Judicial candidate Jennifer Loflin's interview transcript

The Inland Empire has only one judicial race in the upcoming June 2 election. Three candidates are vying for election to a single seat in Riverside County.

Loflin runs her own criminal defense firm. She has 19 years of experience in the criminal justice system. She was a San Bernardino prosecutor from 2007 to 2008, handling juvenile trial cases. From 2009 to 2011, she directed the Riverside County Bar Association’s Legal Aid program, which provided free legal assistance to low income community members. She was a Riverside County public defender from 2011 until 2017, and then a Riverside prosecutor from 2017 until 2018. In both offices, she specialized in felony domestic violence, general felonies, and misdemeanor cases. She handled employment law for first responders at Castillo Harper from April 2018 until August 2019. Since October 2023, Loflin has volunteered to oversee Riverside courtrooms as a temporary judge, filling in for judges that are out of the office. She is a mother of three.

Additional reporting on the election can be found at the election guide. The transcript of the interview with Andrea Garcia can be found here, and with Michelle Paradise here. These conversations are lightly edited.

Q: I was on your website and I saw that you inspired to become a lawyer at the age of six. Can you tell that story?

Loflin : Oh, I love this story. So when I was young, my maternal grandfather lived in Huntington Beach, and so we would go there often. I love to watch the old shows with him. So I was watching my very first episode ever of Perry Mason and the old black and white, with Raymond Burr.

As I was watching it, I asked my grandfather, 'Grandpa, what is that? What is that man doing?' Because I didn't have any understanding at that age of what a lawyer even was.

He said, 'Well, he's a lawyer.'

I said, 'Well, what is a lawyer?'

He said, 'There's many different kinds of lawyers, but Perry Mason, he seeks the truth.'

I said, 'I want to do that.'

He said, 'You could can anything that you put your mind to.' So I did.

Q: So you were fighting to be an attorney since the age of six. To achieve that end, what did you study at UCR?

Loflin: At UCR, crime scene investigation. I got a certificate. That was an amazing program.

Q: When you were there, what are some of the biggest lessons you learned about the criminal justice system from the professors?

Loflin: Let me give you some context. I didn't put down that I used to work for Redlands Police Department as a crime scene investigator earlier, before I became a lawyer and was sworn in. I needed to learn those skills that CSI needs for field work. I would be on call, I would process the scene. What I learned was, at first, the very basics of how to preserve a crime scene, what to do in terms of crime scene log to ensure that the officers are not contaminating the crime scene. It was fun to know that I got to tell the officers, 'get out of my scene.' So then, it improved to photography with the tripod and the long exposure to try to get night photos. So we would go out on night photo shoots and stuff of that nature. We had a mock crime scene ,that was fun, and what we had to do was identify and placard, just like I would on a regular scene, pieces of evidence and what I thought was evidence and what was not and I learned a lot from actually doing hands on. There's no way I would have been able to learn by somebody just talking to me about what to do, to actually physically do it was so much fun.

And then, of course, my very first scene I get called out on when I'm on call is a stabbing at a party, and the scene is two blocks long because the person ran. So I was a little intimidated, but the sergeant came up to me and goes, 'this is your scene, right?'

I said, 'Absolutely, it is.'

I just started doing what they taught me to do in school. And how do you rope off a crime scene that long? Well, so what you do is you close the streets. So they had units blocking the side streets. Luckily, it was on a residential area. It wasn't a main thoroughfare, and so units block off the street so nobody can go in or out. And they had officers and other community service officers there standing by, so residents didn't come out into the scene. Then what happens is, we tape off different areas. There were trees in the middle, so we were able to tape off like a grid of things, so that I wouldn't lose track of where and how far, because sometimes there was a blood spot right here, but then there is, like, a sock over there. I have no idea what's evidence and what's not, but my job is to collect everything, and that way I'm doing making sure that I preserve any potential piece of evidence.

So I overdid it a lot, but I'd rather overdo it than not do a thorough enough job.

Q: How long were you at the police department?

Loflin: Oh, gosh, two years, I think. I was angry at the bar exam, like, I have no shame, like I took it four times to pass, and I was determined I was not going to give up. So this is during an 'I'm not in the mood to take it again' phase. So what I did was I applied for community service officer. I then was asked to be the assistant crime scene investigator that would be on call. So community service officer and CSI are the same thing in Redlands. What that means is, on shift, I would work a patrol shift and I would take non suspect contact reports, so I learned how to write police reports before I even became an attorney. Then I would report to the sergeant and had a shift with all the other men and women who were sworn.

Then, at that time, James Bueermann was the chief, and he wanted educated police officers. And so what happened was he found out I had a (Juris Doctorate), and he said, 'Well, why? Why won't you consider being sworn?'

And I said, 'Well, I didn't think that was an option.'

He said, 'I absolutely think it's an option, and I want you to go to the academy.'

