Amy Martin (Texas)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
This page was current at the end of the official's last term in office covered by Ballotpedia. Please contact us with any updates.
Amy Martin
Image of Amy Martin
Prior offices
Texas 263rd District Court

Elections and appointments
Last election

March 1, 2022

Education

Bachelor's

Wesleyan University, 1999

Law

University of Texas School of Law, 2003

Personal
Birthplace
Charleston, S.C.
Profession
Judge
Contact

Amy Martin (Democratic Party) was a judge of the Texas 263rd District Court. She assumed office on January 1, 2019. She left office on December 31, 2022.

Martin (Democratic Party) ran for re-election for judge of the Texas 263rd District Court. She lost in the Democratic primary on March 1, 2022.

Martin completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2022. Click here to read the survey answers.

Biography

Amy Martin was born in Charleston, South Carolina. She earned a bachelor's degree from Wesleyan University in 1999. She earned a law degree from the University of Texas School of Law in 2003. Her career experience includes working as a judge since 2019. Martin has also worked as an attorney in private practice. She is affiliated with Texas State Bar College, Wesleyan University Lawyers Association, Gerry Spence Trial Lawyers College, Houston Bar Association, Texas Center for the Judiciary, Harris County Democratic Party, Houston Black American Democrats, Houston LGBTQ+ Political Caucus, Southwest Democrats, Mexican American Bar Association of Houston, Spring Branch Democrats, and Run Sister Run.[1]

Elections

2022

See also: Municipal elections in Harris County, Texas (2022)

General election

General election for Texas 263rd District Court

Melissa Morris defeated Amber Cox in the general election for Texas 263rd District Court on November 8, 2022.

Candidate
%
Votes
Image of Melissa Morris
Melissa Morris (D) Candidate Connection
 
51.5
 
547,074
Amber Cox (R)
 
48.5
 
514,477

Total votes: 1,061,551
Candidate Connection = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.

Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Democratic primary election

Democratic primary for Texas 263rd District Court

Melissa Morris defeated incumbent Amy Martin in the Democratic primary for Texas 263rd District Court on March 1, 2022.

Candidate
%
Votes
Image of Melissa Morris
Melissa Morris Candidate Connection
 
50.5
 
73,376
Image of Amy Martin
Amy Martin Candidate Connection
 
49.5
 
71,926

Total votes: 145,302
Candidate Connection = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.

Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Republican primary election

Republican primary for Texas 263rd District Court

Amber Cox advanced from the Republican primary for Texas 263rd District Court on March 1, 2022.

Candidate
%
Votes
Amber Cox
 
100.0
 
137,641

Total votes: 137,641
Candidate Connection = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.

Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Endorsements

To view Martin's endorsements in the 2022 election, please click here.

2018

General election

General election for Texas 263rd District Court

Amy Martin defeated Charles Johnson in the general election for Texas 263rd District Court on November 6, 2018.

Candidate
%
Votes
Image of Amy Martin
Amy Martin (D)
 
57.1
 
674,968
Image of Charles Johnson
Charles Johnson (R) Candidate Connection
 
42.9
 
506,609

Total votes: 1,181,577
Candidate Connection = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.

Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Democratic primary election

Democratic primary for Texas 263rd District Court

Amy Martin advanced from the Democratic primary for Texas 263rd District Court on March 6, 2018.

Candidate
%
Votes
Image of Amy Martin
Amy Martin
 
100.0
 
132,623

Total votes: 132,623
Candidate Connection = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.

Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Republican primary election

Republican primary for Texas 263rd District Court

Charles Johnson defeated Justin Keiter in the Republican primary for Texas 263rd District Court on March 6, 2018.

Candidate
%
Votes
Image of Charles Johnson
Charles Johnson Candidate Connection
 
59.6
 
73,764
Justin Keiter
 
40.4
 
50,019

Total votes: 123,783
Candidate Connection = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey.
If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey.

Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team.

