Loading…
2026 Miscellaneous Order No. 4 – 2nd Amended (effective August 3, 2026): a case in which a judge within the Criminal Division (Department 17, Department 21, Department 22, Department 24 and Department 38) is disqualified reassigned to a courtroom for all purposes pursuant to Rule 3.734 of the California Rules of Court by the attached “Department Assignment” number sheet - staff excluding the last digit of the case number and assigning by the next two digits, excluding an additional digit if that falls to the same disqualified department, and, where the case still falls within the same department after excluding all numbers, assigning it to the next department (Department 21 to Department 22, 22 to 24, 24 to 38, 38 to 21); the defendant’s pending cases in the disqualified department moving with the disqualified case unless the judge finds unusual circumstances; a traffic case that is the source of a disqualification in Department 21, 22, 24 or 38 may be sent back to Department 17; traffic cases (matters filed exclusively under the California Vehicle Code involving misdemeanor and/or infraction charges, regularly heard in Department 17) whose judicial officer is disqualified reassigned first to Department 37 - unless the defendant has other criminal matters pending in another department - and, if Department 37 is also disqualified, to the criminal department by the number sheet; if the judicial officers of Departments 21, 22, 24 and 38 are all disqualified, the case(s) routed to the presiding judge or the assistant presiding judge (if not disqualified), then to the most senior judge available (by the date the judge was sworn into office); the sheet's chart of the terminal numbers 0 to 99 among Departments 24, 21, 22 and 38, and the lowest number of the MCR case(s) deciding the department when a defendant has both a MCR numbered case(s) and a SCR numbered case(s).
California > Fifth Appellate District > Madera County > Superior Court of California, County of Madera
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF MADERA IN THE MATTER OF THE REASSIGNMENT OF CASES FOR ALL PURPOSES PURSUANT TO RULE 3.734 OF THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT UPON DISQUALIFICATION OF A JUDGE WITHIN THE CRIMINAL DIVISION 2026 MISCELLANEOUS ORDER No. 4 – 2nd Amended IT IS ORDERED that effective August 3, 2026, cases in which a judge within the Criminal Division of the court ¹ is disqualified shall be reassigned as follows: The case will be reassigned to a courtroom for all purposes pursuant to Rule 3.734 of the California Rules of Court based upon the “Department Assignment” number sheet attached hereto and incorporated herein. In order to determine the reassignment, staff is directed to exclude the last digit from the case number and assign the case based upon the next two digits of the case number. If following the above methodology, the case would be assigned to the same disqualified department, staff is directed to exclude an additional digit from the case number and re-assign the case based upon the next two digits. In situations where the case happens to fall within the same department, after excluding all numbers, the case will automatically be assigned to the next department as follows: • Department 21 cases will go to Department 22 • Department 22 cases will go to Department 24 • Department 24 cases will go to Department 38 • Department 38 cases will go to Department 21 Unless the judge finds unusual circumstances and in the interest of justice to do otherwise, all of the defendant’s pending cases in the disqualified department will be moved to the reassigned department with the disqualified case. a. If a traffic case is the source of the disqualification in Department 21, Department 22, Department 24 and/or Department 38, the traffic case may be sent back to Department 17 to hear that matter unless the judicial officer in Department 17 has been disqualified. The remaining cases will continue to be assigned to their appropriate department pursuant to the “Department Assignment” number sheet attached to this order. In cases in which a judicial officer hearing traffic matters of the court² is disqualified, those cases shall be reassigned as follows: b. All traffic cases assigned to Department 17 in which the judicial officer is disqualified shall first be reassigned to Department 37, unless the defendant has other criminal matters pending in another department in which circumstance the case may be heard by the judge in that department pursuant to the “Department Assignment” number sheet attached to this order. c. If Department 37 is also disqualified that case shall be reassigned to the criminal department (Department 21, Department 22, Department 24 or Department 38) based upon the “Department Assignment” number sheet attached to this order. d. Any further disqualifications of a judicial officer on traffic matters shall then follow the disqualification reassignment procedures set forth above in this order. If