So, I was not in shape at all. I said, 'Sure, I could do that.'

So I started working out. I actually went to the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Academy. I think I was class 163, and they were not kidding about the physical activity. And so I got, I think I was top of my class in grades, but I was not good at running, like, I'm very short. These little legs are not made for running in any way, shape or form. And so what happened was I passed the obstacle course. I got over this five foot wood wall, but running, I tore my hip flexors on both sides all the way down to the knee, and so they would not allow me to continue. So I did 10 weeks before that happened. Then I went to dispatch, learn how to be a dispatcher, and then when I passed the bar, I applied everywhere."

Q: After that, you joined the Public Defender's Office. Tell me about you first couple of months there.

Loflin: Oh no, after that was juvenile District Attorney. I worked for Redlands for two years. So maybe it was, I guess, 2004 through 2006. I remember I took the bar exam while I was a dispatcher. I studied and took it 6th of November.

Q: So, juvenile at the DA's Office in San Bernardino County. Tell me about that, the onboarding, what was that like?

Loflin : I loved it. I still have a photo of me being sworn in with Mike Ramos and with, actually, a couple of colleagues that I still keep in touch with. I thought it was a very intimidating process for me, and it's a huge responsibility, right? Because juvenile is very different than adult court.

The goal in juvenile court is rehabilitation. It's not about punishment and keeping the community safe like adult court. So I started out with a frame of mind that my very first law job was about helping these people, these kids, be better, and I thought that the onboarding process for that was as any other process, figure it out, here's your caseload. Figure it out, ask your colleagues for help.

Asking for help became like critical in any job that I was doing, because you don't get a lot of training. What was really cool about juvenile was, again, besides helping the children and kids, teenagers, mostly, having that goal in mind, I got taught a lesson really early by an older, wiser attorney: I thought I needed to be this rigid person, and—Bob Alvarenga, is his name, I love him—and he said, 'Listen, kid, you need to calm down. This is juvenile, and this is how that works. And let's just take a breath and let me help you.'

At first I was super embarrassed, but then I was like, 'Okay, can you please help me? Because I don't understand what's going on.'

So I learned, and I got to learn that balance between teenagers not willing to participate in any kind of rehabilitation, and not and not able to, and the ones that could. So I learned my first skill that was necessary for the rest of my criminal career, which is do not ever look at a person as their charge only. It's different.

A kid could steal from a shop and do a robbery, and another kid could steal from a shop and do a robbery, and the reason they did it can be completely different, and then the mechanisms that they use can be completely different, and trying to figure out the causes and conditions of why and addressing, learning how to assess a case on an individual basis was, to me, the most important skill.

I got to also do adjudications, that's what they call them. I did over 90 of those.

Q: What is an adjudication?

Loflin: An adjudication is a juvenile court version of a jury trial. Juveniles do not have the right to a jury trial. They have what are called adjudications, which is a bench trial. And a lot of those things went to trial, including very serious crimes, gang crimes, assault with a deadly weapon, a lot of sex cases. Unfortunately, I somehow ended up with a lot of that caseload, and so I was tasked with doing quite a few of those. Is very heartbreaking to see the amount of sex crimes are going on with with teenagers at that age. But you know, I had to set my personal beliefs and emotion aside because I have a job, and I can do it to the best of my ability, regardless of whether or not I like the charge or don't like the charge. So I was able to get kind of an advanced knowledge on the code sections and the evidence that are needed at a trial, and a little on a little stage before I was in front of the jury. So I think that that was really a great help.

Q: And are you able to talk about your biggest success story from your time in that unit?

Loflin: So there was a particular child who was the one of the youngest juveniles I had seen in the system. He was 12, and he was charged with some very serious felonies, to include multiple sex crimes and also assaults. And this is where I saw my very first mentally ill, like truly mentally ill little human being. When I observed him in court, it was very apparent that a lot of things that happened to this child, and he had some serious mental health issues that needed assistance. This is one of the first of the serious cases I had where I was not looking to, you know, 'let's just do the trial and be done, and he can go to Youth Authority.' Youth Authority is what it was called then, California Youth Authority. And it was not a nice place. It was horrible conditions, understaffed, too many kids, you know, it was not good. So I would try to avoid that kind of a sentence as often as I could, but with him, it was really hard.

So what I was able to do was work with the defense attorney and get to a place with the judge, who was Marsha Slough. She was my very first judge in J2, and work collaboratively to try a series of other alternatives to try to help him address his mental health. I say it's a success story because it's not that he became well and he walked out of the juvenile system entirely. It's a success story because there were open minded people at every corner who were examining, 'let's see what we can do to help this child,' who had been himself sexually abused, who had been tortured by his biological parents, and who very much was a shattered little kid.

So to actually have these success stories for me is knowing that I have done all these other things to try to help to where I then feel like, if there's nothing else we can do, then the outcome is what the outcome is.