Selection method

See also: Partisan election of judges

The judges of the Texas District Courts are chosen in partisan elections. They serve four-year terms, after which they must run for re-election if they wish to continue serving.[2]

Though Texas is home to more than 400 district courts, the courts are grouped into nine administrative judicial regions. Each region is overseen by a presiding judge who is appointed by the governor to a four-year term. According to the state courts website, the presiding judge may be a "regular elected or retired district judge, a former judge with at least 12 years of service as a district judge, or a retired appellate judge with judicial experience on a district court."[3]

Qualifications
To serve on the district courts, a judge must be:

  • a U.S. citizen;
  • a resident of Texas;
  • licensed to practice law in the state;
  • between the ages of 25 and 75;*[4]
  • a practicing lawyer and/or state judge for at least four years; and
  • a resident of his or her respective judicial district for at least two years.[2]

*While no judge older than 74 may run for office, sitting judges who turn 75 are permitted to continue serving until their term expires.[2]

Campaign themes

2022

Ballotpedia survey responses

See also: Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection

Candidate Connection

Amy Martin completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2022. The survey questions appear in bold and are followed by Martin's responses. Candidates are asked three required questions for this survey, but they may answer additional optional questions as well.

Expand all | Collapse all

I am the sitting judge of the 263rd District Court in Harris County, Texas. Licensed since 2003, I was elected in 2018. I am the first woman to preside over the 263rd District Court in the over forty years since it's creation. The 263rd District Court is a criminal court hearing felony cases. I oversee a docket of approximately 2,000 felony cases. In addition to my regular duties, I also serve on several committees. I have a diverse court staff and run my court to be approachable, courteous, and efficient. I continue to improve the clearance rate for the 263rd, have increased successful completions of probations by more than 20%, and continue to utilize diversion programs and explore creative options for effective dispositions of cases in the court. I grew up in southwest Houston, where I still live with my husband and dogs. I attended Alief ISD schools and St. Agnes Academy. I earned Bachelor degrees in Psychology & Sociology from Wesleyan University and a J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law. In 2019 I was appointed by the Administrative Judge for the 11th Judicial Region of Texas to serve as the only district court judge in a six-county region authorized to issue interception orders (wiretaps) and was also appointed to the Harris County Bail Bond Board, which oversees compliance for bail bondsmen. I also serve on the committee responsible for oversight of the Harris County Magistrates and the Associate Judge hiring committee, in addition to other assignments.
  • Voters should first look to experience. The fact is that not only have I been licensed longer than my opponent, I also have more relevant experience. As a lawyer, I focused almost exclusively on criminal cases, which are the only kinds of cases heard in my court. I have experience working in all stages of the most serious and complex felony criminal cases, at both the trial and appellate levels. I also have the past three years of experience as a sitting judge. I have more criminal experience, and more complex criminal experience, than any other candidate in this race.
  • Voters should also look to effectiveness and efficiency. I have managed to reduce the backlog of cases in my court since I took the bench in 2019. Despite setbacks from Hurricane Harvey and the Covid-19 pandemic, I have kept the court open and have kept the docket moving. I have never closed my courtroom to the public, and I have never denied defendants the right to confer with their attorneys in person.
  • Another of my primary concerns is indigent defense. Prior to taking the bench, I spent my career as a private attorney predominantly focused on representing indigent defendants. Much of my career was spent working on death penalty cases as all stages of litigation, from trial through appellate levels. One of my duties as judge is to ensure that all defendants receive the highest quality of representation from lawyers who are appointed by the court.
I am passionate about fairness and good governance. I believe that the public is entitled to government that has integrity and is transparent. I believe that good governance also means efficiency. For some people this means controlling costs, and as a taxpayer, I agree that is important. What's equally important is getting the most value. In the court system, this means ensuring that criminal defendants are accorded their due process with the assistance of highly qualified, highly competent counsel who have access to needed resources. Ultimately, it is more efficient and sensible to do something right the first time and have a just outcome, than to try to take shortcuts which give rise to rulings being overturned and taxpayers have to pay for "do-overs."

