Hon. Ana Maria Luna See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   1.3 - 2 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      
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




What others have said about Hon. Ana Maria Luna


Comments


Other

Comment #: CA9550
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Comments made below about this Judge are spot on! She showed absolutely no interest in my case. She looked up maybe once and disregarded all my evidence and gave the petitioner everything they asked for knowing full well the incompetence. She made snarky remarks belittling me for her own amusement and drugs being a factor in this case (coming from a narcotics background as she stated) made no difference to her knowing a small child was involved. She seems irritable with every comment, let a false witness testify with a biased opinion. She obviously has no respect for family law and the clearly lacks the ability to gauge the best interest of the child. She just seems to sway to the side on which she woke up feeling her best. She absolutely should not be presiding over family law. Lack of interest, lack of empathy. She should be removed.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA9028
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Being in her courtroom had a Kafkaesque feel. She openly stated that she did not have time or the inclination to review any of the evidence in the case, but rather proceeded to contrive the reality of the situation in a disgracefully capricious manner. She treated the law as though it was according to her “whimsy of the moment.” This was a case that involved accounting, and she refused to look at any of it. She looked slovenly, and acted annoyed that she had a job to do. She seemed impressed enough with herself to sit on the bench and bark out her fantasy about the case. She should be removed.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8050
Rating:1.6
Comments:
She should not be re-elected.

Other

Comment #: CA8049
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Luna is assumptive about respondents as well as petitioners knowledge and actually used that unproven assumption to make judgements on very important events in the case, she would not allow respondent or petitioner to give testimony or evidence, did not do her own research on my particular case, was clear that she did not know how to proceed in the case for the next hearing and allowed OPC to decide for her, showed disrespect for the case by rushing through the last 10 minutes of the case to get to anther case 15 minutes before lunch, did not sign off on the case for over 3 months and I was told she had 3 piles on her desk of 1.5-2' high which shows she is uncaring (it also shows the courthouse does not monitor their judges), and more.