Why is that a success? Because winning a trial is not success. That does not define success. If we want to reduce crime, we need to address what's underneath all of that. And so that was the very first case where I did not make a knee jerk judgment because I'm new. I'm not used to seeing these things, I'm not used to reading them. I did not make a knee jerk call and I tried to help this child, rather than just take it to an adjudication and make sure that the child was convicted, because I was afraid of the material. So I overcame that fear in the sense that I was able to see him as a person and a human damaged, rather than someone that's just to throw away.

Q: That case must have been ongoing for months.

Loflin: Yes, multiple years, in and out of juvenile court, yes. It was the first case that really touched my heart and and gave me what I use now today, which is, I don't believe any human should be discarded, and nobody is worthless. Everybody has a gift. Doesn't matter if they're on the surface, they're like this horrible person. I believe everyone has a gift and a purpose of what they're supposed to be doing, and when that person's gone, that gift is gone from the earth forever, and the earth is less because of it.

Q: So following that, you joined the Riverside Bar Association, Legal Aid Clinic. How did that happen? How did you land that job?

Loflin: So, I was looking for a a job. I was a stay at home mom for many years, and I got to a position where I had a very difficult last pregnancy, where I could then actually go back to work in a full time capacity. I was on bed rest with my last son, and had a blood clot, and gave myself injections three times a day, and so I was protecting that, of course, and I had a healthy baby boy, but I needed now a full time job. So what I did was I applied because I was open minded to a variety of other ideas. So I applied kind of randomly to whatever was available, and the Bar Association sounded like very interesting job, and I applied to the Bar Association.

Charlene Nelson was the outgoing program director, and she is the one along with board members who interviewed me at that time. And I had to admit like, 'No, I've never written a grant, but I can learn. No, I've never done, you know, Legal Aid compliance with the State Bar, (Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Accounts) grants and with there was another service provider, ICLs grants. So I'd never done either of those things. I had no experience in running a legal aid at all, but I did say, 'I'm a quick learner, and I will do my very best. And Charlene, if I need you, you're right across the hallway.'

They've gone through a couple of other directors that didn't really work out, they weren't a great fit. I was hired on, and I was excited, because I don't like to be bored.

You stop learning, you know, what's the point? So, steep learning curve. Learn how to write grants, learn how the flow worked. I had to just really observe everything and take it all in, and then I once I had a basic understanding, it was literally the most rewarding thing I've ever done in terms of my career, because all day long, my goal was to help other people who could not afford help. I've never liked the fact that if you don't have money, 'Sorry for you. Too bad, so sad, you don't get all these resources that are available to others in any area of law.' You know, lawyers don't all work for free, I get it. We're all professionals, so I love the idea of helping people and learning something.

Q: You were there for two years in that time frame. Do you have a rough estimate of how many people you helped?

Loflin: Hundreds and hundreds, I believe, because that's when I wrote new grants for the bankruptcy clinic, which is my—I had a questionnaire the other day that asked, 'What's your greatest legal accomplishment?'

It's from this job and the bankruptcy clinic, I was approached by Judge Virginia Phillips in the federal court. The Central District Court asked me if I would be interested in writing grants for a bankruptcy clinic in their courthouse. I said, Sure. Never practiced bankruptcy. Never done that at all, but anything that is developed to help the public, I was okay with that. I was terrified. She arranged the space. She showed me the grants to write. I wrote them, and I had to go downtown to this, like, Star Chamber of bankruptcy judges. There was, like, literally, the most intimidating interview I've ever had, at that point, and pitch to them my grant, you know, because they had one model clinic in LA and that was it.

I got the grant. It opened. I had to make myself competent on Chapter Seven bankruptcy. I'd never done that, so I had to get some training and take some classes. After that was done, I had to be able to train staff and coordinate all of the training for them, work hours and so forth. I did payroll, all these things, but the bankruptcy clinic is still there, and it's expanded in space, and it's now four times a week instead of one. So that is, you know, another, 'Let's give somebody who may not have an opportunity a better chance at understanding even what is going on in a Chapter Seven bankruptcy.'

Q: That's incredible, to have had that program started by you, then to see that grow over the years, it's got to feel really good. What were some of the other clinics that you either led or were involved in through the legal aid program?

Loflin : Okay, so what existed there when I came on board, was a family law clinic. That was the largest one, and there were certain family law matters that we would assist with. Obviously, it's all document preparation. Legal Aid did not have attorneys that go with you to court. So we also had a probate clinic for conservatorships and guardianship. So I had to run that. Then we had a limited civil clinic where there are certain civil matters, where lawyers would come in and volunteer their time, because I depended on volunteers. So it was up to me to kind of rally people to come in. And luckily for me, Charlene had already had some volunteers in place. So I learned I had to learn somewhat of each area that was already there, civil probate, family, oh, and unlawful detainers. So I had to learn landlord tenant a little bit, and then I developed and wrote an additional program, an expungement clinic that operated in two counties, through Riverside County Superior Court and San Bernardino Superior Court, offering a free expungement clinic, so I had to write the grants for that and coordinate that with two court systems.

