Hon. Anthony P. Lucaccini See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
San Joaquin County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   10.0 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 1 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      
Zip
Occupation

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)
Comments


Please type what you see below:

    

What others have said about Hon. Anthony P. Lucaccini


Comments


Other

Comment #: CA29481
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Respectfully, not my Judge at the present, but if possible, because of ranking, integrity, would
like you to be the Judge to review a US Mail
Fraud, under Perjury, attempted grand level
extortion case. (18-32026). Several government
offices informed. NAPSA and USDJ assistance
requested. Thank you.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA29285
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Where others had problems, I thought he was cool.no prible.s with this judge. I didn't mind his court one bit. I think he was impressed with me a bit and my argument and requests.

Other

Comment #: CA10643
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Temperamental. Quick to rule and dismiss without listening to non offending parent and without considering non offending parents rights. He does not show or explain how and why his ruling will take place and course of action is very unclear. Appears to be controlled by CPS. He is impatient and should not be on the bench if he is not going to rule fair and without giving non offending parents a chance to speak.