 |
|
|
|
| Jeff Sullivan |
| |
| Candidate: State Supreme Court, Position 2 |
 |
| Jeff Sullivan |
|
| |
| Age: 56 |
| |
| Residence: Yakima |
| |
| Occupation: |
| |
Yakima County prosecuting attorney |
| |
| Education: |
| |
B.A. in English, Gonzaga University; J.D., Gonzaga University |
| |
| Campaign Web site: None |
| |
| Campaign theme: |
| |
Experience counts. |
| |
| Rating: Well-qualified |
| |
|
| |
| 1. |
Do you support the current system of electing judges? Why, or why not? |
|
| |
I do support electing Supreme Court judges, however, I would require lawyers who run to meet minimum experience requirements. In addition, I would require that the candidates come from each of the nine congressional districts. |
| |
| 2. |
Name a state Supreme Court ruling that you would have joined the majority on and explain why. |
|
| |
I would have joined the majority opinion in State v. Rivers, upholding the "three strikes, you're out" law. Sentencing repeat serious offenders to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. |
| |
| 3. |
Name one where you would have dissented and explain why. |
|
| |
I agree with the dissent in State v. Kinzy. The majority's opinion prohibits police officers from detaining children at risk and runaways unless they have a warrant. Requiring a warrant will have an immediate and devastating effect upon a variety of law-enforcement functions necessary to aid children in harm's way. |
| |
| 4. |
Do you think judicial candidates should have more leeway in what they can say in a campaign, or do you support current restrictions? |
|
| |
I support the current restrictions because I believe a completely independent judiciary is essential for the proper administration of justice. Allowing judicial candidates more leeway in what they can say could lead to campaign promises which would affect their impartiality. |
| |
| 5. |
What is the biggest problem facing the state court system and how would you address it? |
|
| |
The biggest problem facing the state court system is access. The current system is too expensive, too complicated and too adversarial. The Supreme Court needs to lead by encouraging more lawyers to volunteer their time and by ensuring that the courts are available to everyone regardless of their financial resources. |
|