Q: So, it seems like, just to the legal aid program and your past experience at this point, you've touched on most areas of law.

Loflin: Yes, yes.

Q: Tell me a little bit about joining the (Riverside) public defender's office.

Loflin: My husband and I were going through a separation and divorce at that time, so I needed to earn more income to be a single mother based on the change of those circumstances. So, you know, legal aids, by their nature, don't have a lot of money. I loved what I was doing, but I also needed to be able to support myself, and so the public defender was was hiring, and I applied. Gary Windom was the public, the head public defender at the time. The pay was, I think about 25% or 20% at least, more than what I was earning. So the initial attraction was, I love criminal law. I want to get to criminal law. That was the number one thing. And also, though I needed to earn more money to support my family.

Q: You still wanted to be Perry Mason.

Loflin: I did. I still do.

Q: Then, in that department, you specialized in felony domestic violence, general felonies and misdemeanor cases, right?

Loflin: Yes. So, I started in misdemeanor, Department 22 in Hall of Justice. That's where we all start in one of those. Then my first felony rotation was drug court, the old Prop 36 with Judge (David) Gunn. Prop 36 existed before, and now it's back, the drug treatment programs, and so there was just an entire courtroom dedicated only to drug court at that time. From that point, I went to domestic violence, and I became part of the training for law clerks.

Q: Can you explain to those who don't know, what is drug court?

Loflin: Oh, so, okay, so the old drug court system was Proposition 36 when it was in place, prior to it being, you know, rescinded and then brought back. If you have priors, a certain number of priors, it becomes a felony, and it was state prison petty theft with a prior also no longer a misdemeanor. It's now a felony, and you're eligible for prison. So this was a particular situation where the courtroom was all dedicated to all drug cases from different parts of the county, there were centralized courts that handled that. And the reason was, the amount of drug crimes was huge, and a lot of sales cases marijuana grows were very large back then. As you know, the heavy cases in fact, transportation of of drugs on the highway. Those kinds of cases all went to that one department.

Q: Did you have more to say on the specialization before I cut you off and had you do that explanation?

Loflin: What, did you cut me off?

Q: When I asked about the explanation of drug court, I wasn't sure if you had more to say.

Loflin: Oh, do you want me to go through my assignments? I could do that. Let's do that.

So I had a misdemeanor assignment, then I went to drug court that we were just talking about. Then after that, I rotated to domestic violence, and that's when I began to train law clerks. During that time, domestic violence is an area that I really earned my stripes by being a defense attorney first in that courtroom, and the reason why is because a vast majority of the clients are male, and my personal experience, the vast majority of those clients do not have any respect for women whatsoever. I learned this by personal experience, and this is where I learned how to have a thick skin and also how to gear my approach to talk to that kind of a client in a way where I was best able to help them understand because I had no experience. So I had to learn and take my beatings for a little bit before I was able to feel confident in that assignment. After that, I went to general felonies, Judge Becky Dugan and Judge (Richard) Fields, before he hit the appeals court, I worked in their vertical departments, and I did my very first preliminary hearing in front of Judge Fields. I'll never forget it. It was great.

Q: What happened?

Loflin: So I don't even remember the like, what the crime was, but what I do remember is the DA sat down during preliminary hearing, and I found that to be strange, because I thought you're supposed to stand up,.

Q: And, a preliminary hearing, for those who don't know?

Loflin: Preliminary hearing is a probable cause hearing. a felony has two parts. The beginning is you're arraigned on the charges, which we always recommend not guilty, and you set two court dates, a settlement conference court date, and then the preliminary hearing, that is a probable cause hearing in front of a judge. To decide if there's enough evidence to have a trial. So the standard proof is very low. It's the same needed to arrest somebody: probable cause. So ,preliminary hearings are the most common type of hearing. I've probably done thousands of those by now, a lot.

So this is my first one, and I'm completely sweating everywhere. I'm so nervous. I want to make sure I'm doing a great job. I didn't see the DA stand up, and I thought that was strange, but I felt the need to stand up, so I stood up doing my questioning. You know, I don't even remember the result. Most of the time it's held to answer, because, again, the standard is so low, so I assume it would be held to answer.

But why I remember this is because I asked Judge Fields, 'This is my first preliminary hearing. Can you please give me any feedback on what you saw that I could improve what you liked about what I was doing?'

And he said, 'You know what, nobody has ever stood up in front of me to do preliminary hearings.'

At first I was horrified. I was like, "Oh no."

He goes, "Don't ever stop doing that."

And so I did not ever stop doing that. I stand up.

Q: It shows a level of respect?

Loflin: Yes, exactly. I'm really glad Judge Fields is the one who heard me.

Q: Because someone might have said, 'Go back and sit down?'

