Hon. Garen J. Horst See Rating Details
Superior Court
Placer County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 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      

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)

What others have said about Hon. Garen J. Horst



Comment #: CA5323
Rating:Not Rated
I dont know much about Garen Horst the Judge. I do know something of his actions as a prosecutor. People v. Barmettler, 2001 I was a criminal defendant in a tragic, and fatal case of mistaken identity.
My friend was shot and killed on an isolated ranch in Newcastle. Both myself and his sister mistook him for an intruder at 3:00 in the morning. This was never disputed.

Facing un-favorable facts in the case, Mr Horst sought to introduce evidence of an earlier accidental and fatal shooting 12 years earlier under vastly different circumstances. This evidence was admitted by J.Richard Cousens on the basis of showing knowledge of the dangers of using guns. This despite the stipulation by defense that such knowedge obviously exists by anyone who uses a gun in self defense.
The jury convicted in about an hour on voulintary, in-voulantary and negligent discharge.
The 3rd DCA reversed the conviction in its entirity in a unanamous decision, (unpublished).
It seems that in Placer County one doesnt get far by playing by the rules. Garen Horst knew the evidence code and conciously disregarded it. He knew he had J.Richard Cousens in his pocket. He was entrusted to represent the People of California and willfully betrayed them as well as the law by merely arguing that this highly prejudicial and irrelevant evidence come before a jury. He had a duty to follow the law: not win at any cost.
I wonder if he has gained the integrity to make hard, and perhaps unpopular decisions required of a Judge of the Superior Court, Or will he follow in the steps of J.Richard Cousens.
I truly wonder if "Judge" Garen Horst has learned anything about fidelity to the law.

to read my case go to:



Comment #: CA4337
Having served on the City Council for the City of Colfax, and been in the legal field for 13 years, I have been disappointed in a judicial officer who rules on hearsay with no factual evidence, such as a copy of a citation from a law enforcement officer. And whereas Judge Horst found it to be credible, when a former spouse filed a restraining order for protection without factual evidence, he falls into that category. I find this to be judicial negligence, as he was once a District Attorney.