Hon. James Burke See Rating Details

Supreme Court
New York County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.4 - 5 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   5.0 - 3 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. James Burke


Comments


Other

Comment #: NY13141
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The last comment was not submitted by a criminal defense lawyer.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY13140
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The jury in the current trial of Harvey Weinstein is now in its 6th day of deliberations. From the way his NY case's lawyers appear to have "fixed" things, obviously one (or more - remember, money's no object here - what good is Weinstein's money if he has to rot for the rest of his life in jail, right?) of the LA jurors has been paid off to hold out and proclaim they can't come to a verdict. This runs like a grade C Soap Opera. Bring back Perry Mason and Barnaby Jones. Let's get to the bottom of this. Weinstein may have been the bad guy due to a deformity the papers have been making quite a riff about a few days ago. Psychologically he probably felt like a sexual misfit and would get laughed at for his deformity, thus causing him to try to overcome it by making it huge in business and getting the upper hand over the problem. Unfortunately, there's no deformed genitalia mitigating defense so he's had to go all or nothing in both cases. So what could Judge James Burke do; he, too, had to apply the law without taking into account any mitigating circumstances that might have made a 5-year sentence more reasonable than the 23-year sentence he meted out. Why can't the media put two-and-two together here and stop creating and maintaining hysteria in order to hype up sales? There are so many post-Covid issues that are not being addressed that are significant while the public's "attention" is continually being diverted into such trivialities.

Other

Comment #: NY13131
Rating:8.0
Comments:
Correction to the below review:

Near the end, after "ambiguous at best," should say: ie. clearly did not warrant the extraordinary relief of post-sentencing appeal bail.

Other

Comment #: NY13130
Rating:8.0
Comments:
I have no experience with this judge at all. I'm writing solely because it appears he was forced out through chicanery involving the Harvey Weinstein trial verdict and subsequent appeals. No one could ever convince me otherwise. He seems to be a controversial judge, but that - standing alone - does not categorize him any differently than perhaps 20% or more of the judges currently serving. Weinstein may not be 100% the fiend he's been categorized as, but it is a very dangerous precedent when a disgruntled (and notoriously corrupt) defense lawyer can "get rid" of the judge that put his multi-millionaire client away so he can intimidate judges on the NYS Court of Appeals to rule unanimously in favor of his client (as he already "put the word out." The goal here is to get a fat, juicy retainer, plus a generous expense account to grease multiple palms. Maybe that's "just the way it is" but that lawyer's at the heart of a lot of the problems in society right now and he's being painted as a hero. Maybe someone will stick up for Judge Burke and help set things right. Otherwise, the precedent set here is if you don't get your way at trial, find a way to get rid of the judge to show you're more powerful than the system and everyone will (continue) to be afraid of you and laud you and speak of your so-called "greatness." Look at the Weinstein firm's "partners," one of whom was forced out of a top city judgeship because he helped his eventual law "partner" to get a reversal in a case of a defendant whose family also had a lot of money (and whom another eventual "partner" as an appellate judge allowed on bail while his appeal was pending due to an alleged extortion attempt supported by an audio recording the DA's office later ceded was "ambiguous at best," i.e. clearly did warrant the extraordinary relief of post-sentencing appeal bail. There's other examples of this "firm's" making the rules, rather than playing by them. What ever happened to fair play?

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY13112
Rating:9.6
Comments:
Judge Burke is an outstanding jurist who conducts his court in an extremely fair and respectful manner to all involved. I represented a non-citizen Spanish speaking immigrant who was wrongfully accused of two burglaries by an overzealous and unethical prosecutor who forced this horrible case to go to trial in the hopes of winning a wrongful conviction by knowingly misrepresenting facts to the jury. When we were sent out to Judge Burke’s part, I was initially worried because he was a former Manhattan ADA and I thought he may have a pro-prosecution bias and I had significant issues with the ADA assigned to my case. We were granted a Franks hearing because of multiple false facts contained in the search warrant. Judge Burke allowed me wide latitude in my questioning of this detective which revealed that despite his having the correct facts within his case folder the search warrant affidavit was drafted by the unethical ADA who presented it to the detective for his signature containing numerous false facts. This was a young officer and newly promoted detective, who was clearly taken advantage of by an unethical prosecutor, and compelled to sign a search warrant affidavit. While Judge Burke did not find that the numerous misstated facts would have negated the other facts in support of probable cause for the search warrant, he was beginning to see our defense to these charges and my ethical concerns with the ADA.

Throughout the trial, Judge Burke was respectful to both sides but importantly allowed me latitude in exposing some of the unethical conduct of this ADA, including compelling a prosecution witness to turn over an email that we learned for the first time at trial, he sent to coworkers about the alleged burglaries. This email directly contradicted factual statements made by the prosecutor in his opening statement and I believe the prosecutor had this email all along.

Some judges knowingly and unknowingly put their thumb on the scale during a trial in the way they speak to the attorneys, by their interference in the questioning of witnesses, in the way they rule on our objections and how they view both sides. Thankfully, Judge Burke maintained his impartiality especially in refereeing the sometimes very heated arguments between me and the prosecutor which continued right through closing arguments where I reread portions of the prosecution’s opening statement and told them that they were lied to. Thankfully, and only because Judge Burke maintained his impartiality throughout the trial, the jury found our client not guilty of all charges.

If I had to offer one criticism of Judge Burke it would be a similar criticism that I have with many judges who were institutional lawyers (Court attorneys, ADAs, Legal Aid, etc.) and did not come from running their own private practice. These institutional lawyers worked at a job where they just had to focus on being great lawyers and did not have to worry at all about running a business. Therefore, my criticism is that they are less flexible and at times completely unforgiving with scheduling. Conversely, I find that Judges who come from private practice are more respectful of our time and are more flexible with scheduling. Aside from that, Judge Burke was everything we hoped for in a trial judge.

Other

Comment #: NY11825
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Burke is better suited to work as a judge appointed by a third-world military dictator than working to serve the people of New York State. We pay Judge Berke’s salary, not the NYPD. New Yorkers will not blindly check names for judicial office on the 2022 ballot.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY11824
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Burke overruled habeas corpus for Black Lives Matter protestors, aiding and abetting the NYPD's apparent attempt to increase the risk that protestors will Covid-19 while in custody. This is a huge failure of civil and constitutional rights as well as public health interests. Vote him out at the next opportunity.

Prosecutor

Comment #: NY7947
Rating:1.0
Comments:
male version of judge judy

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY81
Rating:2.8
Comments:
He is very personable off the bench but enjoys bullying prosecutors and defense attorneys. It is apparent that he hates defendants and he has no problem abusing his powers just to hurt a person. I have seen him give only one fair trial and I suspect that it was because it was a high-profile case and he was afraid of political repurcussions. Having him on the bench is akin to doing away completely with the judicial branch of government. A man is accused and therefore guilty.