Loflin: Oh, yeah. Judges are all different. You know, they all have their different demeanors, their pet peeves, the things that they like and don't like. And Judge Fields was very—he's a very kind soul, and also very forthright. And so I was grateful to hear that. 'Oh, great. I did something that he really liked,' and I kept that.

Q: And you so you had another first event, which was before Marsha Slough. And then you have this one, which was before Justice Fields—Well, now Justice Fields—you seem to keep on having these first events with these really well respected jurors, who get elevated to the Court of Appeal. So that's, that's a great experience for you.

Loflin: Yeah, I think it was, yeah, I find it odd, those coincidences. But then again, I don't believe in coincidences either. You know, everything happens for a reason.

Q: So, in that capacity, as a public defender those six years, who was your biggest integration, either as a judge or as an attorney or as a mentor, and what is it that you learned from them?

Loflin: Okay, so I learned a ton from two women in the public defender's office who were responsible for—well, one of them was responsible for training me, Laura Box. Another one was Christine Juneau. Christine Juneau and Laura Box showed me, and by training, I mean, it was kind of like the hard way, so you figure it out. But they were there to be very blunt and direct and not coddle me. And I appreciate that a lot.

Back then, it was very intimidating. I would be afraid to ask questions, because I didn't want to feel or look stupid. You know, all the things that you do in a new job, and I am glad that there was no nonsense. 'You need to do this.' 'Go do that.' 'Fill this out.' 'Go do that.'

I learned right away: don't waste time on how you feel about somebody else's treatment of you. That's not important. You need to do the job. And so they trained me how to do the actual job, because law school does not train you how to fill out a continuation form. It doesn't train you on how to argue a release argument. I knew nothing about these forms, nothing.

So Laura gave me that foundation. And Christine Juneau was the best calendar vertical calendar department attorney I've ever seen. And what that is, is the general felony departments that existed back then. She was in (Department) 41 which was Judge (Becky) Dugan back then, and she would run the whole calendar, meaning violations of probation, anything that was added on. The public defender had the bulk of the cases. She wasn't the only public defender in there, but she was the anchor, and I watched her arraign like 20 people at one time in this fantastic manner. So I had really great examples of how to do your job in the most efficient way and be really excellent at what you're doing at.

Q: Can you share a success story in that capacity over those six years, or maybe share a case that you're most proud of?

Loflin : Okay, so I had a robbery case, and I don't remember his name, and I wouldn't say it anyway, but the gist of the robbery was: it was at a 7-Eleven and the person was Latino, and had tattoos in a video, and used a firearm to rob the clerk of the 7-Eleven. I don't even remember the money, but it wasn't a significant amount, and later, my client was arrested from his home on a different time because the clerk identified him, my client, as going into the store often, and associated that it was my client. It must have been mine. My client had frequented that store.

However, he was not the person, and the way I know that is, he had no tattoos at all in the areas where the suspect had tattoos. So to me, it seemed very logical: 'Well, here you go, prosecutor. Look, there's a picture here. There's no tattoos. You got the wrong guy.'

And that's when I learned it's not that easy. It's not that easy. Judy Beck was the DA on it, I remember that. And she was like, no nonsense. I was a little intimidated of her, to tell you the truth, but I was convinced I was right, and I had investigators go and follow up and find alibi witnesses for my client. He was at home. Understand, you know, prosecutors are completely different standpoint, I've been both.

So as a prosecutor, I'm thinking, that's great, but family is always going to say what they're going to say that, to support their family member, right? So how, how much weight does that carry? Not a whole lot.

But I was able to work up the case to where I had clear photographs, I had timelines of where my client was. I had blown up stills of the actual 7-Eleven video, and he's in custody, mind during this time, and I prepared a package where the end result was a dismissal of this case against my client.

He was released from custody. That was the first time I had ever gotten a dismissal, and it was so much work to get it. That's when I learned that, 'okay, the system's not really that easy, and this is the climate I'm working, and these are the things that are required, but it never felt so good—sorry—it never felt so good as I felt when I got to take picture with him outside the jail with his family.

If you ask what my greatest case memory is, it's that, yeah, because nothing can replace time, right? It's the only commodity we have that you can't—What do they say? You can't borrow, you can't pay for it. So, I don't even know the slogan, but time cannot—you can't get that back.

So what I found really upsetting to me in that role was that my client is incarcerated during this entire time frame where he never did anything. You know, but the prosecution, I also know from that standpoint, they don't control who is identifying my client, right? So they're reading the report and deciding, what do I file? Do I file a robbery on this case?

I would have filed the same thing, because you look at the report, and the video and the ID—it seems all solid. There's no violation of any kind of, you know, Fourth Amendment rights problems with the police procedure. I would have filed the same case, you know.

So I understand both perspectives of why the system is the way it is in that context.

Q: And after you left the public defender's office, you joined the district attorney's office, and that was in Riverside as well. Tell me a little bit about your time there.

