Moreno, Blanca From: Jonathan Paton Sent: Friday, July 5, 2019 9:16 AM To: Moreno, Blanca Subject: Fw: Bill Montgomery This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Steve Twist . Sent: Wednesday, luiy 25:55 AM To: Jonathan Paton Subject: Bill Montgomery Dear Jonathan, This note is about Bill Montgomery. It is my hope that you will share this with your colleagues on the Commission. I first met Bill as his professor when he took my class on Victims in Criminal Procedure, which I have taught at the ASU Law School since 2001. Bill was in my first class, Spring Semester of that year. As Bill told me, he took the class to make sure he could protect the rights of all involved in the criminal justice system, defendants as well as victims. He was an outstanding student, in my class and in law school overall. l?rn certain his biography will be well known to the commissioners: challenging childhood raised in gang?ridden neighborhoods with a dad who went to prison, but whose mom was loving and encouraging, West Point graduate, decorated tank platoon leader in Desert Storm (where he notes he is most proud ofthe fact he got each of his troops home safely), Order of the Coif and magna cum laude graduate Law, prosecutor and private lawyer who twice left the private practice of law to care for a dying parent (first his Mom and later his father with whom he reconciled before his father passed), loving husband and father, three-time elected County Attorney who restored dignity, respect, and honor to the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office and, under whose leadership, balance has been restored among all the agencies of county government. He has been a national award? winning leader of his office and respected among his peers across the country of every political persuasion. have known Bill for l8 years. He is nothing like the false caricature his critics are painting. That caricature is far more a reflection of the current political landscape and utterly detached from Bill?s actual character and accomplishments. While the critics may be able to generate enthusiasm and raise money from their supporters with the narrative they are pushing, the false representations rob the Commission of objective and fair input for what Bill has actually accomplished in office for the community he serves. 1 He is an outstanding lawyer with rigorous intellectual skills. I know from personal experience that he is an excellent researcher and writer with a commitment to objective facts. He is principled, but not arch. He is tolerant and respectful of others and I have seen this first hand. During a public debate over a statewide initiative, he was viciously attacked and his personal character and honor challenged. Bill refused to respond in kind and maintained what any lawyer would fairly call the type of judicial temperament and demeanor that encourages confidence in our judicial system. His commitment to the rule oflaw is grounded in his deep commitment to the ethical standards that prosecutors must follow; to do justice, not just win cases. In fact, he passes out the following quotation from the 1935 case of Berger v. United States to every new prosecutor at the end of their initial training: The [Prosecutor] is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all, and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the two?fold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.? When he takes an oath he means it. Duty Honor Country is notjust the motto ofhis West Point alma mater, they are the very guideposts for his personal and professional life. He has a servant?s heart. Bill will exemplify the essential, qualities for judges first laid out by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 78. They must ?have sufficient skill in the laws to qualify them for the stations of judges.? And they must unite ?the requisite integrity with the requisite knowledge.? Knowledge and integrity define Bill. Moreover, he will not ?substitute (his) own pleasure to the constitutional intentions ofthe legislature.? He will exercise ?judgment? and not ?will.? He understands the value ofa truly independentjudiciary, itselfconstrained by the constitutions ofthe United States and of Arizona. In what passes for public discourse these days, the motivations or reasons behind actions of public officials are quickly assigned to categories of ideology without even the slightest acknowledgment that an of?cial may very well be motivated by nothing more than a commitment to doing their duty on behalf of the people they serve. Bill is just such an of?cial. I hope the commissioners will see past the false claims against Bill and see him for the good man and fine lawyer that he is. He is more than quali?ed to be added to the list for the Governor?s consideration, among other quali?ed candidates to be sure. Sincerely c, i Steve Twist Stan/En Vice Presxjenr and Genera? Comm;in SEWICBS Group of America Address: -i43 a A TTORNEYCUENT DO NOT FORWARD WITHOUT PERMISSION: This e?maii iransmissmii (and the afiaciimenis, if any, accompanying if) may contain confidential belonging to the sender which is protected by the a?omey?ient priviiege The information is iniended only for the use of the iniended fEfCip?ierif, if you are no! the intended you are hereby notified that any forwarding, disclosure. copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on me conrenis oft/71's information is sii?iciiy pi?ohibizad Any mtercepa?mn of this transmission is iliega/ under the law if you have received {his i/?ansmisyon in error piease prompiiy {he sender by rep/y email, and men destroy copies of {he iraimmissian, EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP SUCCESS Office of the Courts (TuittmiSSiim rm Appeitate Cuurt Appointments era Human Resuurces Department i503 W. Suite 22} Ptmenix, AZ 85007 Re. Fittpreme Court Nominatiui?i Montgortiery Juue 20 i 9 to R/Eemtiers oftitc Coritrttigeion: i write again t0 offer my euthusiaatic suppurt For the tiriirtittaticm (Bit!) to the Arizona Supreme Court. Biti receives my highest and absoiute unequivoca} Ag past Chief Executive Officer tiftite State Bar qurimna. had the Opportunity to ki?tow and with Bit? throughout my ten~yeur tenure. I know him and prof?cssiortaiiy. He is not oriiy rm exceedingfy taiented iawyer, he is; aim an extraurdinary leader. Sewing in a, i?iigh-prrfit?iic pusiticnt and one that i3 I?iztturaiiy subject to oceasionai pubiic criticimi. Biit has been it made! prt??eggiunatism and regpect He IiSteits to at} sides and makes; decisium Eiztxeti mt the tan nut what ix puiitieatit expedient ur persui'tzitit in Ritt??ik he exerc?scu the kind utiiudgu?tent mtg?ittcteu tits: itwticc its: Kt the risk tit" repeating: ?1th prewth Hiit?x tutti to the State Bar have beet: ssiguitieziitt. it: attitiitiuti tu tut; tjimt permuizti t?Vtii?v?tij?t :18 CLE titcuity and at rite-ember {it ueverzti bar task force; he encourages participatiuu by tam/yen; from his office. ?i?itmugh his icaderst?tip. the Bar has beiietitted sigttiticztittiy {rum at puaitive and productive reiatiunship with the Marimpa County Attorney?s Office. understand from his; test itppiiczttimi. the commissiun received a number ofnegzitive cmumunications from SHIRE members otthe Bar regarding Bill's wark with the Bar?s Rule 84 task force. The task force considered a number of changes; tr) tite Ruiei regarding; sexuut identity and I served on the task force and Ob?gervcd Biitia g'izu?ticipzttiun and input to be and drm?t presurite to kt?tow how much this matter may have affected mus;idci?zit?mii (it hi8 {gist uppiiczttiuri~ but the fact that he fur those who might disagree with his; legzii amuse umuiu? i?iiakc him suited for (in our Cum"th bench. trustiy 215 {t {Ciitl?Vv Array \r?ete an. I think Eit?eiuttg commitment t0 honorable service that began when he entered the N?tititary Academy at West Point as a yutmg cadet and continues to this day. aheuid be C(?st?iSidCde by the (Touuniasiuu ?518 it exaitiiues his character. Duty; ?01101?. (Teuntry is part of DNA. I have no doubt that he mitt f?uitht?utty and iu?ipartiaiiy discharge the duties ot?Jugxitice oi?the Arizuna Supreme (hurt. Sincerei}; flE limit 23. 