Multiple female public defenders of color have accused San Francisco Superior Court Judge Braden Woods of inappropriate comments and a demeaning attitude over a span of three years, from 2018 to 2021.
The allegations, which include biased and unethical behavior, have raised serious concerns about Woods’ fitness to serve as a judge.
Following a formal complaint lodged in 2021, Woods was promptly transferred to another court.
However, his recent reassignment back into the San Francisco Superior Court system, near City Hall, has led to renewed scrutiny and has forced at least one of the complaining attorneys, Diamond Ward, to confront him in court once again.
Ward has formally challenged Woods’ ability to oversee her case.
On Friday, Woods is expected to make a ruling on that challenge.
The accusations against Judge Woods were detailed in declarations from three attorneys who were part of a 2021 complaint brought forth by Matt Gonzalez, the chief attorney of the public defender’s office.
Ward, along with attorneys Kathleen Natividad and Crystal Carpino, alleged that Woods had made sexualized comments regarding their clothing and body movements, often antagonizing them during court proceedings.
These comments occurred in front of clients, district attorneys, and other courtroom personnel, creating a hostile and toxic environment, especially for women of color.
Deputy Public Defender Elizabeth Camacho, who supervises several of the attorneys involved in the allegations, stated, “Judge Woods’ behavior is highly inappropriate and unethical.
It makes it harder for us to do our jobs, impacting every aspect of the case, including our clients.”
Appointed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown in 2013, Woods previously served as chief deputy of the criminal division at the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office and as a prosecutor in Kern County.
His initial assignment was presiding judge of the San Francisco Community Justice Center, an alternative court located in the Tenderloin district.
In late 2021, Woods was slated for a promotion to preside over a courtroom that handles a master felony calendar.
This led a group of female public defenders to unite and file a formal complaint against him with the presiding judge of the San Francisco Superior Court, Anne-Christine Massullo.
Approximately two dozen attorneys signed on to the complaint submitted by Gonzalez to the Commission on Judicial Performance, a state agency.
Gonzalez accused Woods of disrespecting litigants, making sexually charged remarks, losing his temper during pre-trial conferences, and belittling young women attorneys of color in his courtroom.
He emphasized that this pattern of conduct was inconsistent with the responsibilities expected of a judge.
In December 2021, representatives from the district attorney’s office participated in a meeting with the public defender’s office and judicial leadership to discuss Wood’s behavior.
As a result of these discussions, Woods was swiftly removed from the Hall of Justice—the site for more severe criminal cases—and reassigned to the Civic Center Courthouse, which primarily handles civil matters and misdemeanor criminal cases.
The parallel complaints from the DA’s office reportedly helped suppress media coverage of the situation, leaving many questions unanswered about whether Woods faced any significant consequences.
Former public defender and prosecutor Rebecca Young expressed that if it were not for the DA’s intervention, the matter might have unraveled differently, saying, “I don’t know what would have happened if we hadn’t had a couple of district attorneys saying ‘Me, too.’”
As for Ward’s challenge against Woods, Camacho indicated that he has already suggested he would dismiss it.
Ward’s challenge asserts that Woods exhibited bias and should remove himself from her case due to previous behavior.
She recalls a harrowing incident from April 2021 when Woods allegedly yelled and screamed at her for time management issues during a hearing, an environment that became humiliating, given that her client and numerous others were present.
In her statement, Ward emphasized, “I was completely humiliated in front of my client, a courtroom of other lawyers, and the court staff.”
Moreover, Ward and her colleagues have found ways to avoid assigning cases to Woods’ courtroom, including requesting substitutes whenever possible.
Another public defender, Crystal Carpino, disclosed in a November 2020 declaration that Woods called her alone to the judge’s bench to point out a post-it note that bore the word “WOW.”
As he looked her over, he mouthed the word ‘Wow’ and complimented her shoes, creating an uncomfortable and inappropriate scenario.
Additionally, Carpino described an incident where Woods “verbally attacked” her during a conference where she was defending a position against a prosecutor, despite that prosecutor’s assertion that he bore no ill will toward her.
Woods allegedly became aggressive during this altercation, towering over Carpino in a threatening posture and chastising her, which left her feeling intimidated and in tears.
Carpino referred to the incident as “intimidating and chilling” and required a break from the courtroom due to the emotional turmoil it caused her.
Kathleen Natividad, another public defender, recounted similar experiences of being demeaned by Woods.
She recounted an instance in August 2020 when Woods refused to call her case even though she had worked diligently to avoid his courtroom for two years.
Instead, Woods inaccurately claimed to be too busy, utilizing condescending language and behavior that further alienated Natividad.
Upon returning later that day, he chastised her for misunderstanding a settlement agreement, suggesting she lacked the experience to grasp it.
When it came time for Natividad to present her argument, Woods interrupted her, then laughed openly at her, compounding the humiliation she felt.
Natividad reflected in her statement, “Judge Woods took advantage of my youth, gender, and the fact that no other attorneys were present in the courtroom to anticipate and demean me, intimidating me in open court.”
After her challenge was rejected, she found herself crying while maintaining her case in front of Woods, who further mocked her.
Camacho noted that Woods’ behavior felt abrasive, aggressive, and disempowering consistently across different interactions.
She mentioned that the transcripts do not always capture the true essence of those exchanges, stating, “You have to be there in the moment to see the aftermath of what his words, actions, and behavior do.”
Camacho raised her concerns about Woods’ conduct during meetings with presiding judges in 2020 and 2021.
However, the outcome of any internal investigation by the San Francisco Superior Court was never disclosed to her.
The Commission on Judicial Performance confirmed that it received the 2021 complaint but did not provide details about whether any investigation was conducted.
Furthermore, the women mentioned in the complaint were reportedly not contacted during the process, as confirmed by a public defender’s spokesperson.
Attempts to reach the court for comment on the situation were unsuccessful, and Woods did not respond to the inquiries, as judges are typically restricted from speaking to the media.
image source from：https://missionlocal.org/2025/06/sf-judge-braden-woods-accused-harassing-female-lawyers-color/
