Judge Sweeney deserves more time on the bench

Judge Maureen Sweeney

Video

Sweeney - Judge Maureen Sweeney is running for re-election in Mahoning County Common Pleas

Atty. David Gerchak

Video

Gerchak - Running for Mahoning County Common Pleas Court against Judge Maureen Sweeney

Has Judge Maureen Sweeney’s four-year tenure in the Mahoning County Common Pleas Court been perfect? No, it hasn’t. Have we taken her to task for some of her rulings and the way she has administered her court? Yes, we have. But, are we ready to call for her firing in the Nov. 4 general election? No, we aren’t.

When Sweeney, a Republican, was appointed to the General Division judgeship in July 2004 by then Gov. Bob Taft — to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Robert Lisotto — she took on a docket that was like a runaway train. There were more than 1,000 criminal cases pending, of which 120 were being handled by a visiting judge.

That overall number has been somewhat reduced, but there also is a reality that cannot be ignored: given the crime situation, especially in the city of Youngstown, criminal cases are being added constantly.

For this reason, we do not believe it is fair to compare Sweeney’s docket with the one that is held up as the standard, Judge R. Scott Krichbaum’s — as her general election opponent, Democrat David Gerchak is doing.

It would be great if all five general division courts had no backlog of cases, were adhering to the Supreme Court standards and were able to keep the wheels of justice turning without any breakdowns.

But, the case load, especially on the criminal side, makes perfection impossible. However, that does not mean the Common Pleas Court can’t come close.

As Judge Sweeney points out, when she took office there were two magistrates serving all five general division courts. Today, there are five. The magistrates handle civil cases, allowing the judges to deal with the criminal ones.

In addition, each court now has two assistant prosecutors assigned to it, which means that delays and postponements, at least from the prosecution standpoint, can be kept to a minimum.

Thus, the onus is now on the judges to not only schedule as many hearings in a day as is practical, but also to make sure that lawyers aren’t able to use the excuse of workload to miss deadlines or seek continuances.

Mental health court

Judge Sweeney insists that she is well on her way to not only tackling the cases on her docket, but establishing the mental health court to deal with individuals who deserve treatment rather than incarceration.

She has handled 30 such cases, but says there are as many as 130 individuals who could be eligible for the mental health court.

Sweeney’s goal is to increase the case load.

Gerchak, who ran for county recorder in 2000 and for county court in 2004, is challenging the incumbent on the basis that she does not know the law. He cites cases in which her rulings have been reversed by the appeals court as evidence of incompetence.

However, even the most learned and experienced of trial court judges gets reversed by appeals courts.

As we noted at the outset, Sweeney has suffered our editorial wrath on occasion, but we do not share Gerchak’s opinion that the incumbent does not know the law.

If she were incompetent, the Mahoning County Bar Association would have found her unqualified to continuing serving on the bench.

We believe Judge Sweeney has the ability to make her court run as efficiently as Judge Krichbaum’s. She may need to make some scheduling adjustments to do so.

The Vindicator endorses her re-election.