In order to protect public safety, the court must make decisions with integrity, which means obedience to the law. Texas law is written by the state legislature and interpreted by the Courts of Appeal and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. While I may have opinions about the state of the law, I never allow my private feelings and opinions to influence my decisions. Whether it's appointing counsel, ruling on motions, setting bonds, or passing judgment on a defendant, I follow the law as it has been written and handed down to me. It is my duty to follow statutes and prior precedent in making decisions, and I take my duty seriously.
It's not very exciting, but I look up to the example my mother and father set for me. My mother left home at an early age. She overcame tremendous odds in making herself into a good citizen, a working woman, and a wife and mother. Though she has seen a lot of loss and hardship in her life, she has never let that make her bitter or cynical. Instead she is kind, outgoing, and compassionate - she has truly never met a stranger. My father came from a poor country upbringing (we used to laugh when he talked about not wearing shoes as a child), but managed to advance through service and dedication. He joined the U.S. Navy and took advantage of the opportunity to further his education, going to technical school. He went on to work for Texas Instruments, and stayed there his entire career until retirement. Though he could sometimes have a gruff exterior, he was never mean or cruel. I remember when I was in school and there was going to be a daddy-daughter dance, one of my friends didn't have a father at home. He took us both to the dance because he didn't think any young girl should feel like she didn't have a "dad." He was charitable always "walked the talk." I hope that I can live up to even half the example my parents gave me.
The core responsibilities for a judge are to show up every day, setting aside personal feelings and opinions, to attend to the business of the court in a manner that follows the law in a fair, impartial, and unbiased way. The person who holds this position has to show up ready to work. The business of the criminal justice system never stops, and it is incumbent on judges to ensure that they do their part to keep the "wheels of justice" moving. When judges are absent, people linger in the system longer, which does a disservice to crime victims, defendants, and the public. A judge also needs to be engaged in the ancillary work of the judiciary. This means serving on any number of committees which move the business of the entire judiciary forward. For example, every criminal judge in this county spends about two weeks out of every year on-call for warrant duty. Law enforcement officers need access to the judiciary 24/7/365, including nights, weekends, and holidays. During my warrant duty, I make sure that I am available to review these various warrants and court orders at all times, whether that be at the courthouse or at my kitchen counter. I personally serve on a number of committees include Legal Affairs, Document Management, and committees that oversee the qualification and appointment of lawyers for death-penalty cases. A person in this position should understand that this isn't a typical 9 to 5 job. This is a job in public services, with a big emphasis on service.
I hope that my legacy will be inspiration for everyone in the court, whether prosecutor, defense attorney, bailiff, court clerk, or court reporter, to do their best to serve the public with integrity. It's my hope that my example will be one of honesty, transparency, and humility. I truly do not believe that being a judge makes me special. I believe that the position of judge is a special one, and I hope that I live up to the trust the public has placed in me. I certainly don't expect anyone to build statues of me when I retire. I do hope that people will regard me as someone who was fair and even-handed, who followed the law without favor or malice to anyone, who treated everyone with care and respect, and who upheld the dignity of the office.
"In Your Eyes" by Peter Gabriel. I can't help it - I'm a child of the eighties and it's close to Valentine's Day!
What's interesting about this question is how little my own personal "legal philosophy" influences the decisions of the court. While a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court has a great deal of opportunity to influence the tide of jurisprudence, the work of the criminal district courts is much less heady. Thus, my feelings and opinions about the law don't hold much sway. As best I can, I follow the law as laid out by the legislature and interpreted by higher courts. Rather, where my philosophy most has effect is in how I treat the people in my courtroom. I believe in maintaining the dignity and decorum of the court, thus I treat everyone before me with courtesy and respect, regardless of their position. I also insist that parties accord each other that same courtesy and respect. I always allow attorneys to approach, but do insist on parties moving cases forward on a reasonable basis, and that they communicate and negotiate with each other before bringing issues to me. And I always allow defendants to speak to the court to address any issues with the proceeding of their case. I feel that it is of the utmost importance that defendants understand the court process in order for everyone to believe in the lawful legitimacy of the criminal justice system.
In my opinion, empathy is very important in a judge. The role of the judge is so elevated - we literally sit on a high bench looking down toward the litigants. We wear a distinctive robe, and everyone stands when we enter the courtroom. The officers of the court address us as "your honor." With all that pomp, it is crucial for a judge to remember that she is in reality just another person, albeit someone who is entrusted with a solemn public office. A judge must not only be well-versed in legal reasoning; she should also be able to relate on a human level to the parties in the court. The cases in the court represent human conflicts, human troubles. There are human perpetrators and human victims. A judge must be able to follow the law while understanding the everyday human context of the circumstances that gave rise to the case in question. Empathy isn't simply having pity for the people involved in a case. Empathy is being able to understand what it's like to walk in the shoes of a crime victim, a witness, a defendant.
One of my primary concerns about the legal system in Texas is that it is highly politicized and thus subject to the constantly shifting political currents. The job of judge is one that is, and ought to be, as far from politics as practical, however judges in Texas are elected. Thus Texas judges are subject to all of the pitfalls that politics can entail. A person with a case before a judge ought not believe that they are advantaged or disadvantaged based on the judge's political affiliation or the fact that judges are beholden to the electorate. Yet it is also important that judges be subject to oversight and accountability. There are of course various systems for electing or appointing judges throughout the nation. The Texas legislature has studied this and, unfortunately, not come to any conclusion which was satisfactory enough to gain traction. I do believe that voters and politicians want on both sides of the aisle want the same thing: fair and impartial judges who are people of integrity and good conscience. The people of Texas certainly deserve a judiciary which is made up of highly competent, ethical, unbiased people. I am hopeful that our legislature will be able to come up with a creative solution which ensures that outcome while assuring citizens that the process is fair and transparent.

