Comments (7) | Add a comment
Jane Ann Morrison
Legislature's lack of clarity in writing law leads to legal challenge
Tools
More Columns
More Blogs
Clark County firefighters who raise money for charity must now do it on their own time
Applause for Beers at GOP dinner thundering
National spotlight on Mob Museum highlights 'Sin City'
Morse Arberry Jr. reaches plea deal; charges to be knocked down to misdemeanor
Commissioner needs to choose his battles wisely
Updated: Mar. 26, 2010 | 12:11 a.m.
District Judge Jim Bixler booted Amber Candelaria off the ballot Wednesday.
He didn't see any merit in her argument that she met a prerequisite -- being a licensed Nevada attorney for five years -- for seeking a Las Vegas justice of the peace seat just because the State Bar of Nevada charged her dues for five years.
Bixler left some wiggle room, saying there might be some merit in her constitutional challenge to the law requiring five years of legal experience for a justice of the peace in Las Vegas, while in some rural areas you don't even have to be an attorney.
Candelaria is backed by a couple of constitutional heavyweights -- Las Vegas attorneys Alan Lefebvre and Dan Polsenberg -- who give her credibility.
They will appeal Bixler's decision to the Nevada Supreme Court, hoping to put her back on the June 8 ballot to "protect the people's right to vote for who they want," Polsenberg said.
They are representing her for free because they believe the law was poorly written. They argue the language in the law is vague and confusing and the Legislature should have defined "years."
Sort of reminds you of when President Bill Clinton nitpicked about what the definition of "is" is.
Now common sense tells me Candelaria has been licensed since Oct. 17, 2006, when the State Bar of Nevada licensed her and that her opponent Bernie Zadrowski is right when he says on Election Day she won't have the requisite five years under her belt, she'll just have four years and a few days.
To rely on a bill from an organization that merely wants to squeeze every last dime of dues out of an attorney is silly.
Presumably, most of the Supreme Court justices count their own years as attorneys starting with when they were licensed, because in the lawyer world that's a memorable date. However, picky justices might enjoy tweaking the Legislature and telling lawmakers they should have defined what they mean by "year."
Bixler said the question of whether Candelaria has equal protection, as guaranteed by the Constitution, is "really the biggest wrinkle." He didn't seem taken with the argument that her First Amendment right of association was violated.
In Candelaria's four years of experience, she has never once actually represented a client. She is director of the Clark County Family Law Self-Help Center and is an alternate hearing master in Family Court. In that role, she has presided over about 700 cases since July.
As an attorney for the county, she is paid $94,400 and receives extra pay as a hearing master. She was elected to the Board of Governors of the State Bar in 2009 for a two-year term.
Legislators passed this law in the aftermath of Joe Bonaventure winning a job as justice of the peace in 2004 when he had less than two years of experience as a lawyer. He won by confusing voters who thought they were voting for his father, retired District Judge Joe Bonaventure.
His opponent in 2004? Zadrowski.
Despite just two years of experience, people say the younger Bonaventure is a decent justice of the peace.
Perhaps Candelaria would be, too.
Although the 2005 law said candidates for the Supreme Court must have been licensed attorneys for 15 years and candidates for District Court must have been licensed for 10 years, Candelaria's challenge only goes to justices of the peace.
Maybe the whole point of this exercise is to send the Legislature the message that it needs to write its laws more clearly and with more definition.
But even if she wins the right to run, I'm not sure Candelaria wins politically. Yes, she's bright, but her experience is limited, and this case has drawn attention to that.
Jane Ann Morrison's column appears Monday, Thursday and Saturday. E-mail her at Jane@reviewjournal.com or call (702) 383-0275. She also blogs at lvrj.com/blogs/morrison.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Bernie Zadrowski, former chairman of the County Republican Party, has made his living sucking off the government teat. When not campaigning for Republican issues on the County dime (I'm a Republican and I still find that offensive), his "experience" has been in the bad check unit, basically throwing gamblers in jail who fail to pay their markers. His position is illegal, unconstitutional, and has resulted in one or two trials. In other words, he does nothing except collect more than six figures . . . now he wants to be a judge? Vote for Conrad Hafen if Bernie's challenge if Candelaria is thrown off the ballot. ANYONE BUT BERNIE, TELL YOUR FRIENDS!
Candelaria's "...experience is limited".
She has no experience arguing for a Plaintiff or Defendant. She only hears argument.
Candelaris is "willfully violating the lawful process" NRS 199.340(4). She argues she's been a licensed attorney for five years. The facts show she's been licensed four years and one month. This is the logic with which Clark County appointed persons are ruling over the lives of Clark County residents.
"As an attorney for the county, she is paid $94,400 and receives extra pay as a hearing master (in family division)".
This hearing master has never practiced as a private attorney. Her Clark County position, as well as other Clark County appointees in the family division, has resulted in the Clark County children's murders up 300%. A significant number of these murdered children were under the authority of Amber Candelaria and other appointees.
Candelaria "has never once actually represented a client...is an alternate hearing master in Family Court".
Attorney Candelaria has the blood of innocent children on her hands. As law clerk in Dept. H, the then presiding Dept. over Family Division, Ms. Candelaria refused to review criminal evidence of child abuse priot to meeting with Judge Ritchie. As a result, our children suffered additional child abuse, some to the point of death.
There's nothing convoluted, vague or confusing about the statute or its interpretation. Ms. Candelaria apparently overlooked the most basic qualification to serve in the office she is seeking. Attempting to twist the interpretation of the statute to suit her personal circumstances and to save face for such a grotesque, basic error is indicative of the level of integrity and the type of justice of the peace Ms. Candelaria might be. That is to say, not the type of justice of the peace I want to see in office.
The reputation of one's counsel bears no weight in determining the merit of one's legal position. Shame on you, Jane Morrison, for buying into that nonsense and suggesting that her argument is more credible because her attorneys are so-called "constitutional heavyweights." Her argument is laughable, and her appeal is going nowhere.