Please describe what you believe are the most significant issues in this race and why.

I think experience is the issue in the race, and I believe that my long, successful experience as a prosecutor, trial judge, and appellate judge uniquely qualifies me for the job.

Are the United States and Texas constitutions living documents?  Please answer in the context of Progressivism versus Originalism.   

No.  Like Justice Scalia, I am a textualist.

Please describe the best way for the average voter to determine which candidate for this office is best.

It is difficult.  Most people don’t even know that we have two supreme courts in Texas and that our court exists, much less who the judges are.  I would recommend talking to lawyers and judges that you know and respect and get their recommendations, read responses to questionnaires like this one, research candidates online, and, if the candidate is an incumbent, look at the court’s website, read the judge’s opinions, and see how the judge votes on the other judges opinions. 

How many days off per year should the officeholder of this position take to learn (seminars & workshops) or teach (give educational or motivational talks) or network with other county officials?

I don’t have an exact number.  I am usually gone a total of ten to fourteen days per year --- mainly teaching, but also learning.  By law, Texas judges are required to have a minimum of sixteen hours of continuing education each year.  On the other hand, I don’t take a family vacation, and from January to December, you will usually find me at my desk Monday through Friday from 8:30 to 5:00 at the very least. 

Who is endorsing you and what is their relationship to you?

As of this date (December 20, 2015), I am endorsed by eight former State Bar Presidents (Buck Files, Guy Harrison, Darrell Jordan, Lloyd Lochridge, Harriet Miers, Richard Pena, Charles L. Smith, and Lisa Tatum), Former Chief Justice Tom Phillips of The Supreme Court of Texas, Former Justices of the Supreme Court of Texas Scott Brister, Craig Enoch, and Deborah Hankinson, Bryan Garner, co-author with Justice Antonin Scalia of Making Your Case and Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts, and District Attorneys Teresa Clingman (Midland County), Kenda Culpepper (Rockwall County), and James Farren (Randall County).  None of them are related to me, but I consider all of them friends.

Why are you running for this office and what 3 major goals do you want to be measured by if you are elected?

I am seeking re-election because I enjoy the work, and I think I have done a very good job during my seventeen years on the Court.  My primary goals are (1) to write clear, well-reasoned opinions; (2) inspire respect for the Court and the law in the public; and (3) leave Texas criminal jurisprudence better than when I came here. 

What are the three main reasons you are running for this office? Do you see any potential conflicts of interest?

After two years in private practice, I joined the Dallas County District Attorney's Office, where I served for twelve years, tried over four hundred jury trials, and was a senior felony chief prosecutor in the Career Criminal Division.  In 1981, I was appointed by Governor Clements as judge of the 292nd District Court in Dallas, a general jurisdiction trial court, where I was re-elected four times and served for over seventeen years.

I am currently serving on the State Bar Judicial Section’s Board of Directors and have previously served as its Chair as well as Chair of the Texas Center for the Judiciary's Board of Directors, the ABA State Trial Judges' Ethics Committee, the Dallas County Criminal District Judges, the Dallas County Juvenile Board, and the Dallas Bar Association Criminal Law Section. I also served as Presiding Local Administrative Judge and as Dean of the Texas College of Advanced Judicial Studies.

I have taught at The National Judicial College since 1992, served on the Faculty Council there, and was the April, 2002 Robert H. Jackson Lecturer at its General Jurisdiction Course.  I wrote the College’s ethics curriculum and co-wrote its curriculum for the appellate judges’ capital litigation course.  I am a member of The American Law Institute and the ABA Appellate Judges Conference.  I am also a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation.  I teach judicial ethics, constitutional criminal law, standards of appellate review, and statutory construction to judges nationally.

I have served on the Court of Criminal Appeals since 1999.  During that time, I have written many noteworthy opinions, one of which, Medellin, is the one that Senator Cruz often cites when he talks about his argument before the U.S. Supreme Court that our state law cannot be overruled by the World Court’s international law opinions. The Supreme Court majority agreed with him and upheld our opinion affirming Medellin’s death sentence. 

