Judge Charlaine F. Olmedo

Judge Charlaine F. Olmedo has served on the Los Angeles County Superior Court since her appointment by Governor Gray Davis in August 2002, making her one of the more experienced jurists on the criminal bench at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse. A Loyola Law School graduate, she has built a reputation over more than two decades presiding over a demanding criminal calendar, with her judicial temperament described as one that balances rigor with empathy — a combination that signals she takes both procedural integrity and the human dimensions of criminal proceedings seriously. This dual orientation is not merely rhetorical; it is evidenced by her management of some of the most complex and high-profile criminal matters in recent Los Angeles history. Judge Olmedo's handling of the Danny Masterson rape trial stands as the most publicly scrutinized chapter of her judicial career. She presided over a proceeding that resulted in a mistrial in December 2022 — a legally defensible outcome given jury deadlock — and the subsequent retrial led to Masterson's conviction and a 30-years-to-life sentence in September 2023. Her management of that case, which involved Scientology-related witness concerns, media pressure, and sensitive victim testimony, demonstrates a capacity to maintain courtroom order and procedural discipline under extraordinary public scrutiny. Similarly, her oversight of the James Heaps sexual abuse case, which concluded in a guilty plea to 13 sex crimes, reflects her ability to shepherd complex multi-count criminal matters to resolution. Attorneys appearing before her should expect a judge who is thoroughly prepared, procedurally exacting, and unlikely to be swayed by courtroom theatrics or media dynamics.

Attorneys appearing before Judge Olmedo in criminal matters should prioritize meticulous procedural preparation above all else. Her track record on high-profile cases suggests she has a low tolerance for sloppiness in motions practice, evidentiary foundations, and courtroom conduct. Given that she has managed cases involving sensitive victim testimony, complex evidentiary disputes, and intense public attention, she is likely well-versed in the nuances of Evidence Code sections governing prior sexual conduct, hearsay exceptions, and witness protection measures. Defense counsel and prosecutors alike should anticipate that she will have read the briefs and will ask pointed questions — arriving unprepared or relying on boilerplate arguments is a significant risk. The 'rigor and empathy' characterization of her judicial philosophy is a meaningful signal for how to frame arguments. On the empathy side, arguments that acknowledge the human stakes of a proceeding — whether for victims, defendants, or third parties — are likely to resonate more than purely technical presentations. On the rigor side, she will expect those arguments to be grounded in law and fact, not sentiment alone. Attorneys should avoid overplaying emotional appeals without legal scaffolding. In high-stakes criminal matters, particularly those involving sexual offenses or sensitive witnesses, counsel should be prepared for robust in limine motion practice and should not assume any evidentiary issue will be resolved informally. Given her experience with media-intensive cases, she is also likely to be firm on courtroom decorum and may have standing orders regarding media and spectator conduct that require advance review.

• critical

  Obtain and Review Judge Olmedo's Standing Orders

  Before any appearance, obtain her current standing orders from the clerk or court website. Her management of complex criminal trials suggests she likely has detailed standing orders governing motion deadlines, in limine procedures, trial schedules, and courtroom conduct. Non-compliance with standing orders is a common and avoidable error.

• critical

  Prepare Thorough In Limine Motion Practice

  Given her experience with evidentiary disputes in sexual offense and high-profile criminal cases, expect robust in limine proceedings. Every evidentiary issue should be briefed in advance with specific statutory and case law authority. Do not assume any issue will be resolved informally or on the fly.

• critical

  Master Relevant CALCRIM Instructions and Penal Code Provisions

  For criminal matters, particularly those involving sexual offenses, thoroughly brief yourself on applicable jury instructions, Penal Code sections 1108 and 1109, and any relevant Evidence Code provisions. Judge Olmedo's experience in this area means she will identify gaps in counsel's knowledge quickly.

• important

  Research Recent Published Decisions and Media Coverage of Her Cases

  Review publicly available reporting and any appellate decisions arising from cases she has presided over, particularly the Masterson and Heaps matters. These sources may reveal procedural rulings, evidentiary decisions, and courtroom management preferences not captured in formal databases.

• important

  Prepare for Active Bench Questioning

  Her methodical judicial approach suggests she reads briefs carefully and asks substantive questions. Attorneys should be prepared to defend every argument in their papers and should not rely on the court simply adopting their position without engagement. Moot your arguments before appearing.

• Nice

  Develop a Sensitive Witness Management Plan

  If your case involves victim witnesses, expert witnesses on trauma, or sensitive testimony, prepare a detailed plan for how that testimony will be presented and protected. Judge Olmedo's experience with sexual abuse cases means she will have expectations about how such witnesses are handled in her courtroom.

• ›Arrive early and be fully prepared — her methodical approach means she is likely to begin proceedings on time and expects counsel to be ready without delay.
• ›Address the court formally and avoid interrupting opposing counsel or the bench; her experience managing high-pressure, media-intensive trials suggests she enforces decorum strictly.
• ›Do not engage in speaking objections or use objections as a vehicle for jury argument — given her experience with complex criminal trials, she will recognize and likely curtail this tactic.
• ›If media or spectators are present, be aware that she has managed high-profile proceedings and may have specific protocols governing courtroom access, camera use, and spectator conduct that must be followed precisely.
• ›When addressing sensitive subject matter — particularly in cases involving victims of sexual offenses — maintain a respectful and measured tone; her 'empathy' dimension suggests she is attentive to how counsel treats vulnerable witnesses and parties.