130%) Soul Via Electronic Mail Chiel?lustice Scott Boles; and Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Commissions on Appellate and 'l?riol Coon W631 \x?ashingtoo Street. Suite 221 85007 Re: William Montgomery Applicant {or Arizona Supreme Court Door Chicl?liixiicc Roles and Commissionoi?s: i write. as a former pl?CSitlem ol? the Stale Bar ol?Arizona. a fomwi? iWO*l?I?m member ofihis Appellate Commission and a lawyer practicing, in Arizona. in support of William ("Bill") h/loolgomery?s application to some on the Arizona Supreme Court. Bill is cniinemly qualified to xcwe on the Court and that you advance his name to Governor Douglas Ducoy. am anaching my previous lcitcr in with ihc following; update. Biil is loin limo road the crilical oily/Er. {\flontgoii?icry and rewiecl {hon} as; a LiiS'EO?lOll oi?his choracici. Share tho political beliefs ol?somc oi?Mi?. Montgomery's critics. ih?iwcvoit strongly disagree: wiih them as lo iis alleged unfairness and prejudice. would not Silpp?l?l Mi?. applicolion il? :1 scintilla oliwhzxi his detractors said was; two. My. is an clcoiccl of?cial in L1 dif?cult job that llorccs him l0 make tough decisions. 'l?hosc decisions will zinger some and plow: others. 'l?hai is pan oiliisjob. He should not he penalized because ol' his public; scivicc. ll is lhzil our high court include individuals who ham: sowed in the public square: and done so with courage clos'fipilc dissent. Based on my as a memhm? ofthc Appellate. Commission. Mr. Montgomery exceptionally quali?ed to serve on our high court. Please forward his name to the Governor. I stand ready to address; any of your concerns. \?l?ory truly yours. lir?nogt Calderon linclosoi'c July 5, 2019 Commission on Appellate Court Appointments Re: Application of William Montgomery Dear Commission Members, would like to supplement my January 29 letter in support of Bill Montgomery?s judicial application. i am compelled to write this in light of the effort to thwart his application by those who have disseminated incorrect and biased information. in the decade plus that have known and worked with Bill Montgomery, have had occasion to staff a myriad of issues with him, including many of the issues that his opponents have attacked him on. i can tell you emphatically that his decisions on these issues were based on the facts and circumstances, not on his personal beliefs or any political motivations. indeed, many of these decisions were made knowing there could be a political cost. Prosecutorial integrity is the primary value of the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office from the top down. in the more than thirty years that have been a prosecutor, prosecutors have never been held more accountable than they are by Mr. Montgomery?s administration. Validated claims of unprofessional conduct are dealt with as the circumstances and applicable rules deem appropriate. Claims that prosecutorial misconduct is rampant in this office are irresponsible, absolutely untrue and offensive to the more than 300 prosecutors who strive and succeed every day under crushing caseloads to do the right thing. This Commission should make a decision rooted in facts, which have been presented to you, even when others do not. Sincerely, Barbara Marshall iatroou July 12, 2019 Arizona Commissions on Appellate Court Appointments 1501 West Washington Street, Suite 221 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Via email at Dear ChiefJustice Brutinel and Commissioners: write in support of Bill Montgomery as a candidate for the Arizona Supreme Court Over a. twenty year legal career in Arizona, I have litigated, lobbied, and advocated from an orthodox Christian perspective on some of? the most contentious social, moral, and constitutional issues of our time: whether an unborn child has a right to be born; the bounds of?religious freedom and free speech; the nature of marriage; and most recently, the nature of the human species itself, speci?cally whether the terms ?innlc?? or ?female? hove objective, knowoble mooning? under the law. For the inirposcs of this letter, the merits otthoso issues are neither here nor there. But W?l?l?t is is the degree ollcontroversy that generoted hy the not just from on overzealous activist (such us may he found on either side of many issues} but unfortunately sometimes from within our profession when a few who are personally invested in the issue may bring a hit too n?iuch vigor to their arguments. Each of?these subject matter areas is certainly a ?hot button,? high profile, and hotly contested issue in our nation. Over the past decade, I would occasionally cross paths with Mr. Montgomery when, Moricopa County operations would intersect our issues. Through those interactions formed the opinion that Bill was something of a lawyer?s lawyer: precise, personally engaging yet often a hit reserved. His questions would be focused and precise; his analysis direct and concise. In short, he seemed to be an advocate that you could respect and trust regardless of whether his View on a given issue was contrary, congruent, or neutral in respect to yours. But in 201.2, I found my viewimint of Bill shifting from a rather broad and distant panorama to more of a microscopic View, when both of us were asked to serve among~ a diverse group of about 20 attorneys serving on the Arizona State Bar ?Task Force on ER Rule 8.4 governs discipline for misconduct. In 2003 it was amended to add Comment 3, which among other things asserted that manifestations of prejudice or bias in respect to ?gender identity? could provide a basis for disciplinary action against an attorney. In 2011, proponents of gender identity theory petitioned the Arizona Supren?ic Court to move the non?binding comment into the binding text of Rule 8.4. in turn, the Bar formed the Task Force to inform its recommendation on that proposal (which it ultimately supported). The proposal was controversial, as gender identity touches on numerous legal and cultural issues: compelled speech under the First Amendment; bodily privacy issues; sex harassment and sex?specific sports leagues under Title and employment low. Simply put, gender identity theory postulates that our sex-?? whether one is female or malew?is determined not by objective reproductive physiology, but by an unprovnble, subjective, malleable continuum of perceived masculinity, femininity, neither, or both. The Bar prudently selected attorneys representing a broad range of views including pm and con- advocates drawn from the ranks advocacy groups and conservative (,irgnnizotlons such mine; practitioners who were more rank?and??le who would be impacted by the change but not necessarily taking a stance on its social or legal worth; and at least one participant who claimed a gender identity discordant from his sex?