|
Judge Duhart:
I was born and raised in Toledo’s central city, right across
the street from the Fredrick Douglass Community Center. My
mother passed away when I was 10, and my father passed away
not long after. I was essentially raised by a single
grandmother who sold Avon to put food on our table and she
taught me the value of hard work. I went to St. Francis de
Sales High School and didn’t really have any way to pay for
college, so I did a of couple years of active duty in the
United States Army, and chose to go to Wright State
University in Dayton, Ohio. While in college, I interned
for Ohio State Rep Casey Jones, and he encouraged me to
consider law.
Perryman: Please describe
your law school experience.
Judge Duhart:
I had the pleasure of being the law clerk for Judge Robert
Penn, obviously a pillar in the community and a well-known
judge. Again, I didn’t have any money to pay for law school
so I would work at Toledo Municipal Court from 9-5, go to
school from six to nine at night, go home to eat and rest,
and then get up for the graveyard shift at the United Parcel
Service, where I would sling boxes till three or four
o’clock in the morning, and go home. Then I’d get back up at
four to five in the morning and do it all over again. I
worked hard, paid my way through law school, and graduated
in 1996. With respect to the formative years before I
started practicing law, those are the highlights.
Perryman: You are presently
on the Court of Common Pleas and a candidate for the Ohio
Sixth District Court of Appeals. Many people understand
what trial judges do, but they’re not familiar with what
State Appellate Judges do. Can you talk about how the
Appellate Court differs from your trial court experience?
Judge Duhart:
I was appointed by Governor Ted Strickland in 2011 to the
Common Pleas Court, trial division, replacing Judge Charles
Doneghy, another pillar in the community. Previously, I had
a very large general practice for 20 years, doing a lot of
work in personal injury, criminal defense and business
litigation all over northwestern Ohio, and many other
jurisdictions. Many of those jurisdictions are the same
counties that make up the Sixth District Court of Appeals,
but while an attorney I was certified by the Supreme Court
of Ohio to litigate death penalty cases, some of the most
challenging cases I ever had.
In 2012 I had to run to
be elected and was successful. I handled
multi-million-dollar civil cases ranging across the gamut to
death penalty, homicide cases. I was reelected in 2018 to
the Common Pleas Court bench, and it has been a fruitful and
rewarding experience, and I believe I’ve made an impact on
the community. At least that’s what I try to do, to do
what’s right.
Perryman: And the Appellate
Court?
Judge Duhart:
The Sixth District Court of Appeals, however, is made up of
eight counties, as Lucas, Wood, Erie, Sandusky, Ottawa,
Fulton, Williams and Huron County. So, to use a football
analogy, if there’s a call by the referee made on the field
in real-time, that’s the trial court judge, that’s what I do
now. You make that call to the best of your ability with
what you have in front of you.
Now, the Court of Appeals
is when that call is made, and one of the coaches challenges
the call. It’s the persons in the booth and in the camera
who then, in consultation with the other referees, look at
the film, pontificate as to what the right call is based on
the rules, what the tape and the record would suggest, and
then come back and either affirm the call or reverse the
call on the field. That’s essentially what the Court of
Appeals does. It is a crucial position to have, and I take
it with a great deal of seriousness and consideration.
Perryman: So, an appellate
judge is tasked with overseeing the lower courts’ rulings to
ensure that decisions are sound?
Judge Duhart:
Correct. Often, people don’t understand that the Supreme
Court of Ohio is the highest in the state; however, the
cases they take are discretionary. Therefore, if you wish to
dispute the decisions made in a trial or the municipal
court, most cases don’t often reach the Supreme Court.
That’s why it’s vitally important to know the judges on the
Sixth District Court of Appeals, and have researched their
record, experience and education because they’re generally
the last court of resort.
Perryman: So, an appellate
judge must clarify often confusing or misunderstood points
of law, and have extra insight and knowledge about the law
and how it should be applied.
Judge Duhart:
Yes, 100 percent! Hence, I feel that it is extremely helpful
to have a judge who has served on the trial court,
understands what happens at the trial level, and moves on
and ascend to the Sixth District Court of Appeals for that
very reason.
