Are you running for judicial office this year? October 20th is the last day to guarantee your bio info gets added to Judgepedia! Please use our biographical information submission form to enhance your profile page.


Evelio M. Grillo

From Judgepedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Evelio M. Grillo
Placeholder image.png
Do you have a photo that could go here? Submit it for this profile by emailing us!
Current Court Information:
Superior Court of Alameda County, California
Title:   Judge
Position:   Office 14
Salary:  $181,292
Service:
Appointed by:   Gov. Gray Davis
Active:   2003-2019
Preceded by:   D. Ronald Hyde
Past post:   Partner, Grillo and Stevens
Personal History
Law School:   Harvard University
Candidate 2012:
Candidate for:  Alameda County Superior Court
State:  California

Evelio M. Grillo is a judge for the Superior Court of Alameda County in California. He was appointed by former governor Gray Davis in November 2003 to succeed D. Ronald Hyde. Grillo won re-election in 2012, after running unopposed, and his current term will expire in 2019.[1][2]

Education

Grillo received a J.D. from Harvard University.[2]

Career

Prior to becoming a judge for the Superior Court of Alameda County, Grillo was a partner at the firm of Grillo and Stevens.[2]

Elections

2012

Grillo ran for re-election to the Superior Court in 2012. As an unopposed incumbent, his name did not appear on the ballot. After the primary election, Grillo was automatically re-elected.[3]

See also: California judicial elections, 2012

Notable cases

Jahi McMath declared brain-dead


When 13-year-old Jahi McMath went in for tonsil surgery, no one knew that it would be her demise. Due to complications at the Children's Hospital & Research Center in Oakland, the girl was declared brain dead on December 19, 2013--three days after her surgery began.

After the surgery, the girl was moved to intensive care due to excessive bleeding, where she went into cardiac arrest. A CT scan later revealed that her most of her brain had swollen.

Her family wanted to keep McMath on life support, but the hospital said that wasn't an option. Her death had already been reported to the coroner. The family then sent a cease-and-desist letter to the hospital to try to stop them from taking the girl off life support.[4] The case went to the Alameda County Superior Court, where Grillo found that the girl was indeed brain dead. However, the judge said both parties should hold off on any decisions until December 30.[5] The hospital was authorized to take McMath off of life support at 5 p.m. on that day. However, Grillo decided at the last minute to postpone that deadline until January 7. The family and their attorney continued their attempts to keep the girl on life support through appeal.[6]

On January 3, 2014, pursuant to an agreement made in Alameda County Superior Court, McMath's mother was allowed to have her daughter removed from Oakland Children's Hospital. The agreement made McMath's mother responsible for her care. McMath was transported from the hospital by ambulance to an undisclosed location.[7] According to an article in the Contra Costa Times on February 19, her mother released a statement via Twitter saying her daughter's condition was "much better" but provided no further details.[8] McMath was still being kept alive on a ventilator as of March 13, 2014.[9]

Release of pepper spray report


In early March 2012, Grillo delayed release of a report compiled by the University of California. The report detailed the actions of campus police during the Occupy protests at the university on November 18, 2011. In a video made public, a security officer doused seated protesters in the face with pepper spray. Grillo permitted a delay in the release of the report after the police union said the report could endanger the officers.[10] At the end of March, Grillo ruled the report should be released, saying, "The court is not persuaded that either the Legislature or the California Supreme Court intended [the law protecting officer information] to apply whenever public entities investigated law enforcement policies, procedures or actions."[11] The judge did agree with the police union that the names of two officers involved not be released to the public. The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California intended to press for the release of the full report.[11]

See also

External links

References

CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme CourtCalifornia Courts of AppealCalifornia Superior CourtsUnited States District Court for the Central District of CaliforniaUnited States District Court for the Eastern District of CaliforniaUnited States District Court for the Northern District of CaliforniaUnited States District Court for the Southern District of CaliforniaUnited States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitCalifornia countiesCalifornia judicial newsCalifornia judicial electionsJudicial selection in CaliforniaCaliforniaTemplatewithoutBankruptcy.jpg