By Robert J. Hansen
A California Appellate judge was forced into retirement last week and agreed to never serve as a judge after the Commission on Judicial Performance found misconduct and a failure to exercise authority, according to court documents.
Justice Vance W. Raye, presiding Justice of the Third District Court of Appeal since 2010, engaged in a pattern of delaying around 200 appellate cases over ten years and failed to properly exercise administrative and supervisory authority for the expeditious resolution of cases.
“Justice Raye’s conduct caused prejudice to civil litigants and criminal defendants. Prejudice can occur in civil cases by parties suffering from uncertainty as disputes remain unresolved, or the payments of money judgments are delayed,” the Commission said in its ruling.
The commission surveyed approximately 200 matters assigned to Raye from 2011 to 2021, in which more than one year passed between the completion of the briefing and the issuance of an opinion.
At the same time, a significant number of cases languished for years. Raye’s oldest completed case had aged seven years and nine months after being fully briefed before the parties dismissed the 
matter.
Two of Raye’s cases were delayed between six and seven years; five between five and six years; 17 between four and five years; 29 between three and four years; and 45 between two and three years.
Justice Raye was aware of his growing backlog of cases.
He received monthly reports that identified his assigned cases and the date of each assignment.
The justices in the Third District discussed the topic of delay and the court’s “growing backlog of appeals” at several justices’ meetings and three court retreats from 2012 through 2018.
The pattern of chronic delay created the appearance that the delay could affect adjudicative decisions, and impede or deny meaningful appellate review.
Justice Raye’s conduct was, at a minimum, improper action within the meaning of the California Constitution, the Commission found.
The Justice acknowledged that he was aware of his backlog and admitted his misconduct and stipulated discipline.
Justice Raye was appointed to Sacramento Superior Court in 1989 and as an Associate Justice on the Third District Court of Appeal in 1991.
Raye entered into a stipulation agreement with Director-Chief Counsel Gregory Dresser to resolve the pending preliminary investigation by agreeing to public admonishment, to retire, and not to serve in a judicial capacity, subordinate judicial officer, or judge pro tem with any court in the State of California, or accept a reference of work from any California state court, at any time after June 1, 2022.
Raye advised Governor Gavin Newsom of his retirement from judicial office, on June 1, 2022.
EXCERPT FROM THE LETTER TO THE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE
THE JUNE 1, 2022 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE DECISION AND ORDER IMPOSING PUBLIC ADMONISHMENTS, INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF PRESIDING JUSTICE VANCE W. RAYE FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL’S THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (3DCA)
What happened and is still ongoing in my 3DCA appeal of Case No. C095488, filed on December 23, 2021, is that the evil of corruption was neither removed nor has vanished from 3DCA and Sacramento County Superior Court after the Commission investigated Presiding Justice Vance W. Raye and after Raye was removed by the Commission from 3DCA on June 1, 2022.
Raye’s disciplinary removal from the Appeals Court is not a trivial matter. I see the Commission’s actions against Raye as a positive step to eradicate the corruption that has plagued the Sacramento Courts and the State of California’s third branch of government in general.
By reading the Commission’s June 1, 2022 decision, I learned that, after Raye, Edith R. Matthai, and the Commission’s counsel (the “parties”) submitted a proposed disposition of the matters set forth in the Commission’s staff inquiry letter, dated November 30, 2020, and a preliminary investigation letter was written, one month later, on December 31, 2020, Judge Brown resigned from his post in Department 53.
Brown presided over my wrongful termination case from September 22, 2014 through December 31, 2020. After he resigned, my 70-year-old wife was attacked and robbed of $22,284 in a coordinated action between Porter Scott attorneys representing the UC Regents and the judge in Court Department 43, Thadd Blizzard. Blizzard worked with the court clerks from Departments 43 and Department 53; along with Judge Hakim Mesiwala, and most likely with the involvement of a newly appointed judge, George Acero, a former Porter Scott attorney and former intern in the UC General Counsel’s office. The heinous attack against my wife, to frame her for a bench warrant and attempt to rob her of her life savings, makes me believe that a drug gang/cartel-associated criminals are operating in Sacramento County Superior Court and preying on vulnerable litigants and their families. During the appeal, the perpetrators attempted to exclude Judge Kreuger from the appeal of Case C095488’s proceedings and blame the evil on Judge Brown and former Porter Scott attorney Douglas Ropel by manipulating the record on appeal.
I also noticed that, just two months after the Commission removed Justice Raye from 3DCA, State of California Supreme Court Chief Justice Hon. Tani Cantil-Sakauye, on July 27, 2022, announced her resignation. Justices Cantil-Sakauye and Raye have known each other for more than three decades. I remember Justice Raye from the October 19, 1999 Oral Argument in the 3DCA Case No. Waszczuk v. Destec Energy Inc., Case C0005, when Raye did not hesitate to tell the Littler Mendelson attorney Brian Dixon, “You are not here to teach us law, we know the law. Get to the point and sit down.”