In addition to that, and
speaking of me in particular, I think not only my experience
as a trial judge is a value add to the Court of Appeals but
my education as well. I’ve also gone to the Harvard Kennedy
School of Government, a highly selective program. In 2015 I
was also selected amongst judges from all over the world,
literally, to the Duke University School of Law for a Master
of Law and Judicial Studies degree. My class consisted of
State Supreme Court judges, federal judges at the district
court level and the circuit level. There were Supreme Court
judges in other countries, and classmates from Sierra Leone,
Taiwan, Denmark, Belgium, and just worldwide.
I believe as you mature,
there’s always an opportunity to get better, be better, do
better, and understand more. So, I’m always seeking
education and experience to better assist me in the
decision-making process that you engage in when you become a
judge, especially at the Appellate Court level where it’s
more of an exercise in researching the law, understanding
nuances in the law and an academic exercise. I think I’m
uniquely qualified.
Perryman: Let’s talk about
the “gavel gap.” Presently, on the Sixth District Court of
Appeals, all of the judges are white. I don’t know of a
previous African American to serve. Why is it essential to
have a bench that reflects society?
Judge Duhart:
If elected, I would be the first African American there, but
I also believe my experience and education qualify me to be
on the Sixth District Court of Appeals, and thus, diverse
perspectives are critical. Suppose decisions are being made
in a vacuum without the benefit of diverse thoughts,
opinions and experiences: In that case, you begin to get
decisions that have blind spots and don’t appreciate what
those in a diverse country like ours would appreciate.
Diversity is critical - not only demographic diversity but
diversity in thought and experiences. I’m not aware of
anyone on the Sixth District who has any military
experience. I’m not aware of anyone on the trial court
bench right now who has any military experience. I believe
strongly that a more diverse court is a stronger court.
Perryman: Do you believe a
less diverse court might have hidden biases of which they
are unaware?
Judge Duhart:
The reality is, we all have implicit biases, and so, it is
incumbent that those who sit in judgment of others
acknowledge those implicit biases, recognize them and
actively take steps to offset whatever those are. I also
strongly believe that individuals from diverse backgrounds
on the court can accelerate the process of identifying
implicit biases, take affirmative steps to address them, and
put in place mechanisms - either in rulings or other
administrative ways - to minimize the effect biases have on
our decision-making.
Perryman: Finally, what key
messages would you like to communicate to voters about your
campaign?
Judge Duhart:
The main message is, don’t forget about the judges. When you
fill out your ballot or go to the polls, judges will not
have party designations next to their name. So, make sure
you’ve investigated and researched the judges on the ballot
to include myself and make an informed decision. We must
have good judges on the bench.
Now, why? That may sound
simple, but the judicial branch is a coequal branch of
government - the executive branch, the legislative branch
and the judicial branch. When there is an overreach by the
executive and/or the legislative branches, generally the
judges bring that back in line. This is not a partisan
statement, but in the current state of America, starting
from the federal government all the way down to state and
local levels, there is a great deal of dysfunction, discord,
and acrimony. Generally speaking, it’s the judges who have
weighed in. No matter what side of the political aisle that
judge is on, I trust and think that the decisions are being
made based upon the law and not partisan politics.
That’s how vital judges
are, and I encourage folks to make sure that they research
me, particularly, and when they go to vote, make sure that
they pull that lever.
Perryman: And voters want
to see judges that are fair and impartial.
Judge Duhart:
Absolutely, and so critical! I was at a judicial conference
a couple of days ago. One of my classmates at Duke, Bernice
Donald, who sits on the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals,
said something, which was so profound, but simple. She said:
‘perceived justice is just as important as actual justice.’
So, while it is incumbent
on judges to make sure that actual justice is being done, it
is critical also to ensure that perceived justice is being
done. Because, if there are certain members of
disenfranchised communities who believe or perceive that
justice is different for one group as opposed to another,
whether or not actual justice is being done or not, then
we’ve got dysfunction and we’ve got a problem.
Contact Rev. Donald Perryman, D.Min, at
drdlperryman@centerofhopebaptist.org |