Loflin: Yes, I went in—it was a lateral move. I went to Banning in a felony domestic violence trial capacity. That was my first rotation. Um, Quentin Baranski was my supervisor back then. I don't know if he's still supervising, but he worked out at the Southwest office, so Banning was kind of like this little island where I walked in and—I knew the defense side very well, and I knew juvenile but that's not the same as being an adult criminal prosecutor. So a whole new learning curve again, and thankfully, I had some trial experience at this time, and had done a lot of hearings, and was pretty good about assessing cases, and I was being very careful that my influence would be like, this is a prosecutor's mindset.

I am not here to look on how these people can be exonerated. Now my role is to protect the safety of the community and to make sure that punishment is imposed for those who are convicted and found guilty.

I still believe that, I believe that the community needs to be safe. I believe that prison is merited in quite a few cases, we need to protect the community. The difference with me is that's not all—I also believe that everybody should be looked at individually, and that resolution shouldn't take so long, you know, it's a flawed system, so I do the best that I can within it, just like we all do, but it was definitely difficult being working for the government in that capacity, because there are different rules on public defender and the prosecutor, the DAs office. They didn't make sense to me because I didn't understand the reason for them. So that was kind of the the part I did not care for was you need to do x trials in order to be qualified for this position.

Then on the defense side, you know, you never stipulate to these things ever. And I'm like, 'isn't there certain times you'd want to?' 'Nope, that's the rule, you don't do that ever.'

You don't ever declare a misdemeanor client incompetent. You don't do that. I didn't understand it at the time. Now I do, because I did competency court, but I just was confused by all of these rules and why they applied equally to every case, because my experience so far had been but they're all different, though they're all different people.

Q: And so, why wouldn't you declare incompetency?

Loflin: Well, I later learned that incompetency is on a misdemeanor case. So the way that competency—Penal Code Section 1368 is the one that I've used many times where I declare a doubt as to my clients competency to stand trial. A misdemeanor case has a maximum of one year county jail as punishment, commitment to a state hospital. The maximum is two years. So now I understand it. So there's a different procedure where you ask for a specific report to be done that is like a mini-1368, that assists the client, but doesn't keep them in a custodial setting.

Q: Earlier, you talked about something that I think people in the legal system talk about more than people in in other professions, which is the difference of roles, about how the prosecutor has a role, the judge has a role, the defender has a role. And ideally, everybody does the role to the best of their abilities, and then justice works out, because everybody's involved in this fact-finding experiment, and everybody's got the interest of the clients at heart. For the prosecutors, it's the victim, protecting the victim, protecting the community. For defense attorneys, it's protecting the constitutional rights and the civil rights of people, and also making sure that justice is properly done, because you don't want someone who didn't do a crime to go to go to jail. Going into the the role of a judge, as you are campaigning to do. How would you describe that role?

Loflin: So that role is the biggest responsibility of the three, that role as a judge is the force that stops either side from getting out of control by remaining neutral and following the law as it applies to the facts of these cases.

Because, obviously, prosecution, defense, we're on opposite sides. It's a myth that they think we all hate each other. No, I'm really good friends with a lot of DAs and vice versa, but the judge's role is the one that is the filter, the stopping point, really, with, 'Ok: is this fair? Is this a resolution that is based on the law or not? Is this a case where there is a political motivation or not?' and you are the referee.

My job as a judge is to understand that I am neutral and impartial. I don't have a role in being a DA anymore or being a defense lawyer anymore. My role is to make sure that everybody's following the rule. That's the simplest way to put it. I view my role as a judge is to be able to have people leave my courtroom feeling, even if they lose, even attorneys, not just defendants or victims, attorneys, court staff, I want my courtroom to be an environment where people want to go there, because at least they feel that I've listened to them, that I've allowed them to speak and be heard, that I am thoughtful and I take my time and ask for help rather than make gut rulings, and it's different for every assignment.

If I were a trial judge, yes, I can make gut rulings because I've done so many trials on evidence code, those have to be done right there. But if you're in, for example, probate or civil, you may have opportunities to stop and research. So you have to be willing to, when the pressure's on by the lawyers.

They want you to make it: 'You know you must determine this now.'

No, I don't, because I don't know the answer. And I would be the judge that says, 'I don't know, but I'm going to find out, because that's my job.'

If I need more time, and I have the opportunity to do that without prejudicing either side, I would take that time. Asking for help is key, and understanding that just because I have this robe on does not mean I'm any better than anybody in this room, period, at all, because I do relate to everybody on a different level.

I have been all of these people to one degree or another. I'm not saying that I've committed crimes. I'm not admitting to that. Maybe, years ago, I remember I stole Chiclets and my mom spanked me and made me turn the Chiclets back, in so I learned really early.