-which is to say a male who professed a feminine identity. With such an array of?views in the room, and vigorous dehete ensued. Vigorous. And Yet to the credit of all even, when strong emotions came forwardwl think it safe to say that we conducted ourselves with civility and courtesy. At least in that room, sl'uirply divided opinions did not lead to personal denigration; deep personal investment did not undercut professionalism and civility. Heated conversation at lunch was, as likely to be over the weekend?s bull some or the merits ole given golf com?se us it was the deep leg; issues we with. And Bill certainly set the example: asking questions clearly; challenging others to bring clarity to the points being made; and in wrapping up, stating his opposition in very measured, logical, and terms. His engagement was, in my View, just what you?d expect from. a person you saw as ?lawyer?s lawyer.? And there was a briefbut interesting epilogue, this contentious issue coincidentally arose during a time that many within our Bar were vigorously debating whether the Bar should remain mandatory, or transition to a voluntary bar. When the Bar made known its support for the gender identity proposal, Bill circulated 21 short email to the Task Force Chair to note that the Bar?s support for the proposal typified the issues that motivated the call for disestablishing the mandatory bar. I thought that comment helpful, as it highlighted a bar-related issue with which I was not engaged, and gave the Bar an additional insight to weigh. A copy of?that email is attached. Given his evident analytical skills; his respect for his diverse colleagues in that politically polyglot task force; his respect for the Bar, and his unfailing civility, I certainly see Mr: Montgomery as having several of the most valuable qualities a judge might possess: Based upon these experiences with him, both broad and narrow, I am pleased to strongly commend him as candidate to the bench of this state?s highest court? You are welcome to contact me should you have any questions. With great respect, Gary McCaleh Senior Counsel From: h?lontgomery Bill [niailtoxhr ?its mite Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 8:56 AM, To: Subject: RE: BR 8.4 Task Force Update Thanks for the update, Carrie. I feel compelled to reiterate what I shared at our last meeting: there is a growing sentiment among attorneys that if the State Bar approves the further segmentation of our community along the lines proprmed, an unnecessary distinction segmentation given our common humanity as have expressed? there will be a strong effort to render membership voluntary with a requisite change in the manner of regulating our profession. Sincerely, Bill Montgomery Maricopa County Attorney From: Carrie Sherman 7, Sent: h?londay) November 19, 2O 2 8:44 Aer Man Eli, ham; Ann leslie; Montgomery Bill; Brett Harvey; Bryan Chambers; Carrie Sherman; Claudia ?fork; Dianne Post; Gzretano lipourrlPhelps; Kami Kina l-larding; Faull Mark; Melissa Ho; Michael Crawford; molly eWUuiu, 1 them when, Rod Galarza; Suzanne Diaz; Virginia Herrera?Gonzales Subject: BR 8.4 Task Force Update All: On Friday the Board of Governors? Rules Committee considered the Task Force?s proposal (attached). The Committee made no modi?cations to it and will present the proposal to the full Board on November 30 as an informational item. The Board is scheduled to vote on this matter at its December l4 meeting Carrie Carrie Sherman, Director of Board thm?'nnc i EMAIL: 33: Serving public an enbzm 0112;; the legalprofession. Linley Wilson: This letter will serve as a formal recommendation for the consideration of Bill Montgomery to be appointed by Governor Ducey to the Arizona Supreme Court. My husband and have known Bill for 10 years in many different capacities. Through our mutual concerns for community and reform, we have been afforded the opportunity to see firsthand, Bill?s in working as a member of a team, his commitment to the rule of law, and his unwavering sense of duty and character. He has taken a very active role in many community efforts and is always willing to hear out the ?other side? of any argument while ultimately following what the law dictates. We have watched Bill?s tireless efforts to improve the community through his work as a board member of First Way and his support of Great Hearts and the Teypeyac Leadership institute and many other organizations with which we have also been involved. We are confident that Bill would be an asset to the court because of the many leadership roles he has held in Arizona, his love of country and the law, his reliability and honesty. From West Point to the Gulf War to his time as Maricopa County Attorney, he has been a member of an influential network of professionals and served as a virtuous leader to advance the common good of all. while displaying confidence, wisdom and good judgement. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any additional questions you may have? Sincerely, Debbie and Biil Cheatham BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESIDENT David LaBahn Chief Executive O?cer CHAIR lean Peters Baker Prosecuting Attorney jockson County, MO VICE-CHAIR Rod Underhill District Attorney Muzrnomah county, TREASURER Steven Naugle Chief Financial Of?cer SECRETARY Spencer Merriweather District Attorney Mecklenburg County, NC DIRECTORS Thomas Carr City Attorney Boulder County, CO john T. Chisholm District Attorney Milwaukee County, WI Mike Feuer City Attorney Los Angeles, (A Paul L. Howard District Attorney Fulton County, GA Bill Montgomery County Attorney Maricopo County, AZ Marilyn Mosby State?s Attorney Baltimore, MD Dan Satterberg Prosecuting Attorney King County, WA Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. District Attorney New Vork County, NY Amy Weinth Attorney General Shelby County, TN Worthy County Prosecutor Wayne County, MI ASSOCIATION PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS July ll,20l9 Arizona Commission on Appellate and Trial Court Appointments lSOl West Washington Street, Suite 221 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Dear Honorable Members ofthe Commission, On behalfof the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys (APA), I am writing to express my strong support for the appointment of Maricopa County Attorney William G. Montgomery to the Arizona Supreme Court. APA is a national non?profit organization which includes both elected and appointed prosecuting attorneys as well as their deputies, assistants, victim advocates and investigators. We provide valuable resources to prosecutors to develop proactive and innovative practices that prevent crime, ensure equal justice, and increase community safety. This includes high? quality training and technical assistance to promote collaborative, innovative strategies to increase access to and quality of evidence-based, victim~centered services. MCA Montgomery was elected by his peers to serve on Board of Directors in 2017 and has played a substantial role in the development and implementation of many innovative practices, many of which have been adopted by prosecutors? offices nationwide. Under MCA leadership, his office hosted the ?rst regional APA prosecutor-led diversion training. Prosecutorwled diversion programs offer an alternative to traditional case processing so certain individuals accused of committing a crime may participate in a cominunity~based education or treatment program that addresses behavioral change. MCA Montgomery?s office offers multiple diversion programs, including drug diversion, felony pro?