Note: Ballotpedia reserves the right to edit Candidate Connection survey responses. Any edits made by Ballotpedia will be clearly marked with [brackets] for the public. If the candidate disagrees with an edit, he or she may request the full removal of the survey response from Ballotpedia.org. Ballotpedia does not edit or correct typographical errors unless the candidate's campaign requests it.

2018

Ballotpedia survey responses

See also: Ballotpedia's candidate surveys
Candidate Connection

Amy Martin participated in Ballotpedia's candidate survey on April 2, 2018. The survey questions appear in bold, and Amy Martin's responses follow below.[5]

What would be your top three priorities, if elected?

1) Integrity

2) Loyalty to the Law
3) Efficient operation of the court[6][7]

What areas of public policy are you personally passionate about? Why?

Criminal JusticeCite error: Invalid <ref> tag; invalid names, e.g. too many[7]

Ballotpedia also asked the candidate a series of optional questions. Amy Martin answered the following:

What characteristics or principles are most important for an elected official?

Integrity, honesty, fairness, and willingness to follow the law.[7]
What qualities do you possess that you believe would make you a successful officeholder?
I am an experienced and well-qualified attorney with a passion for justice.[7]
What do you believe are the core responsibilities for someone elected to this office?
The core responsibility of a Criminal District Judge is to ensure the fair and just operation of the court in accordance with the law.[7]

See also


External links

Footnotes

  1. Information submitted to Ballotpedia through the Candidate Connection survey on January 31, 2022
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 American Judicature Society, "Methods of Judicial Selection: Texas," archived October 3, 2014
  3. Texas Courts Online, "Administrative Judicial Regions," accessed September 12, 2014
  4. Texas State Historical Association, "Judiciary," accessed September 12, 2014
  5. Note: The candidate's answers have been reproduced here verbatim without edits or corrections by Ballotpedia.
  6. Ballotpedia's candidate survey, "Amy Martin's responses," April 2, 2018
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.