Smith
F--
provisional — 80% — 4.0 of 5 opinions sound, per qwen3.8-27b; would rank in the top 100% of 80 graded judges, but ten opinions are needed for a standing letter — 5 so far
On the assumption that the model is right — qwen3.8-27b reads the court's own disposition right 70% of the time, graded on a curve: A is the top fifth of the judges graded under this model, F the bottom fifth; ++ / + / − / −− within the band. How the grade is made.
6cases reviewed on appeal
732opinions authored
1,565panels sat on (not as author)
—5 merits decisions: a rate is shown from 10
Outcomes on appeal
Areas
By year: 2014 1 · 2013 1 · 1998 1 · 1914 1 · 1910 1 · 1900 1 ·
Analysis
No analyses yet. When they exist, this shows counts of the model's findings across this judge's reviewed cases — with the court's own dispositions beside them, and only from 10 cases.
Cases
- Isenberg v. Dept. of Motor Vehicles CA5
- People v. Gomez CA5
- People v. Ventura CA5
- People v. Cordray CA5
- Magallanes de Valle v. Doctors Medical Center of Modesto
- In re A.G. CA5
- People v. Castillo CA5
- People v. Gomez CA5
- People v. Ventura CA5
- People v. Casares CA5
- People v. Stankewitz CA5
- Nunez v. Nicholson
- People v. Mandujano CA5
- People v. Montano
- Cockren v. Brown CA5
- Cockren v. Brown CA5
- People v. Reyes CA5
- Marriage of Davis (Price) and Davis CA5
- People v. Torres CA5
- J.F. v. Office of Administrative Hearings CA5
- People v. Olivera CA5
- People v. Goodwin CA5
- Sengrath v. Audeamus CA5
- People v. Maynor CA5
- People v. Accredited Surety and Casualty Co.