But these people all have life experiences that drive who they are and how they show up, and so my role is to make sure that I am fair, neutral. I give everyone an opportunity to argue their side. I give the victims a chance to feel heard and understood, and I also give the defendants a chance to be heard and understood, and I make rulings based on the facts that are presented to me, based on the law as applied to those facts, and I do not make them uniformly on this particular charge: 'Everybody's getting this.'

No, you know, judges have discretion in certain areas, like sentencing, there's mitigating factors and aggravating factors. So I would be that person that, even if the defense attorney loses an argument or the prosecutor loses an argument, they walk out like, 'well, at least she was fair and she took her time to research it and give it thought.'

Q: And is that based on Judge Martha Slough's courtroom?

Loflin : Yeah, she was the best first example of a judge I'd ever seen. She was so patient. I think it's important a judge is very patient. She was so genuine and authentically herself and humble. She was my very first role model of a judge, where I was astounded at how creative she could be, as well with, 'Well, have you considered this particular treatment center or course of action?"

It was one of the best experiences of my life, just soaking in how she was handling all these things, and I was amazed at how she was able to do that. Now I know how she was able to do that: a lot of hard work and dedication to what she was doing, her craft.

Yes, judges work really hard, at least, that's what I would do. It's just a priceless responsibility. It's huge. You have people's property, money at the low end, in your hands. You make decisions based on taking someone's children away from somebody. You know that's, that's a big, huge responsibility.

It's not, 'I have the power to do these things.'

It's a responsibility to these people. You are affecting everybody's lives, and at the top of the chain is people's freedom or right to live or die. If it's a capital case, those are not things that should ever be taken lightly, and there should be no amount of work, for me, there is no amount of work that I wouldn't do to make sure that I gave everybody the opportunity.

Q: What do you think about your experience distinguishes you from the other two candidates who are running for this position.

Loflin: Okay, well, the other two candidates are certainly very successful women in their fields. You know, I don't know Michelle Paradise personally, but I know her reputation. She's a very experienced prosecutor. I think I heard she was a 911 dispatcher as her very first career, and went to law school. I think that's admirable. I have never had a trial (against her), but I heard she's very fierce in court and very prepared and very intelligent.

On the other hand, Andrea Garcia, I got to meet Andrea. She is completely full of all of this knowledge of immigration that I don't know.

You know what differentiates me from those two women, are two main things.

One, the biggest one, is I have experience in a vast majority of areas of law relative to their experience.

I have respect for the police. I represented them in internal affairs cases. I would do what's called Skelly hearings, which is a part of the employment process. I did a full blown employment hearing for police officers, right?

I've been a prosecutor, and I respect law enforcement, and I believe that there are way more good cops than there are bad cops, and there's the bad apples that give everybody else a bad name, right?

But I also am the person who calls out truth to that power from the defense side, and the truth is, not all cops tell the truth, right? And I have the ability, because I've done both, to not only, you know, protect the community and make sure the victim is protected, and also, from the other side to call out those who do not play by the rules.

I am very vocal when they do not play by the rules, I can tell. And I've done many motions for police officers who, you know, are not truthful and who exaggerate and who, quite frankly, have done some pretty horrific things on duty, where I, in my role as a defense attorney, I absolutely call them out. I remember a particular Pitchess hearing—that's what it's called when you want to get access to a personnel file that got very heated and contested. I don't like confrontation. I'm like, 'Oh, hey, let's love, you know,' but confrontation is part of my job, and I gladly accept it.

So what differentiates me is I've been in a criminal courtroom on both sides, and actually on the bench in a misdemeanor department. That's really fun, by the way, I love doing that, and at the same time, I have learned so many other areas of law, including all of the collaborative courts civil commitments that I knew nothing about.

I learned I had to develop a new system for one kind of civil commitment that did not exist until, thankfully, I had a lot of help doing that from the San Bernardino Public Defender.

So, I have experience in all these areas of law, and I've sat as prosecutor, defense attorney, and am in the courtroom still basically every day. Now I'm managing, I think my caseload for calendar, which is general felonies through the preliminary hearing, is 188 cases. And I do complex trials for CDL, it's an indigent defense panel, out of criminal defense lawyers, is what it stands for. And I think I still have one homicide left. So I tried three different homicide trials, with, one was a retrial, because the first time and life cases, I in March. For most of March, I was in a life case in southwest in Johnnetta Anderson's court on a mayhem, aggravated mayhem case. So I'm doing all these things while campaigning, right? And I think the reason that I'm able to do that is because one of my strengths is I can learn a new area of law very quickly by doing many things, but the biggest one asking for help, and I have experience in prosecution, defense, being the judge, that's what differentiates me. I'm not the government. I work for the government, but and I respect the government, but I also pull the truth out of the government. So I think it's a great balance that differentiates me from either of the other well qualified candidates in their areas.