- trial intervention, and justice court diversion. Additionally, the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office has earned the High?Performance Prosecution Designation, as they have embraced community prosecution and data-driven evidence-based prosecutorial practices. MCA Montgomery has also been at the forefront of protecting the most vulnerable members of our community. His office serves on Animal Cruelty Advisory Committee. Research shows that there is a strong link between animal violence and violence towards humans. Animal cruelty often connects to other serious and violent crimes, such as interpersonal violence and child abuse. MCA Montgomery is ?ghting to illuminate this link and hold offenders accountable. He knows that animal abuse is not something that can be ignored, as animal violence often sheds light on more serious crimes. To maximize public safety, his office is working with the Arizona legislature to increase the punishment for those who commit violence against animals. Additionally, his of?ce is hosting the next National Animal Cruelty Prosecution Training, which provides prosecutors, law enforcement and allied professionals with the skills to strengthen links between the criminal justice system and the community and enhances prosecutors? ability to successfully identify and prosecute animal cruelty and animal fighting cases. in iron DC .joxsmmau org 7.9 BOARD OF DIRECTORS David LaBahn ChiefExecutn/e O?icer CHAIR Jean Peters Baker Prosecuting Attorney jar/(son County, MO Rod Underhill District Attorney Multnonion County, OR TREASURER Steven Naugle Chief Financial O?icer SECRETARY Spencer Merriweather District Attorney Mecklenburg County, NC DIRECTORS Thomas Carr City Attorney Boulder County, CO John T. Chisholm District Attorney Milwaukee County, Wi Mike Feuer City Attorney Los Angeles, CA Paul L. Howard District Attorney Fulton County, GA Bill Montgomery County Attorney Moncopo County, AZ Marilyn Mosby State?s Attorney Baltimore, MD Dan Satterberg Prosecuting Attorney King County, WA Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. District Attorney New York County, NY Amy Weirich District Attorney General Shelby County, TN Worthy County Prosecutor Wayne County, MI ASSOCIATION or PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS MCA Montgomery has continued to advocate for victims? rights and his office has deveIOped a robust victim services division. The Maricopa County Attorney?s Office employs a K9 Victim Support Program; facility dogs trained to work with victims of crime. These canines provide a calming, comforting presence and provide support to victims throughout the criminal justice process, including court hearings, interviews, and meetings related to their case. MCA Montgomery?s office also participates in Domestic Violence Committee. His office has created the national standard when it comes to strangulation cases, including victim support and police training. Their strangulation protocol has saved lives. Strangulation can be a precursor to homicide; by gathering additional evidence, training officers, and providing victims with services they need following a strangulation, more cases have been prosecuted, and fewer DV victims have died. MCA Montgomery has cultivated an office environment in which prosecutors exposed to vicarious trauma can seek peer support through a successful program that has been replicated throughout the country. At its inception, this peer support program was the only program of its kind in the nation for prosecutors and was inSpircd by crisis support for officers. His office has conducted multiple national and site-based trainings to ensure that prosecutors throughout the country can bene?t from these practices. in addition to his recognized achievements, MCA Montgomery is well respected by his peers. lie is a thoughtful member ofAPA?s Major Counties Prosecution Council (MCPC), which is a conglomerate of the top 40 jurisdictions in the nation, which collectively prosecute one?third of the crime in our country. Maricopa County Attorney?s Office is the only two?time host to the MCPC meetings. MCA Montgomery and his office have presented on wide array of topics and he has actively engaged with a truly diverse group of fellow prosecutors from around the country to work toward achieving safer communities. On difficult issues such as officer use of force, MCA Montgomery?s office was very actively involved in developing national guidelines for the proper role ofa prosecutor in the wake of an office-involved shooting. I have personally worked with MCA Montgomery and can attest to his upstanding moral character and ethical integrity as well as his ability to effectively work with prosecutors from all political persuasions across equally diverse jurisdictions to improve public safety in our communities. Accordingly, and on behalf of the Association, 1 strongly support MCA Montgomery?s appointment to the Arizona Supreme Court. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully Submitted, David LaBahn President and CEO July 15, 2019 AZ The Commission on Appellate Court Appointments 1501 Washington, Suite 221 Phoenix, AZ 85007 Dear Commission on Appellate Court Appointments: it?s my understanding that you have decided to interview Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery as part of your process to make recommendations for an appointment to the Supreme Court of Arizona. While i no longer serve in any official capacity, i feel compelled to share some thoughts about my experiences with Mr. Montgomery from when i did serve in elected office, During my 19 years as a Maricopa County Supervrsor, served with three different county attorneys and five presiding judges. initially, my colleagues on the Board and were skeptical about how Mr. Montgomery would perform as the Maricopa County Attorney. Mr Montgomery had just won the 2010 speCial election, held to fill the remaining term of Andrew Thomas. County government, the Arizona Superior Court in Maricopa County, as well as much ofArizona state government were still recovering from the abuses and incompetence of Mr, Thomas. From day one, Bill worked toward his stated goal of restoring confidence in the office and leading it to a new level of performance in all areas of service. He demonstrated the highest ethical standards in every undertaking towards this goal. For me, it was especially satisfying to have the legal counsel for Maricopa County that was untainted by political or personal agendas. am confident that my colleagues with whom i served would voice similar sentiments if asked. Bill has demonstrated great political courage in pursuing his agenda to reduce the recidivism rates for criminal offenders and was effective in the effort to prepare convicted criminals to re?enter society. His willingness to partner with all participants in the criminal justice system and social services providers undoubtedly benefitted our whole community. Bill?s reverence for the justice system is beyond reproach. He is a model of the quotation etched on the side of the court building: "The first duty of society is in closing, i would like to thank you for serving in this extremely important position. Your service on this committee is a benefit to millions of people who have no direct knowledge of your efforts. This is truly the essence of community service, Sincerely, Andrew Kunasek 3344 Camelback Road, Suite 100, Phoenix, AZ 85018 O: 602795?3020 F: 602296?4549 Dr Tracy Munsil: This letter will serve as a formal recommendation for the consideration of Bill Montgomery to be appointed by Governor Ducey to the Arizona Supreme Court. My husband and I have known Bill for 10 years in many different capacities, Through our mutual concerns for community and reform? we have been afforded the opportunity to see firsthand, Bill?s in working as a member of a team, his commitment to the rule of law? and his unwavering sense of duty and character He has taken a very active role in many community efforts and is always willing to hear out the ?other side? of any argument while ultimately following what the law dictates. We have watched Bill?s tireless efforts to improve the community through his work as a board member of First Way and his support of Great Hearts and the Teypeyac Leadership Institute and many other organizations with which we have also been involved. We are confident that Bill would be an asset to the court because of the many leadership roles he has held in Arizona, his iove of country and the law, his reliability and honesty. From West Point to the Gulf War to his time as Maricopa County Attorney, he has been a member of an influential network of professionals and served as a virtuous leader to advance the common good of all, while displaying confidence, wisdom and good judgement. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any additional questions you may have? Sincerely, Debbie and Bill Cheatham a James Wesley 0 Ray 8 E). (1?11. Shut litll?tl?ttilt?tl Lauren Reynolds Steven tlcegtilcy (more l. (:otlld Michael Rooncv i I), 1} i 1 Aron Benson Michael J. Harris Clitl'ord J, Roth l9, {Evan [5 llillcr Philip R. Rudd Paul Dmuiell Janet l5, .iacl-ttm lontcs Samuelson Judith DWt?kill Joe Keene Sharon Shivclv Patty A Ferguson Robert (3. Kimball Allyson 'l?cply Brian Nancy M. LaslmiLs David Tierney Michael Galen let't?rcy 3, Leonard Matthew F. Winter Rosario (,ltillitgher Phoebe Mott?utt Gregory l? (iillis Randy Nusshaum Saft?mmtr Sticks 1' 3 20] 3. ("digit Jam; (hm ti l?ttCL?. (lM. lixccutn-?c Director July 18. 20h) MERITAS tid- erasumnt VIA E-MAIL: 'Itctziicourts.2iz.70 him i 1305811: \l Moreno, Blanca From: Andre Miller Sr Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 i204 PM To: JNC Judicial Nominating Commissions Subject: Bill Montgomery This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Greetings, i?m writing as a Pastor in Mesa Arizona, Father, African American and concerned citizen. I fully support the application of MCA Bill Montgomery as We known him to be fair and open when approached with real concerns. Over the past several years We worked with Attorney Montgomery to address police bias and proper community policing while looking at the cultural ramifications. As a Justice l?m certain Attorney Montgomery would show the same compassion he?s shown from the MCAO and be an example of fairness. l?ve seen on occasions where he's been accused of not being racially sensitive and i can assure you that isn?t the case and has never been a concern from me and several leading members of the East Valley NAACP. His appointment to the court would be a needed addition with proven experience too be impactful while applying the law? believe he is the best choice, and look forward to him being seated on the court. Pastor Andre N. Miller, Sr. New Beginnings Christian Church Sent from my iPhone J. Arthur Eaves 602.532.5730 602.230.5034 Artie.Eaves@sandersparks.com June 20, 20l9 To Whom This May Concern: I write to express my support for Mr. William Montgomery as a nominee for Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court. I am an Arizona trial attorney practicing almost exclusively in the civil realm. Primarily. I represent physicians who are accused of malpractice. I regularly take those cases to trial. One of my trials was just selected as one of the top ten defense verdicts of 2018 by the Arizona Attorney Magazine. I am a Senior Owner of the law ?rm of Sanders Parks. My firm has enjoyed a reputation as one of the leading civil trial ?rms in Arizona for 46 years. I have known Mr. Montgomery for at least ten years. The circumstances under which we met say a lot about Mr. Montgomery and his character. As Mr. Montgomery was about to take the helm at the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office, he heard a story about me standing up for what was right under some trying circumstances. Mr. Montgomery reached out to meet me because he was genuinely interested in meeting and surrounding himself" with people of integrity. We met over a cup of coffee and have been colleagues ever since. I have had the opportunity to work closely with Mr. Montgomery in relation to some important issues. lle has always been committed to doing the right thing even when it would have been expedient to do something else. Most of all. I have been impressed with Mr. Montgomery?s devotion to the truth. He exemplifies the standards of professionalism and ethics to which we should all aspire. have worked with Mr. Montgomery enough to observe that he has the keen mind and analytical sensibility necessary to be an appellate judge. I also believe that Mr. Montgomery?s experience as an actual trial lawyer would be a very valuable resource for the Supreme Court. We need some legitimate trial lawyers on our appellate courts. As a trial lawyer, it can be very frustrating to brief and argue appellate issues before panels of appellate judges who have no idea what it is like to try a complex trial. Not every appellate judge needs to be an experienced trial lawyer, but at least some of them should be. 3038 Noah Third Street. Sorta 3300., Phoenix, AZ 3 602,532 5600 sandersparkseom SANDERS WWKS June 20, 2019 Page 2 of 2 am aware that some criminal defense organizations are engaging in a campaign to prevent Mr. Montgomery?s nomination. It is one thing to oppose a nominee because of concerns over his character or quali?cations. There is no basis to criticize Mr. Montgomery on either of those bases. Instead, the criminal defense bar seeks to prevent anyone with a prosecutorial background from making it to the appellate bench in Arizona. Unlike Mr. Montgomery, those who oppose him are not devotees oftruth, they are devotees of a particular agenda. It would be a travesty if the proponents of a very particular agenda were able to prevent Mr. Montgomery?s name from making it to the Governor?s desk simply because he is a prosecutor, It may be helpful to remember that the objective of a criminal defense attorney is to secure an acquittal or a favorable plea utilizing any and all tactics within the bounds of their ethical constraints. By contrast, it is a prosecutor?s job to dojustice. As a prosecutor, Mr. Montgomery has spent a career considering facts, setting aside personal feelings and making objective decisions based upon doing what is right and what is just. That experience is a tremendous background for one seeking a position on the appellate bench. whole?heartedly endorse Mr. Montgomery as a nominee for the Supreme Court of Arixona. if you have any questions or would like to discuss any of these issues further, please do not hesitate to contact me at the number listed above. Very truly yours. w, J. Arthur Eaves For the Firm JAEzml 3030 North Third Street. Suite BOO. Phoenix. AZ 85012-3093} 6025325608 3 sandersparkscom Moreno, Blanca From: CenturyLink Custome Sent: Thursday, June 20, 20i9 2:23 PM To: JNC - Judiciai Nominating Commissions Subject: 6. Montgomery, MCAO CAUTLON: This emaii originated from outside of the organization. Do not click Links or open attachments uniess you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Gratings, i support Mr. Montgomery's nomination to the court. As County Attorney he has shown interest in improving reiationships with minority communities and iaw enforcement. To that point he asked to meet, around 18 months ago with East Vaiiey Community Leaders. He was interested in why East Vailey Leaders had such a great respectfui relationship with Mesa PD Leadership. know him to have an open mind, ear and door to our concerns we believe, of the unjust prosecutoriai issues in our, African American Communities. Thank you for your time and kindest regards, Pastor Betty McGee Retired, USAF Chapiain Co-Chair EVNAACP Legai Redress Committee Moreno, Blanca From: Ellen Benshalor Sent: Monday, lune 17,2019 5:12 PM To: JNC Judicial Nominating Commissions Subject: consideration of Bill Montgomery appointment to AZ Supreme Court eaurioe: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unlessyou recognize the sender and know the content is safe. it is time to speak out against the potential appointment of Mr Bill Montgomery fits a very partisan politician for many years, his leanings make it obvious that he could NOT be a iair judge over cases that may affect any Arizonanr The history regarding his discrir?nrriation of L678)in individuals, alone, him. Exampies of why he snouid not be appointed are: 2} His refusal to bring importai?ii cases to the courts which couio address criminai justice, reform, and u} His support o? aggressive enforcement procedures, ram asking the commission to not consider this individuai to be a future Supreme Court judge. Thank you, Best E'Vngial?dB! Moreno, Blanca From: Carolyn Riske I Sent: Tuesday, June i8, 20i9 5:22 PM To: JNC Judicial Nominating Commissions Subject: Bill Montgomery This emaii originated from outside of the organization. Do not ciick links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe? i