A lifelong Republican, at the age of ten I campaigned door-to-door for General Eisenhower during his successful initial Presidential campaign.  Over the years, I have volunteered for, belonged to, contributed to, and led numerous local Republican organizations.

To what extent do you believe the state or federal government should be able to obtain court orders directing parents to do things for their children that the parent does not believe should be done?

Since I do not deal with these issues, I prefer not to express a global opinion on this subject.  I have, like most people, seen some criminally abusive parents and the devastating effects of child physical and sexual abuse.  And as a trial judge, I have sent the abusive parents to a place where I hope they will never have the chance to hurt another child again.  So in those cases, I think that government action is certainly appropriate.

Do parents have the right to block grandparent "rights" or doctor intervention? Why/not?

I really don’t deal with this issue and can’t envision ever having to rule on the issue.

What can you do in your court to protect citizens from harm by illegal aliens?

Affirm their convictions if we legally can.  In Medellin v. Texas, an opinion I wrote, the defendant was an illegal alien who committed a vicious gang rape-murder. We voted to deny his claim for relief and affirmed his death sentence.  Then Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz argued the appeal from our Court in the Supreme Court of the United States, and the Court in a 6-3 opinion written by Chief Justice Roberts affirmed our decision.  Medellin was executed soon thereafter, and he will never victimize anyone again.  This is just one example.

Do the taxpayers have a responsibility to provide an interpreter for non-English speaking illegals?  As well, do taxpayers have-to-have one available during courtroom hours just in case someone might need their services?

Yes, if they are indigent.  The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment has been held to require it.  After all, it’s hard to confront people testifying against you if you can’t understand them.  As to having one available “just in case,” I don’t think the law requires it.

What is the job of a judge?   What is your judicial philosophy?

The job involves serving as one of nine judges deciding cases on appeal to our State’s court of last resort in criminal cases.  My judicial philosophy is, and has always been one of judicial restraint.  I believe that judges should not usurp the role of the legislature, and my opinions consistently reflect that philosophy.  People outside the court (including journalists) consistently identify me as belonging to the conservative wing of the Court.

What is the proper role of a lawyer?

The proper role of a prosecutor is not just to convict, but to see that justice is done.  On the other hand, the role of the defense lawyer is to ethically defend his or her client to the best of his or her ability in accordance with the law.

Among the nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, which one do you respect the most, and why? Which one do you respect the least, and why?

 I like Justice Scalia personally, enjoy his opinions, and agree with most of them.  I also agree with Justice Alito and Justice Thomas most of the time. I disagree almost all the time with Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagen.  Occasionally, however, the entire court agrees in a written opinion.  In others, depending on the issue, there are strange combinations of liberal and conservative judges voting together in a single case.  And even though I vehemently disagree with the opinions of some of the judges, I would not publicly express disrespect for any of them.  As a member of the judiciary, especially one who teaches judicial ethics nationally, I think it would be improper for me to do so.

What is the single most important action the county needs to do to keep this a great community to live in?

Help secure the border.

Should the state license barbers?  Lawyers? Why or why not?

I have no opinion as to barbers (perhaps because I am bald).  However, I do believe that it is proper for lawyers to be licensed by the State because lawyers are officers of the State courts.  And since they enjoy a position of trust, it is not unreasonable for the State to look at the character of people that are to be put in that category

What carries the greatest influence on your ruling: case law, the Constitution, or other?

The U.S. Constitution is paramount, and to the extent that statutes and case law conflicts with it, they are invalid.

Is there anything in your background of an embarrassing nature that should be explained before your election?

I don’t think so.  I am certainly not infallible and am in need of Divine Grace like everyone else.  Nevertheless, I take the Code of Judicial Conduct very seriously and have tried to live my life so as to “avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety” both in my public and private life. 

To what extent would you need to recuse yourself from cases because of conflicts of interest?

I would not participate in any case (1) that I decided as a trial judge, (2) that I prosecuted, (3) where I was related either by blood or marriage to any witness at trial, or (4) any other case where my fairness or impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

Can the legislature effectively write law that makes sense for 30 million people? Please explain your thoughts

Of course.  The penal statutes are just one example that applies across the board.