Hon. F. Dana Walton See Rating Details
Superior Court
Mariposa County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   6.1 - 2 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)

Please type what you see below:


What others have said about Hon. F. Dana Walton


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA29866
Totally biased judge, always sides with the County. Obviously close to the County officials, knows them, and will protect them. There is even a federal order that recognizes Judge F. Dana Walton's orders were based on an overbroad warrant and disingenuous County officials. "The foregoing facts make it hard to credit the County Defendants’ statement that “the County’s only interest in the [] Property has been, at all times, to ensure that the violations of law upon it are remedied to protect the health and safety of the occupants, the neighbors, and the surrounding community.” The relatively sparse inspection history described in the Warrant declarations seems to contradict the assertion that the Property had been “the focus” of code enforcement efforts “since at least 2008” and raises obvious questions about the expansive scope of the Warrant (which included not just buildings but also all “vehicles … compartments, drawers, cabinets, papers, and electronic files located on the [] Property”). The notion that Cox could have repaired all 101 “dangerous violations” set forth in the N&O in a 30-day period that included Christmas and New Year’s Day strains credulity, particularly since the County’s expert receiver was still collecting bids 10 months after the Receivership commenced and was apparently still working on repairs well into the first quarter of 2019. And it is unsettling, to say the least, that the aggressive code enforcement activity evidenced by the record in this action coincided with the County’s failed criminal case against Cox." http://ncfm.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/ORDER-5-1-20-DENYING-COUNTYS-ANTI-SLAPP.pdf


Comment #: CA25818
Judge Walton drinks too much. Can’t remember what he said in the last hearing, allows his clerks to underhandedly sign his name, takes things too personally rather than follow the law.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA261
I have to admit that I love this judge. He is a hard worker and offers suprises in his rulings. He just dismissed a four-felony
marijuana case, due to medical immunity. In another case he set probation at 5 years, which surprised me. I figured 3. A really intellectual judge. Get to work to win him over.