have been reading about the impartial commission that was set up constitutionally to prevent politically extremist judges to serve on any court in our state. The Arizona Supreme Court should personify impartiality and Bill Montgomery, with his blatant anti discrimination for one. We actually need criminal justice reform, and he has refused to bring important cases to court. Please do not nominate him for anyjudgeship. You know better. Educating the electorate is a lot harder. Thank, you Carolyn Riske Moreno, Blanca From: Hedy Grimaldi Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 20i9 9:49 PM To: JNC Judicial Nominating Commissions Subject: Bill Montgomery Cavit?tw?: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. i must speak out against the potential appointment of Bill Montgomery. it is clear that he will not be able to be non?partial in his rulings. This would be very unfair to many of Arizona citizens. Hedy (Sr/mold! Far June19,2019 Arizona Commission on Appeilate and Trial Court Appointments 1501 West Washington Street: Suite 221 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Dear Honorabie Members of the Commission, Eight years ago, Maricopa County Attorney William G. Montgomery appointed me as a Special Assistant to the Chief Deputy of the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office, and it has been a great honor and privilege to work for him and the people of Maricopa County. i am writing to recommend MCA Montgomery for appointment to the Arizona Supreme Court because he is exceptionaliy qualified and it will allow him to continue his lifelong career of public service The Commission should find that MCA Montgomery is highly qualified to serve on the Arizona Supreme Court for the following reasons, MCA Montgomery?s exceptional academic and professionai credentials make him an excellent candidate for the Arizona Supreme Court. MCA Montgomery graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point, which is consistently regarded as one of the top universities in the country. Not only did MCA Montgomery graduate from West Point but he graduated in the top 15 percent of his class which means he earned outstanding grades in academics, physical fitness? and leadership As a West Point graduate, i regard his accomplishments with the utmost respect because despite my best efforts, i was unabie to achieve them as a cadet. After leading soldiers at the platoon and company ievei as an Army officers inciuding during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm for which he received the Bronze Star Award, MCA Montgomery worked in Silicon Valiey before attending law school at Arizona State University. There he graduated in the top t0 percent of his class, which is reflected by his membership in the Order of the Coif and his magna cum iaude distinction. Since 2010 MCA Montgomery has led the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office, which is one of the largest law firms in Arizona. The Maricopa County Attorney?s Office has a substantial criminal practice that involves approximately 330 prosecutors and 50,000 submittais each year. lt also has a distinguished civil practice that invoives approximateiy 45 attorneys who provide litigation, advice: and transactional legal services to various Maricopa County agencies who have an aggregate budget in excess of $2 billion. Criminal and civil attorneys appear in state justice courts; superior courts; and appellate courts inciuding the Arizona Supreme Court. They also appear in federai district and circuit courts as well as file certiorari petitions in the United States Supreme Court. Pursuant to Arizona statute, they practice as deputies of the County Attorney and are subject to his direct and indirect supervision. Thus, during his almost 10-year tenure as Maricopa County Attorney, MCA Montgomery has likely supervised more criminal and civil cases than any other attorney in Arizona, And contrary to ill? informed assertions otherwise, MCA Montgomery is directly involved in many of those cases. know because I have worked with him, meaning he drafted, edited, and researched briefs, on high profile criminal cases, such as State v. Sample and State v. Milka, when they were pending review by the Court of Appeals and the Arizona Supreme Court. While the results of the cases were mixed, MCA Montgomery's work product, guidance, and decisions were essential to the resolution of each case. Beyond those cases, i have known MCA Montgomery to be personally involved in many criminal and civil cases. Most often, he is directly involved with cases when they are on appeal, and his involvement includes drafting, reviewing, and editing briefs, and also discussing the legal issues with the assigned attorney. in most cases subject to appellate review, MCA Montgomery provides guidance and makes critical procedural and substantive decisions that are followed by the assigned attorneys. ln addition to the reasons set forth above, the commission should also recommend MCA Montgomery to Governor Ducey for potential appointment to the Arizona Supreme Court because he is a diverse candidate given his personal history. His inspiring story of overcoming hardships gives him a unique framework for understanding hardships and the importance of protecting the rights of all to pursue the American Dream. He is also a military veteran, which distinguishes his background and experience from other justices on the Arizona Supreme Court. The most recent data from the Department of Veterans Affairs indicates that 500,000 military veterans lived in Arizona in 2010. While the Arizona Supreme Court does not decide many cases involving veteran or military specific issues, it is important to veterans such as myself, as it is with other federally protected groups, to know that at least one justice on Arizona?s highest court has worn combat boots and has personally experienced aspects of life that are unique to military service. And although prior Arizona Supreme Court justices were veterans, MCA Montgomery would be the first West Point graduate to serve on the Court. it is an historic opportunity to have someone who has been trained and tested to live out the motto of Duty, Honor, Country. i also feel it is necessary to note my experience in working on public records matters and helping to provide oversight guarding against prosecutorial misconduct. MCA Montgomery assigned those projects to me specifically because he wanted to improve the organization in those respects. in my assignment to track issues of prosecutorial performance, regularly review appellate opinions to note trends or issues across the prosecution function and those that may pertain to an individual prosecutor, The Maricopa County Attorney?s Office then incorporates into training, and where necessary counseling and discipline and even referral to the State Bar, to address areas or specific instances of concern. in 2018, the Arizona Court of Appeals considered prosecutorial misconduct claims on direct appeal in 28 non-capital cases and did not find any prosecutorial misconduct that constituted reversible error. Notably, many of the claims of prosecutorial misconduct on direct appeal were made by self- represented defendants in supplemental briefs pursuant to an Anders review, which is typically a direct appeal that is filed after appellate defense counsel reviews a trial, finds no claims of error, and asks the Court of Appeals to review the record for fundamental error. As the Maricopa County Attorney. Mr. Montgomery requires all employees to maintain high professional and ethical standards and he holds them accountable if they fail to do so. While rare, the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office has referred some prosecutors to the State Bar when there is evidence they have violated the Rules of Professional Responsibility. i also work in the area of responding to public records