I would greatly appreciate it if the Commission’s Secretary to Trial Counsel would provide me with information concerning whether former 3DCA Presiding Justice Raye was placed on investigatory or administrative leave after March 1, 2021 until the Commission’s investigation was concluded and until he was removed from the post on June 1, 2022. I am asking for this information because I would like to know whether Raye, after March 1, 2021, participated in any case reviews, oral arguments, or the issuance of published and unpublished opinions in between March 1 and June 1, 2022.
By reading the Commission’s June 1, 2022 decision, which removed Raye from his post, it is hard to believe that Raye was lacking administrative skills, since he had been employed at 3DCA since 1991. In examining Exhibit #1, attached to the decision, it looks like 3DCA was lacking the funds to handle so many cases, and Justice Raye was surrounded by people and saboteurs who wanted to see him go, most likely for political reasons.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I would like to ask the Secretary to Trial Counsel and the Commission on Judicial Performance in general to open the March 22, 2016 Complaint against Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Chang, who was assigned on March 21, 2014 to the Writ of Mandate Jaroslaw Waszczuk v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board (CUIAB) and the Regents of the University of California as the Real Party in Interest (RPii), Case No. 34-2013-80001699-CUWMGDS, 3DCA Case No. 079254. The complaint was denied by the Commission on May 19, 2016.
A copy of the complaint and the Commission’s decision is attached to the “Request for Intervention” as Attachment #3.
If I were to write my complaint against Judge Chang today, it would be quite different from the one I previously submitted. Judge Chang was the second judicial officer after Judge Brown from Department 53 to cover up the theft of my unemployment insurance benefits, which were reinstated on May 14, 2014 by the EDD.
Judge Chang should never have presided over this case. The case was filed by my former attorney in in the wrong court, Sacramento Superior Court, instead of San Joaquin County Superior Court, in Stockton. Judge Chang’s friend and former coworker from the California Attorney General’s office, Marylin Tays, on February 13, 2013 conducted an administrative appeal hearing before the CUIAB in Stockton about the unemployment insurance benefits wrongfully denied to me by the EDD. I live in Lodi, San Joaquin County, ten miles from San Joaquin County Superior Court.
The reopening of the March 22, 2016 complaint against Judge Chang is a proposed alternative in lieu of filing a new complaint with the additional information. If I had known in 2014 and 2015 what I know today, the Court hearing on February 27, 2015 before Judge Chang would not have taken place. Just before that hearing with Judge Chang, the Porter Scott attorney who represented the UC Regents made a vicious threat aimed at my wife, stating that the UC Regents or UC administrators would go after her if I did not drop my litigation against the UC Regents. The threats were repeated by another Porter Scott attorney in August 2017 in the 3DCA building, and then in April 2021-July [ 1] she was ambushed by the UC administrators’ thugs in conspiracy and collaboration with Sacramento County Superior Court judicial officers and clerks to seize her bank account containing her life savings.
Alternatively, I could file in 3DCA a Motion to Recall the Remittitur in the Case C079254; however, it would be futile to file such a motion, based on my prior experience with this case and taking into consideration what is going with my present appeal in Case No. C095488. I also believe that it is unnecessary and futile to file a motion where the cover-up of unemployment insurance benefits theft is being allowed by the judicial officers. It is more feasible to investigate the theft by the EDD Special Counsel McGregor Scott, appointed by the EDD on July 21, 2021, to crack down on and prosecute unemployment insurance benefits fraud. The District Attorney and FBI are another option that I could use in addition to making a complaint against Judge Chang. I was trying to find out from the EDD’s legal and public records departments who cashed my stolen unemployment insurance benefits, but the EDD has not replied. Now, I am awaiting information from Wells Fargo Bank whether my former attorney, Douglas Stein, eventually used the Wells Fargo Special Account opened in June 2014 to hold my retainer to cash my unemployment insurance and short-term disability benefits in 2014. The State Bar of California investigators knows about this, In re Stein, No. S245982 (Cal. Mar. 1, 2018). I should hear from Wells Fargo Bank within one week (see https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/131248).
In addition to the above, based on your September 16, 2021 letter concerning what the Commission on Judicial Performance can and cannot do, the Compendium Judicial Misconduct Involving Self-Represented Litigants and applicable state and federal law, my complaints will follow this letter against the Sacramento County Superior Court Judges for their misconduct and conspiracy against me and my wife at the hands of Judges Christopher E. Krueger, Jennifer K. Rockwell, George Acero, and Thadd A. Blizzard and 3DCA Justice Elena J. Duarte.
I appreciate your attention to this matter.
Respectfully Submitted on November 10, 2022