism. I liked Louis Guthrie when he ran for Sheriff last time around, but I don’t think he has any judicial experience, and he hasn’t campaigned anywhere I’ve seen him. Lena Engelage teaches criminal justice at a high school. She has 5 years’ experience with the FBI and 18 years’ experience as an attorney (and doesn’t look old enough). Her background is diverse, which helps with the variety that comes up before a justice of the peace. All of my sources go with Laryssa Korduba (CCHC gives 90% support), and I will too.

 

Justice of the Peace Precinct 5, Place 2:

The two candidates are Jeff Williams and Erik Hassan. Williams is the incumbent. He has 28 years’ experience as a practicing attorney, plus three years as a judge. His opponent doesn’t have a law degree. Again, a law degree isn’t required, but it helps. He handles a staff of 40, with 9,000 new cases a month. It’s not a good place for on-the-job learning. All of my resources support Jeff Williams, and so do I.

 

Harris County Republican Party Chair:

Jared Woodfill is the six-term (12-year) incumbent for this unpaid position. He is being challenged by Paul Simpson. His challenger complains that he’s a corrupt trial attorney, but I’ve hunted and there’s surprisingly little evidence of corruption, so I’m unconvinced. Simpson, by the way, is also an attorney, just not a trial lawyer. Simpson is claiming that things have gone downhill with Woodfill there. Actually, that’s debatable as well. Precinct chairs need to be filled. Both candidates agree on that; I’ve seen Woodfill acting on it; maybe there should be more action, though. Simpson says he will do something about it; but I didn’t catch exactly what he would do. There’s a third person on the ballot, but if she can’t even make herself known to people like me, she doesn’t know how to spread the conservative message for the party in this key county, so I’m not even giving her a mention. 

Simpson claims to be both a longtime Republican grassroots activist, and a party outsider. I’ve also heard that Simpson is part of a group working to move out the most conservative elements of the party. Seriously, I don’t know what to believe. But at our Tea Party, while Simpson was impressive enough, when he said the reason we have Obama is because “Mitt Romney wasn’t the best candidate to talk about conservatism,” he lost me. He was listening to the enemies of Romney and believing them, instead of vetting the candidate himself. Truly I understand how difficult that is—for someone like me. But I found it pretty easy to find the truth about Romney and always wondered why so many ON OUR SIDE failed to see, and failed to support the best candidate in my lifetime as a result. We simply can’t have someone that obtuse running the party for the county. I don’t actually know Woodfill’s personal opinions about Romney, but when it counted all I saw coming from him was appropriate support. 

Woodfill got 78% support from CCHC. Other sources went for Simpson. I’m open to hear more, but for now I’m staying with Jared Woodfill.

Voting for Judges in Texas

In theory I like the idea of being able to vote out a judge who doesn’t do the job well, or fails to grasp the concept of abiding by the written law rather than his/her own arbitrary sensibilities. We do that in Texas. But it has been a rather difficult and confusing process. With the internet, it has become more possible to get information, so if feels a little less like going in to a test without studying. But still, with sometimes dozens of judges on the ballot, it can be daunting.

This time around has been a little better. A number of judges have come to our local tea party meetings, to let us get acquainted with them and ask them questions. And several of them have recognized that we need to be educated on how the court districts are set up. So I thought it would only be fair for me to pass along some of that information. (You can see this in chart form here.)

I recognize that this is local information, but our process may be instructive to all readers.

Summary

Working from the top down, Texas has two statewide “supreme” courts, each with nine justices. The one called the Supreme Court is the ultimate word in civil appeals. The one called Court of Criminal Appeals is the ultimate word in criminal appeals. These courts are discretionary—open to interpretation of the law.

The courts of Appeals include 14 districts assigned to areas across Texas, with 80 justices total. This is the court for direct appeal. The justices here are legal analysts.

The next lower level is trial courts. First the District Courts: there are 456, each with one judge: 359 districts contain one county, and 97 contain more than one county. Some are general and some are assigned specific matters, such as juvenile matters or felony criminal matters. Appeals from here go up to the Court of Appeals.