requests. The Maricopa County Attorney?s Office receives over 600 public records requests per year and responds to every request. ln fact, after his election in 2010, MCA Montgomery established a formal public records review process. and assigned personnel to address the significant demand for public records, adding personnei over the years to try and keep up with an ever?increasing demand. As for public records requests made on or after August 2018 for an internal investigation of sexual harassment allegations against a high-profile prosecutor. the facts are different than what have been reported in April 2018, the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office received a subpoena for the investigation from the State Bar for the investigative materials and agreed to provide it following discussions with the State Bar that resulted in an agreement that the best way to provide the records in a timely manner without having to go through the process of redacting private information was to provide the materials subject to a protective order. While the material was provided in September 2018, and a protective order was subsequently issued. the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office could not ethicaiiy provide that material to the requestors who had fiied the pubiic records request given the State Bar subpoena and knowledge that it would likeiy be subject to a protective order. And the Maricopa County Attorney?s Office has clearly informed each requester that they wiil receive the material when it is no longer sealed by a protective order. Respectfully, Michael J. Mitchell Speciai Assistant to the Chief Deputy Maricopa County Attorneyts Office Moreno, Blanca From: Carol Consalig . Sent; Wednesday, June 19, 20i9 12:04 PM To: JNC Judicial Nominating Commissions Subject: Possible Nomination of Bill Montgomery to the AZ Supreme Court caution: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unlessyou recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Attn: The Commission on the Appellate Court Application: it is time to speak out against the potential appointment of Mr. Bill Montgomery. As a very partisan poiitician for many years, it is easy to review his ieanings that make it obvious that he could NOT be a fair judge over cases that can effect every Arizonan. His history regarding his discrimination of individuals, alone makes him not qualified. As an example, his refusal to bring important cases to the courts that could address criminal justice reform and possible overly aggressive police procedures is an indication that he is, again not fit to be a judge. i am asking the commission to not consider this individual too be a future Supreme Court judge. Thank you, in advance, in taking my comments in making your fair decision on this matter. Caroi Consaivo ?The worio? is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evii but because 0? those who loci: on and do nothing.? wAiber?t Einstein ii.? :rzahiru: Legal i? marital-'31; June 20, 20l9 Arizona Commissions on Appellate and Trial Court Appointments lSOl West Washington Street, Suite 22l Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Submitted via Email RE: Comments Regarding William G. Montgomery?s Candidacy for Arizona Supreme Court Dear Commission on Appellate Court Appointments: Lambda Legal is the oldest and largest national organization committed to achieving full recognition ol?thc civil rights of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, transgender people and everyone living with HIV through impact litigation, education and public policy. We write to express serious concern about the possible appointment ol? William Montgomery to the Arizona Supreme Court. We shared the following concerns with the Commission on February 26, 2019, when Mr. Montgomery first sought appointment to the Arizona Supreme Court. With ?ve new commissionersjoining the Commission since the last interview and selection process for applicants to the Arizona Supreme Court, we feel it necessary to again express these concerns to the Commission. r. Montgomery, current Maricopa County Attorney, has a record that reflects persistent, open hostility to the principles of equality, liberty, justice and dignity under the law for LGBT people and their families, among others? Accordingly; it appears unlikely that he would be able to provide impartial justice to LGBT people and their families itw he were appointed to the Arizona Supreme Court. let alone the appearance of impartiality in 20l 5, alter the US. District Court for the District of Arizona followed the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and struck down Arizona?s ban on marriage for same?sex couples.l a same~scx couple in Maricopa County reached out to Mr. Montgomery?s office to utilize the free legal assistance required to be available to married couples to help with the adoption ol?their son. They were told that same-sex couples were not approved to receive the free legal assistance.2 When questioned, Mr. Montgomery maintained this position and indicated his beliefthat the Ninth Circuit?s decision was only about marriage, not about other legal rights for same?sex couples and their families, such as adoption support.3 Even though the Ninth Circuit?s Latin decision rests in part on the fact that many same?sex couples are raising children fv?pors vi Home. i-i l?Supde l3i3 (Oct. l7. Lana v. ()lier, 77l F.3d 456 {9th Cir. Oct. 7? 20M), 2Michael Kiefer, County Attornev Won '1 Help Gay Couple Adopt, (April 8, 20l5), THE ARIZONA REPt,lBl.,lci. availr?ible r11, i'itii'isyC/e. we A ii ii i ?5.33; - ggig?i?lc?ji'ci osctiatoopt regret? 3 I'd. Lambda Legal it?? Lambda Legal Comments re Bill Montgomery June 20, 2019 Page 2 and the importance of securing those family relationships legally, and even though the adoption right requested of his office (assistance with a stepparent adoption) flowed directly from the status of being married under Arizona law, Mr. Montgomery continued to insist that the Lana decision had no relevance. He refused to provide equal adoption-related benefits to same-sex couples who were legally married. Mr. Montgomery did not stop there. After this incident, Mr. Montgomery sought to have legislation passed that would repeal the requirement that county attorneys provide free legal assistance to couples seeking to adopt children.4 This legislation was passed by the Arizona Legislature in 2015, but was vetoed by Governor Ducey.5 At the time of the veto, Mr. Montgomery?s press aide indicated that he didn?t anticipate Mr. Montgomery would continue to provide this legal aid, required by law, at least not to same?sex couples coming to his of?ce for the help to which they were entitled.6 Mr. Montgomery?s actions indicated both a signi?cant hostility to same?sex couples and an alarming lack of commitment to following the law. But Mr. Montgomery?s hostility extends notjust to same-sex couples. in 2012, Mr. Montgomery was part ofthe Arizona State Baris ER 8.4 Task Force, as he acknowledged in paragraph 53. page 23 of his application. The Task Force was established by the Arizona State Bar to explore possible action to be taken by the Bar before the Arizona Supreme Court with respect to amending Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4 for attorneys. This rule prohibits attorneys from manifesting bias or prejudice based on certain personal characteristics during an attorneys representation of a client. During his n?iembership in this Task Force, Mr. Montgomery opposed any expansion of protections for transgender people in the tiles of Professional Conduct, He went so far as to suggest that ifthe Bar continued the work to make the rules more protective for transgender people, he and others would seek to render membership in the Bar voluntary including a requisite change in the manner of regulating the legal profession in Arizona.7 He maintained this overt