Hon. Patricia M. Scanlon See Rating Details
Superior Court
Contra Costa County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.2 - 5 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 2 rating(s)
Please send me alerts on this judge
E-mail Address:

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address (will not be displayed)
Confirm E-mail Address      

Only items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating.

General Rating Criteria

* Temperament (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Scholarship (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Industriousness (1=Not at all industrious,10=Highly industrious)
* Ability to Handle Complex Litigation (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Punctuality (1=Chronically Late,10=Always on Time)
* General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters (1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
* General Ability as a Trial Judge (1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
Flexibility In Scheduling (1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)

Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation (1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
General Inclination Regarding Bail (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Plea Discussions (1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation (1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Involvement in Settlement Discussions (1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)
General Inclination (1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)

Please type what you see below:


What others have said about Hon. Patricia M. Scanlon


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA31579
Toward women: angry, belittling, vicious.
Toward men: cooing. Talks babytalk.
In general: very indiscrete and inappropriate. Very trump-esque in off-the-cuff ranting.


Comment #: CA9914
Rating:Not Rated
Due to her Judicial misconduct of the Eighth Amendment unlawful detainments, numerous remands, auctions of excessive bails. Et a of Inmate Keegan Lee Czirban, CC16IF148, from $1,000,5000 bail to inhumane no bail of her Broken Bench, Dept. 3, Hundreds of codes of miscarriage of justice, I rate her, disbarred from Interest of Justice. Observing her grandstanding courtroom performance. Sanctions will be addressed. Judicial Misconduct. Inmate Czirban in confinement since May 28, 2016. Total incompetency. Complaint in progress for removal of Broken Bench!!! Respectfully, Legal Advocate, Darice A. Dubrovich

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA9581
This judge should be removed from being a judge to all criminal cases. She failed to allow crucial evidence to be presented during trial. She sentenced an innocent person, who proved innocence through testing (not once but three times), which would have proved this person's innocence. Scanlon stood by the lack of evidence, and still acquitted an innocent person. She admitted her own mistakes at the end of trial but too late. Career, reputation, etc. has been damaged. A misconduct on her part. There has been numerous complaints about this judge. Not competent to be a trial judge in criminal cases.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA6553
A truly horrible judge. Extremely biased toward the prosecution. Very degrading and demeaning to the defense.


Comment #: CA6552
I'm not an attorney, but have had the displeasure of sitting through a very troubling display of bias on the part of a sitting judge. My mental picture of the blindfolded jurist in front of the Supreme Court has been shattered by watching this judge in action. Rude, inattentive, with an unmistakable preference for anything prosecutorial. Would make even the staunchest citizen of our great country feel as though they were watching Stalin populating the Gulags. Horrible to watch.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4800
This judge is not very good at what she does. She is disliked by many members of the Bar. She forms conclusions without hearing both sides of matters. Overall, she is not a very good judge.


Comment #: CA3314
I've never seen a clearer example of a "Hanging Judge". She had clearly already decided the verdict before entering the courtroom. This was a case of a woman's safety with several witnesses present to give statements, but nothing was heard by this judge. Extremely arrogant and unable to hear anything but her own opinion. It is a travesty for the judicial system that someone like this is on the bench.


Comment #: CA1641
Rating:Not Rated
Unfortunately, judges are human and make mistakes. Judge Scanlon had the wool pulled over her eyes and more than likely looked at the personalities of the litigants instead of the facts. Very sad for our judicial system.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1398
Arrogant, was not able to listen to both sides, pre-disposed, did not allow litigants to complete a sentence without interupting because she assumes she knows what you were going to say. Thank goodness for the appeals court.