Judge Robert Draper Trails Challenger by Slight Margin

Thursday, June 4, 2026

Page 1

Judge Robert Draper Trails Challenger by Slight Margin

Other Targeted Judges, Connolly and Walgren, Easily Win; Lee, Forer, Marin, Dibble Prevail

By a MetNews Staff Writer

In doubt is whether embattled Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert S. Draper—who is facing almost certain ejectment from office by the Commission on Judicial Performance either as a penalty for misconduct or through a forced disability retirement—will have the satisfaction of fending off an election challenge by Deputy District Attorney Tal K. Valbuena.

Election results, as of mid-afternoon yesterday, were 51.51% for the challenger, 48.49% for Draper. The outcome might not be ascertainable for days or weeks; ballots postmarked by yesterday will be counted if received by the Office of Registrar-Recorder within a week of Tuesday’s election, and counting continues.

Although there has been a paucity of news coverage of proceedings against Draper, note has been taken of them on social media.

Valbuena had the endorsement of the Daily News and the other Southern California Newspaper Group publications—which include the Daily Breeze, the Long Beach Press Telegram and the Pasadena Star News. He was also backed by the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, but that factor did not prove meaningful in other races.

The results, as of yesterday afternoon, along with a reflection of the endorsements, appear here. There were no endorsements by the once influential Los Angeles Times which no longer carries editorials.

As of the end of the latest reporting period on May 16, Valbuena’s committee had spent $23,720.03 and Draper’s committee had paid out $72,660. The incumbent’s committee put most of its funds into slate mailers.

Prior to the COVID pandemic, they were largely effective because they were released right before the election and were apt to be taken by voters into the polls. Due to the prevalence now of voting by mail, which can take place over a period of about one month, slate mailers are of diminished usefulness to candidates.

Other Contests

Winners in the other six two-candidate races for Los Angeles Superior Court seats are evident.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Pat Connolly and David Walgren prevailed over their respective challengers. Their antagonists are Deputy District Attorney Paul A. Thompson, who targeted Connolly, and perennial candidate Dan Kapelovitz who mounted an anemic effort against Walgren, bagging a mere 20.25% of the votes as of yesterday afternoon.

Headed for victory are Deputy District Attorney Irene Lee over Deputy District Attorney Angie Christides; attorney/rabbi Ben Forer over lawyer Cheryl C. Turner; Gloria Marin over Zachary Smith; and Los Angeles Superior Court Commissioner Ryan Dibble over Administrative Law Judge Thanayi Lindsey.

In multi-candidate races, headed for November run-offs are Deputy District Attorney Maria Ghobadi and Deputy Public Defender Rhonda A. Haymon; Deputy Public Defender Justin Allen Clayton and Deputy County Counsel Anna Slotky Reitano; Deputy Public Defender Anthony (A.J.) Bayne and attorney David DeJute; and Deputy Public Defenders Donna Tryfman and David Ross.

DeJute’s Campaign

The only candidate who was not a Superior Court judge, a deputy district attorney or a deputy public defender who won or earned a place on the Nov. 3 ballot was DeJute, running as “Law Professor/Attorney.” He was outdistanced in balloting by Bayne and came in ahead of Los Angeles Deputy City Attorney Sharee Sanders Gordon.

Through April 18, DeJute’s committee spent $88,026.71. Gordon’s committee, through May 16, had expenditures of $22,506.28.

Three administrative law judges ran: Lindsey, Carlos Dammeier, and Troy W. Slaten. None won or made it into a run-off.

Assured of victory were Deputy Public Defender Binh Q. Dang, Glendale Chief Assistant City Attorney Ann M. Maurer, and Deputy District Attorneys Mariela Torres and Candice J. Henry, none of whom drew an opponent.

Hammock’s Analysis

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Randolph Hammock, who closely follows judicial races, said yesterday:

“[A]lthough Judge Draper appears to have been defeated, the simple fact remains that it is still extremely difficult to unseat a sitting LASC Judge. In the last 19 LASC judicial elections (1988-2026), Judge Draper will be only the fifth LASC judge to be defeated.

“Since unification in 2000, the average number of LASC judges up for election/reelection is approximately 160 per election cycle. This election was 202—an all-time record. Hence, the overall election retention rate for a LASC judge is approximately 99.875%. In further point of fact, there has been a historical average of two to three LASC judges who have actually been challenged per election.

“The last three LASC judges who have been defeated (James Pierce [2014]; Emily Spear [2024]; and Draper [2026]) have lost by razor thin margins (52%-48% or less). On the other hand, the LASC judges who won their respective election challenges all won in the primary by landslides, to wit, on average by 30-40%.”

Hammock went on to note “the sudden rise of the deputy public defenders,” pointing out:

“Since unification in 2000, a deputy public defender had not won a LASC election until recently in 2022. Since then, several deputy public defenders have won. In this recent election, five deputy public defenders appear to be heading to the November runoff—three of whom received the most votes in their race. Moreover, a deputy public defender has already won an open seat without a challenge (Dang). In short, in the past many years LASC elections were dominated by the deputy district attorneys. This recent trend clearly demonstrates that the deputy public defenders are rapidly closing that historical gap.”

