Challenge to Suffolk judge could set troubling precedent

The effort by progressive activists to deny Suffolk state Supreme Court Justice Timothy P. Mazzei another two years on the bench is the latest front in a campaign to reduce prison terms in New York and punish judges perceived as tough sentencers.

The most experienced trial judges often preside over the most heinous crimes and difficult prosecutions. Mazzei, a former homicide prosecutor who has been on the bench since 2014, handled the case of Gilgo Beach serial killer Rex Heuermann, who pleaded guilty to murdering seven women and admitted killing an eighth. Is the decarceration movement so untethered that it believes a life without parole sentence for Heuermann is too harsh?

DISCRETION CRUCIAL

Judges must have the discretion to set sentences established in penal law without fear of political retribution at recertification or election time. Mazzei, 72, is seeking a second two-year extension from the Administrative Board of the Courts.

However, the Center for Community Alternatives, which says one of its aims is to “block the appointment of regressive judges who reinforce systemic injustices,” is formally challenging the recertification of Mazzei and three others. Its reasoning is that 14 sentences of the hundreds Mazzei issued before he turned 70 show that he does not “possess the legal ability and competence necessary for continued judicial service.” In 13 of those cases the appellate judges reduced the sentences, and in another case cited, the sentence was vacated and reassigned to another judge.

That argument overlooks how sentencing works in practice. Trial judges have heard the witnesses, reviewed the evidence and psychiatric reports, and seen victim families’ suffering. In plea cases like Heuermann’s, judges hear the defendant’s admission of guilt; in jury trials, they observe 12 jurors wrestling to come to a unanimous verdict. Sentences that some view as harsh frequently fall within statutory guidelines and remain subject to appellate review.

If New Yorkers want shorter prison sentences or to abolish prisons, the remedy is legislative change, and to vote for lawmakers and a governor who are receptive to their goals. Advocacy groups like the Center for Community Alternatives already have achieved significant reforms reducing the need for cash bail for many criminal charges, expanding the sealing of conviction records to give a second chance to those seeking jobs and housing, and reducing youth incarceration.

This campaign by social activists to reshape the judicial branch had an ugly start. In 2023 at the start of her first full term Gov. Kathy Hochul nominated Hector LaSalle, a Long Islander and former prosecutor who was the widely praised head of the Appellate Division, Second Department, to be the state’s chief judge. He would have been the first Latino to fill the role.

LEFT TORPEDOED LASALLE

He was an outstanding choice but a furious left who felt the state’s top court was too conservative wanted someone who would shift its ideological balance. Their tactics mischaracterized his record, successfully torpedoing his confirmation by a compliant State Senate.

There was little doubt about their goal: snaring the nomination for Associate Judge Rowan Wilson, perhaps best known for wanting to free to Happy the Elephant from the Bronx Zoo on a habeas corpus petition. Instead of choosing another mainstream nominee, Hochul buckled to the pressure and nominated Wilson as chief judge and administrative head of the entire state court system. Earlier this year, Wilson spoke at a CUNY School of Law forum in Queens on sentencing alternatives, made a plea for lawmakers to reform the penal code, and then asked the activists in the audience for “help” in opposing the election of judges who were vitriolic and imposed maximum sentences.

Wilson also urged support for the Second Look Act, a bill that would allow judges to review and change sentences below current mandatory minimum guidelines if an inmate has already served 10 years or one half of their minimum sentence. Republican lawmakers have filed a complaint with the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct claiming the chief judge’s advocacy violated ethical guidelines.

There are 49 judges statewide seeking certification to be decided by a panel headed by Wilson and the four appellate division chiefs. In the run-up to those decisions, there is a formal comment period. The Center for Community Alternatives appears to be the only group who made public their comments about the judges they oppose — four in all — which can only be seen as an attempt to make an example of them and intimidate other judges.

Mazzei’s widely scrutinized handling of high profile cases, including Gilgo, shows no evidence of mental or physical impairment that would disqualify him from service. Denying his recertification absent clear proof of incapacity would set a troubling precedent, and encourage partisan or ideological challenges to judicial decision-making.

Denying his request to serve two more years would dramatically undermine the independence of New York’s judiciary.