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 authored (every role)
- People v. Lopez CA5
- South Coast v. Ag-Weld CA5
- People v. Lowe CA5
- Spjut v. County of Kern CA5
- Marriage of Koelewyn CA5
- Trent v. Fresno County Employees' Retirement Assn. CA5
- Stanley v. The Board of Trustees of the Cal. State University CA5
- Whitlach v. Premier Valley, Inc.
- People v. Mejia CA5
- Whitlach v. Premier Valley CA5
- People v. Watkins CA5
- Richert v. Colvin CA5
- Richert. v. Colvin CA5
- In re Lacey T. CA5
- Randhawa v. Hanford Community Hospital CA5
- Kaur v. Foster Poultry Farms LLC
- People v. McDow CA5
- People v. Loya CA5
- People v. Gomez CA5
- People v. Ventura CA5
- Magallanes de Valle v. Doctors Medical Center of Modesto
- In re A.G. CA5
- People v. Gomez CA5
- People v. Ventura CA5
- People v. Stankewitz CA5