He added: “Whether you agree or not with judicial elections and/or the specific results thereof, this is simply democracy at work. I am just sharing the facts. Nothing more; nothing less.”

Forer’s Victory

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Kim Repecka—who, in 2022, gained election as a deputy public defender—said late Tuesday:

“While election night is often too soon to comment, congratulations certainly seem to be in order for Ben Forer.

“Hopefully he has his papers in so he can be sworn in before January.”

Forer said:

“I am grateful for the support I’ve received in this race, that included meaningful bipartisan, across-the-aisle backing. This was reflective of the approach I’ve taken throughout my career as a prosecutor and educator.

“I am honored by the voters’ confidence and look forward to the new challenges and opportunities ahead. I am especially hopeful that bringing my background in cybercrime and digital evidence to the bench will have a positive impact in an increasingly technology-driven legal landscape.”

Cooley’s Observations

Former Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley commented:

“Generally speaking the voters got it right re judicial candidates. The Ghobadi v Haymon race runoff in November is very important because Maria Ghobadi is solid and predictably will be a fine judge. Her opponent is not solid and predictably would not. The entire justice system should unite behind Maria Ghobadi.”

Cooley remarked:

“I was particularly pleased with Irene Lee’s landslide victory. She ran a positive campaign and her hard work and the esteem in which she is held by many showed.”

Turning to the race for Los Angeles city attorney—in which voters rejected the reelection bid of Hydee Feldstein Soto, with civil rights lawyer Marissa Roy heading into a run-off with Deputy District Attorney John McKinney—the former district attorney said:

“John McKinney would make an excellent Los Angeles city attorney.”

“He is a leader. His opponent seems to be a ‘Soros type’ ideologue. We had enough of that with the horrible experience with Gascón. I doubt if she will withstand the scrutiny that a general election contest will bring.”

(George Soros is a billionaire who finances campaigns of liberal candidates, including George Gascón in his successful 2020 race for district attorney.)

Litz’s Victories

Crystal Litz, of LP Campaigns, has taken over the judicial elections campaign function of Cerrell Associates, once predominant in the field. She reflected:

“The elections went very well for our clients.

“In the no-surprise category, Judge David Walgren was overwhelmingly re-elected. When you’re an incumbent judge rated Exceptionally Well Qualified, that’s generally how it’s supposed to go. Likewise, nobody who was paying attention was surprised to see Ryan Dibble win Seat 181. He was an exceptional candidate and is going to be an outstanding judge.

“I feel comfortable saying Irene Lee will be elected. Judge Pat Connolly also appears headed to victory, and Gloria Marin looks poised for a very strong finish as well.”

Tryfman/Ross Race

Zeroing in on the contest in which Tryfman and Ross sparred, Litz said:

“The result that probably interests me most is Seat 131. Donna Tryfman was subjected to some of the most dishonest and unprofessional campaigning I have seen in a judicial race. Several candidates chose to run coordinated campaigns built around attacks, distortions, and political theatrics that simply do not belong in contests for the bench.

“I’ve been involved in judicial elections for a long time. These races are usually competitive, but they are also guided by rules, traditions, and professional norms that exist for a reason. This cycle, a handful of candidates were encouraged to ignore those norms by consultants and advisers who either did not understand the Canons governing judicial elections or simply chose not to care. The voters noticed.”

The consultant added:

“Across Los Angeles County, candidates who focused on qualifications, temperament, experience, and judicial service performed well. Candidates who tried to turn these races into ideological fights generally did not. David DeJute will advance in 87, and deservedly so.

“Unfortunately, Chellei Jimenez (Seat 64) will not. She is an outstanding lawyer, a terrific person, and someone who has a great deal to offer the bench. We’ll see her again.

“Overall, it was a very good night for our firm, our clients, and for the judiciary itself.”

Jimenez’s Perspective

Jimenez had this to say:

“I would like to thank everyone who supported my campaign for Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge, Office 65. While the outcome was not what we had hoped for, I am deeply grateful for the overwhelming encouragement, endorsements, volunteer efforts, and trust placed in me throughout this journey.

“Running for judicial office has been one of the greatest honors of my professional life and truly a positive experience. Over the course of this campaign, I had the privilege of meeting residents from across Los Angeles County and engaging in meaningful conversations about fairness, access to justice, and the importance of public trust in our courts.

“Although I will not be taking the bench through this election, my commitment to serving our community remains unchanged. I will continue my work advocating for families, children, and access to justice, while remaining dedicated to professionalism, integrity, and public service.

“I extend my sincere congratulations to my opponents as they continue on to the general election.

“To my husband, daughters, family, supporters, volunteers, and everyone who stood beside me, thank you!... I remain hopeful about the future and the many ways we can continue to make a positive difference in our community.”