Also appealing directly to the Court of Appeals are the County-Level Courts: Constitutional County Courts (one per county), Statutory County Courts (233 in 87 counties), and Statutory Probate Courts (18 in 10 counties, limited only to probate matters).

The lowest level courts, for local trials and limited jurisdictions, are Justice Courts (817 with one judge each) and Municipal Courts (923 Cities with 1537 judges). Appeals from these courts would go up to the county-level courts.

Our Recommendations

OK, now for what’s on the ballot, and our recommendations. I sat down with my son Political Sphere and his wife. We printed out copies of our sample ballot, from www.harrisvotes.com, which is particularly helpful this year, since we got redistricted and haven’t yet received our voter registration cards. We combined what we learned from candidates at tea party meetings, what we could find online (you do a search for the name plus “for judge.”) We added info from the local bar association ratings, and word on a few from some lawyer friends who generally share our views. We took bar ratings with a grain of salt (the bar leans liberal, but sometimes you can learn from the patterns of approval nevertheless). If all else seemed equal, the impression the candidate made in person at a tea party meeting became the deciding factor. Willingness to meet the people was a positive.

Supreme Courts

I’m concerned mainly with GOP judges, since I believe we get better constructionist philosophy on the bench that way. So, on the GOP ballot, there are three Supreme Court Justices up for reelection. Nathan Hecht is the oldest of those running; he is unopposed, and I know of no negatives about him. David Medina is the incumbent (running against John Devine and Joe Pool). Don Willett is also an incumbent (running against Steve Smith). I see no reason not to keep these incumbents.

On the Court of Criminal Appeals, Elsa Alcala and Barbara Hervey are both incumbents running unopposed. It was Elsa Alcala who came to our meeting—mainly just to help us be more informed voters. Sharon Keller has no primary opponent, but has a democrat challenger.

Courts of Appeals

The two appellate court districts in and around Houston are the 1^st and 14^th districts. No one is facing opposition in the primary, and I don’t know of any specific negatives about any of them, so we’ll give all the GOP candidates our votes. 

District Courts

In Harris County, the numbering system for the district courts isn’t related to location. When a new court is needed because of population, the next number is added. And it’s hard to know from the number what the court is used for. There are so  many, I’ll only list those that have primary opposition. 

·         11^th Judicial District: Bruce Bain

·         61^st Judicial District: Jeff Hastings (met him several times at tea party meetings)

·         129^th Judicial District: Michael Landrum (met him more than once, and he made a good impression)

·         133^rd Judicial District: Lamar McCorkle

·         151^st Judicial District: Leif Olson (very young, but we had a long conversation, good future)

·         152^nd Judicial District: Allyson Wilkinson (met her)

·         164^th Judicial District: Sophia Mafrige (met her)

·         174^th Judicial District: Joe Vinas

·         177^th Judicial District: Ryan Patrick (very young, haven’t met him, but trusted friends recommended him)

·         179^th Judicial District: Kristin Guiney (met her) 

Other County Judges

The District Attorney is a powerful position in a county this size. Unfortunately there has been a lot of dissatisfaction with the current GOP DA. Word is her office is badly run, morale is low, and she has run off some very good prosecutors who were no longer willing to work with her. Her ads claim being strong makes enemies, but from what I’ve heard from multiple reliable sources is that dissatisfaction isn’t about philosophy on toughness with the law, but about her personal inability to do the job. 

Her opponent, MikeAnderson, came to a tea party meeting. He was impressive and reasonable. He is well liked according to bar ratings. He gets the recommendation from several people I know who have worked with him. So, while it’s somewhat drastic to oust an incumbent republican, in this case I feel good about endorsing Anderson, rather than Pat Lykos. 

County Court at Law No 2 is one I know less about, but online research led us to go with Theresa Chang. 

For County Attorney, again, because of online research, we’re going with Leslie Johnson.