hostility in the years that followed. In 2015, Mr. Montgomery, in his of?cial-capacity, opposed efforts to have the Arizona Supreme Court update judicial ethics rules to include protections for transgender people. Those efforts were filed before the Arizona Supreme Court as Rule Change Petitions numbered R?l 5?00l4 and R~l 5?0020. Mr. Montgomery?s tiling in 4 (attached with this email) indicates that he is strongly opposed to non?discrimination ethics rules that provide protections for specific classes of people, 5? l?loxtard Fischer. Conn/v Can Refuse lo Help Gay?s will: (April 14. lel 5). CAPl?ltil, "litres. available at, 1 . ?w Exwi?y i f, Lift} like . fL ail Mikel,? ,3 3 ilk" +31? ?xiiff?f? ii. l, if i ant~re itibtj via i?i a: ii? any it: i tiradopti 3 6 M. W. Ame. Amie 7 Email attached with this letter. Lambda Legal Witt?? tilt? Cm it? Lambda Legal Comments re Bill Montgomery June 20, 2019 Page 3 particularly for those who are transgender. He also demonstrates a lack of understanding or any attempt in the intervening years to understand why there is a need for protections for transgender people in the court system. Any individual who does not believe that all people deserve access to the courts free ofbias and prejudice is not fit for ajudicial role. Lambda Legal emphasizes this anti-transgender bias because our own investigation of the treatment of LGBT people within court systems and other governmental systems in this country discovered pervasive, especially troubling biases against transgender people.8 The 20l6 report of the 2015 US. Tremsgender Survey con?rmed in more extensive detail the gross mistreatment, harassment, and violence inflicted upon transgender Americans in nearly every aspect of life.9 It is imperative thatjudicial officers sworn to uphold the constitution of any state and the United States Constitution understand that equal protection and other core constitutional guarantees protect transgender peoplejust like everyone else. and that they act accordingly. But. Mr. Montgomery has made clear over the course ofmany years that he is unwilling to treat 1,1387" people equally under the law. Given Mr. Montgomery?s pattern ofconduct, LGBT people in Arizona could not feel confident they would be facing a fair and impartialjudge ifthey were to appear in front of him should he be appointed to the Court. At a minimum. the Commission should investigate and evaluate the circumstances surrounding Mr. Montgomery?s service on the ER 8.4 Task Force and his decision to deny same? sex married couples equal treatment before making any decision to recommend him for appointment to the Arizona Supreme Court. Thank you for your time and consideration of this information. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions by contacting Ethan Rice, Senior Attorney at A arm/v Sincerely, Ethan Rice. Senior Attorney* Jennifer C. Pizcr, Senior Counsel and Fair Courts Project Director of Law and PolicyM National Headquarters Office Western Regional Of?ce Licensed in New York and Florida only **Lieensed in New York and California only 8 Lambda Legal, Protected and Served? (2012), available at served. 9 SE. James or ol. Report oft/1e .2015 U. Survey (National Center for Transgendcr Equality. 2016), available a! a A welcoming Congregation June 16, 20l9 Dear members ol?thc Commission on Appellate Court Appointments: We oppose the candidacy of Bill Montgomer for the Arizona Supreme Court. His conduct in power as Maricopa County Attorney re?ects an authoritarian character which is hostile to many members of our society most in need of the law?s protection. He also has a long history ot?intense Republican partisan political activity; his appointment to an already thoroughly Republican Supreme Court would worsen doubts about the impartiality of our Supreme Court and be a polarizing event. Montgomery is Viewed by many as tolerating or even encouraging a culture of?win at all costs? among his prosecutors despite the fact that prosecutors are ethically charged not with winning but with doing iustieea ln free society justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done. A recomn?iendation of Mr. thtgomery to the Governor will cast doubt on the integrity and ii?npartiality ot?this Commission. An appointment of Mr. Montgomery to the Arizona Supreme Court will cast doubt on the Court itselff2] we.? no ?1 ?14 Paradise Valtey, Arizona 85253 602.840.8400 (Fax) 602.840.1588 r43 Date: Sun, 16 Jun 201915:00:31 Subject: Potentiai appointment It is time to speak out against the potentiai appointment of Mr. Montgomery. As a very partisan petitician for many years, it is easy to review his ieanings that make it ebvieus that he ceuid NOT be a fairiudge ever cases that can effect every Arizonan. His histery regarding his discrimination of individuals, aiene makes him net quaiified? As an exampie, his refusal to bring impertant cases to the semis that ccuid address criminai justice reform and pessibie eve??iy aggressive peiice procedures is an indication that judge i am asking the eemmissien t0 net censider this individeai too be a future Supreme Court judge. Tbaek yea, Myra Baum @tfitiitjii? ("3ti "t?ftii ASBIEBBGR east ftti?i?tiiteitihi .Bssessur June 19, 2019 Commission on Appellate Court Appointments 1501 W. Washington, Suite 221 Phoenix, AZ 85007 Dear Commissioners, lam writing you to recommend Maricopa County Attorney William Montgomery for the vacancy on the Arizona Supreme Court. have a more multi-faceted view of him than most others who know him. i have known Bill for nearly 20 years. i originally met him when he was a young prosecutor and was freshly out of law school defending the son of a family friend on a felony case. Bill had no reason to listen to me more than any other defense counsel, and was certainly green at that time. Yet, he showed my client and me incredible grace by taking the time to hear all the facts of that case, and ended up making a reasonable, but fair, plea offer. i knew at that point that he was someone could trust and who was honorable, based on his limited professional interaction with me then. Fast forward a number of years, and found myself working in the Maricopa County Assessor?s office. During that timeframe the Board of Supervisors and other county-wide elected officials found themselves at odds with the County Attorney and Sheriff. This caused significant disruption to county government, and resulted in a crisis of leadership at the county level. Fortunately, the county attorney at the center of that controversy decided to resign to run for Attorney General. This meant that the Maricopa County Attorney?s office would get new leadership. When i found out that Bill intended on running for the position of county attorney, was one of the first to publicly support him, as I knew he not only had the bonafides for the position, but more importantly, would bring needed stability and principled leadership back to the office. And in fact, once Bill was elected, the long?simmering feuds, disharmony, and mistrust essentially dissipated. Bill was able to restore and further foster the necessary trust between elected officials and departments that had been lost under the previous administration. A few years after Bill was elected as the Maricopa County Attorney, I had the opportunity and honor to be appointed to (and later elected twice) as the Maricopa County Assessor. The role of the Assessor is to locate, identify, and value all real and personal property within Maricopa County. This is done to make sure the property tax role is equalized and fair for all county taxpayers. in this role specifically, my office interacts on a daily basis with the County Attorneys? office because we are essentially the County?s experts on property valuation we set the initial values and then give advice 1? vazn'" Y, My H. r. ii.? i? A. . ., i cvile~ .1 it i a x. :?tfz ,v 2 ,ttizrzz. tvt'ttit.. i.?t Rs tit}: r:i< ;i