Q: And you brought up being a judge pro tem. A judge pro tem is somebody who is able to sit in and oversee court hearings similar to, well, exactly similar to the way that a judge does. And it's something that judges who can't make a hearing for whatever reason—they trust you and they believe in you enough to say, 'Yeah, I'm out, but I know that Mrs. Loflin can do a good job, right?' That's the process?

Loflin: Yes, well, I had to apply. You have to apply to be a judge pro tem and have a certain amount of experience. I think Judge Harmon was in charge of it at the time that I applied, and I was super excited when I was approved, and I was trying to figure out ways and means to do it. And this is where my I'm I'm not. I'm going to try not to cry, but I can't promise. So I started proteaming When my dad was very ill. So in June of 2023 i downsized a lot of the contracts I was working on because my dad his cancer had been diagnosed as he did not have longer to live. That was in 2021 but in 23 of June, it was like nothing left to do. So I downsized my practice. I wanted to be closer to dad, my husband and I, my last medieval name, married name is Kenya. My husband is here, and he's like the best. So we were getting married. Our wedding date was November the 12th. My dad passed away on November the 14th, and we were in our wedding when my dad was in what's known as comfort care, when his vitals dropped, and we literally had to rearrange everything gladly to get to the hospital because we thought maybe that was the time. So after dad passed away in November, it's the most heartbreaking thing I've ever had, and I've learned that when I help other people, I get out of my health, my own head, right. And so all I did was volunteer for all the holidays that season, Thanksgiving, everything I would do whatever I could, because it made me feel better to help out other judges and let them, you know, go and have these plans, because it kept my mind off of, you know, just how dev stated I was at that time. And it was the best experience, because I came home like my very first pro tem assignment was Department 21 which is right next door to the Department 22 where Jonathan Mendoza, who's now a judge, and I started together, and I learned that I really like what I'm doing there, and the court staff would ask for me specifically. And I I thought, this is Wow. Is this my life? You know, but it saved me, I believe, to protest, literally from an emotional and mental health standpoint for me at that time.

Q: So, did your decision to become a judge stem from the good work that you were doing, and you found, you know, you had this realization that this was something that you could continue doing full time after doing pro tem?

Loflin: no at that time, I had already put my application into the governor sorry, I knew a little bit. I applied in 2023, to April, and I had my Jenny this last October, which is, there's all of these layers. It'll take a long time to explain, but nevertheless, I had applied to the governor's office, and so I was trying to get experience to see if I liked it. What prompted me to run as a judge was a conversation with a judge who I had my last trial with, our judge pulling she pulled me into chambers at some point in Danny, when she was in department B, 101, and she said, Is there a reason that you're not applying to the bench? And I said, Wait, what? And she said, Is there a reason you're not applying like you're a woman of color? And I said, Girl, come on with me. I'm half Japanese, and my maiden name is Fujiwara, and she she makes, she made a joke, and then she said, Just go seriously again, like you would be amazing. I really think you should do it. And I said, Oh, so it's not like I had a lifelong dream to become a judge. I just hadn't thought about it until a colleague had put that into my head, that I would be good at that. So then I went to the truth telling judge, Judge Malloy, and who I respect a lot, because I knew if I was not like good and I had been in front of him in master calendar so much on these civil commitment cases, I got to know him. Don't ever be late. That's, you know, the thing to learn. But I went to him in chambers and asked him, please tell me, do you think I would make a good judge? And at that time, he's like, absolutely, you know, absolutely I would. And he's like, you know, you're always prepared. You're always this. You're, I mean, he's one of my references on my judicial application to the governor, a lot of the judges are and so I went to the truth tellers because I'm not just going to I don't make my decisions based on what other people taught me to do. That's kind of not my thing. And also I just hadn't thought about it. So I needed to think about it. So after I spoke to Emma Smith, who is another judge that I was working in her courtroom and spoke, of course, to my husband about it. I decided to apply, and I was, I was going through the motions of getting a mentor, but one had not been assigned to me yet, so judge Jackson was like the best in helping me with putting in my application and editing it for clarity so that I could apply. And I got very good feedback from her and others who looked at the application and I had, you know, we have to turn in 75 references. So it's a lot, it's a lot, it's a lot. So I didn't want to be a judge until I saw that there was a possibility that I need to, I could do that, and that it would expand my ability to help people, because I can help as many people in my little sphere as I can, but a judge has much more ability to help people and ensure equal access to justice for everybody who's in there, to protect those victims, to protect the community and on the other side, to protect the rights, the constitutional rights, as you mentioned, of The defendant, and to respect all and to listen to all and make thorough, thoughtful decisions, because it is a responsibility that's quite frankly humbling to me, like I'm amazed I'm even sitting here talking to you right now. I'm just so grateful to be in this position, because, you know, this is, what a fantastic opportunity, something that is an honor to even be considered. And so I'm just grateful for everything right now. And that's why I wanted to be a judge. Is what a wow. I could be that person. I think I would do a really good job.

Q: Well, that's a good note to end on.