Hon. Beverly J. Woodard See Rating Details
Associate Circuit Judge
Circuit Court
Prince George's County
7th Circuit
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.7 - 3 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)

What others have said about Hon. Beverly J. Woodard


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD2271
I tried a unpaid overtime case before her ten years ago in district court. Following trial, she sat on the case for nine months, then ruled that my client got nothing (although admitting that she was cheated of overtime compensation), and was then unwilling to rule upon a solid motion for reconsideration -- we had to settle this out of court for less than the client deserved. This judge was living proof that choosing judicial nominees based solely upon racial preference is not in the interest of justice.


Comment #: MD2132
On May 17, 2012, I was scheduled to have my divorce hearing in front of Judge Woodard. This judge does not deserve to sit on the bench in Upper Marlboro. As my divorce proceeding started, Judge Woodard started raising her voice as to where were the documents, and why we did not have them, and that she was not going to have the hearing unless we re-submitted our divorce documents. I was not expecting a judge to act this way when I entered the courtroom. She is a selfish person. This judge does not need to be on the bench.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD1950
A generally unpleasant individual. Biased, rude, and not very intelligent.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD1736
Rating:Not Rated
She is the worst, she sit,s there laughting at certia case's that she will be hearing. This day she wanted to leave the bench earlie to go shopping.
I raise my hand and asked to speak to her concerning my grandson's case she yelled at me and said you wait until I come back and she told me to leave her court. She is rude, and laugh too much, she need's to be kicked off the bench. I would like to see the F.B.I would like to see the F.B.I. do an investegation, of her some of her case's.


Comment #: MD1687
this judge is very biased,, she needs to be off the beanch.i hade her as a trial judge and she acted more like a clown than a judge,, get her off the beanch off the beanch and back to clown shool


Comment #: MD1679
Rating:Not Rated
What the Washington Post said 28 Dec 2012

This is a travesty of justice. Let’s take a look at who is responsible.
Then there was the unprofessional conduct of the Prince George’s County Circuit Court judge, Beverly J. Woodard, who presided at the officers’ trial. Ms. Woodard was previously married to a Prince George’s police officer who himself was convicted in 1988 for repeatedly shooting an unarmed suspect in the back, as he lay on the ground, with a confiscated BB gun. When she was assigned to handle a trial involving a similar case of alleged police misconduct and assault, she should have at least disclosed that fact, if not recused herself. She did neither.

She withheld the information until asked about it during the trial by a journalist, Brad Bell of WJLA-TV. At that point she summoned counsel for both sides into her chambers and, in an emotional meeting, refused to declare a mistrial, insisting that she could be fair. Her reasoning remains unknown because she did not allow a court reporter into the meeting.

Nonetheless, Judge Woodard’s comportment on the bench left no secret about her leanings, according to several courtroom observers. During the trial, she was overtly sympathetic toward the defense and hostile to the prosecution, signaling her disdain with facial expressions and by turning her back on the prosecutor, Joseph Ruddy, during his closing argument. Those gestures may have been noticed by jurors.
At the same time, Judge Woodard, in her comments at sentencing, went out of her way to vilify Mr. McKenna by dwelling at length on the unruly behavior of some, though not most, Maryland students following the game. She thereby managed to smear an innocent victim by associating him with the unrelated actions of others. Judge Woodard did not respond to phone calls to her office.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD1081
J. Woodard has the makings of a great judge. I appeared to her in family law matters when she was just appointed to the bench, and thereafter. I can honestly say that what she does not know, she will quickly find out. In other words, she is the type of judge that will spend her lunch reviewing case law so she can have intelligent questions to answer trial counsel after the trial resumes.

I have pushed the envelop with her on more than a few occassions, and, to her credit, she has always been polite, respectful, and attentive (even when my legal argument was very weak). Although I don't always like her rulings, I can never say that my client did not have a fair chance.