the judicial officers assigned to Department 21, Department 22, Department 24, and Department 38 are all disqualified in a case that is being heard in Madera County Superior Court then the case(s) shall be routed to the presiding judge (if not disqualified) or the assistant presiding judge (if not disqualified) for further reassignment. If both the presiding judge and assistant presiding judge are disqualified, the case(s) shall be routed to the most senior judge³ available who has not been disqualified for reassignment. Dated: JULY 28, 2026 Hon. Dale J. Blea Presiding Judge 2025-2026 ¹ Criminal Division shall be defined as Department 17, Department 21, Department 22, Department 24 and Department 38. ² Traffic matters are defined as matters filed exclusively under the California Vehicle Code involving misdemeanor and/or infraction charges which are regularly heard in Department 17. ³ The most senior judge shall be determined by the date the judge was sworn into office. When a defendant has both a MCR numbered case(s) and a SCR numbered case(s), the lowest number of the MCR case(s) will determine which department the cases are to be assigned. Department Assigned Department 24 0 20 40 60 80 Department 21 1 21 41 61 81 Department 22 2 22 42 62 82 Department 38 3 23 43 63 83 Department 24 4 24 44 64 84 Department 21 5 25 45 65 85 Department 22 6 26 46 66 86 Department 38 7 27 47 67 87 Department 24 8 28 48 68 88 Department 21 9 29 49 69 89 Department 22 10 30 50 70 90 Department 38 11 31 51 71 91 Department 24 12 32 52 72 92 Department 21 13 33 53 73 93 Department 22 14 34 54 74 94 Department 38 15 35 55 75 95 Department 24 16 36 56 76 96 Department 21 17 37 57 77 97 Department 22 18 38 58 78 98 Department 19 39 59 79 99 Department 24: 0, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 60, 64, 68, 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96 Department 21: 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 57, 61, 65, 69, 73, 77, 81, 85, 89, 93, 97 Department 22: 2, 6, 10, 14, 18, 22, 26, 30, 34, 38, 42, 46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 70, 74, 78, 82, 86, 90, 94, 98 Department 38: 3, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31, 35, 39, 43, 47, 51, 55, 59, 63, 67, 71, 75, 79, 83, 87, 91, 95, 99
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF MADERA IN THE MATTER OF THE REASSIGNMENT OF CASES FOR ALL PURPOSES PURSUANT TO RULE 3.734 OF THE CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT UPON DISQUALIFICATION OF A JUDGE WITHIN THE CRIMINAL DIVISION 2026 MISCELLANEOUS ORDER No. 4 – 2nd Amended IT IS ORDERED that effective August 3, 2026, cases in which a judge within the Criminal Division of the court ¹ is disqualified sh
Reviewer note: Transcribed 2026-10-15 (California T4 Madera build 2026-10-15) by eye from BenchPath custody ca/t4/ca-madera/docs/general/2026-misc-order-no-4-2nd-amended.pdf (301732 bytes, sha256 5e3d80626402994d87b18b057b2da548808d08786da97658ea0c53b8aa878470; 3 pages, each a scanned page image with an invisible OCR text layer - not the card's source): read on the page images rendered at 200 dpi (vision/img/mo4-p01.png to mo4-p03.png) and checked against a RapidOCR reading of the images (at 200 dpi) and the file's own invisible OCR text layer for the same pages, never published: of the transcription's 918 words, 95 6-word windows were not found in a reading, in 19 spans - 18 spans split into consecutive pieces each found (the cells of the chart on page 3, which the readings take in another order; the footnote marks set against a word; and the footnotes, which the readings have at the foot of their pages and the transcription after the signature block) and 1 span read again on the page images and found as transcribed (vision/check-log.txt; evidence/vision-check-2026-10-15.log, evidence/vision-explain-2026-10-15.log). Not part of the text: the running header printed at the head of page 1 (“Superior Court of California / County of Madera / Local Rules of Court”), the handwritten signature above the printed name and title, the signature rule, the date line's blank rule and the short rules above the footnotes, and the chart's borders and shading; the pages print no page numbers; on the date line only “JULY 28” is handwritten, on the printed blank before the printed “, 2026”. The footnotes, printed at the foot of pages 1 and 2, follow the signature block, before the attached number sheet. The transcription's closing note, which describes the pages, is not published. Review note: The chart's last row prints the label “Department” with no number before 19, 39, 59, 79 and 99 - the row is shaded like the Department 38 rows, and the order's Department 38 list holds those five numbers; the card's text keeps the row as printed. The chart heading reads “Department Assigned”; the order calls the sheet the “Department Assignment” number sheet.
9 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-10.
6 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-13.