Otis D. Wright II

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Otis D. Wright II
Otis Wright District Judge.jpg
Judge of the United States District Court for the Central District of California
Incumbent
Assumed office
April 16, 2007
Appointed by George W. Bush
Preceded by Gary L. Taylor
Judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court
In office
2005–2007
Appointed by Arnold Schwarzenegger
Preceded by Lorna Parnell
Personal details
Born July 13, 1944[1]
Tuskegee, Alabama
Alma mater California State University at Los Angeles (B.A.)
Southwestern Law School (J.D.)

Otis D. Wright II (born July 13, 1944) is a United States District Judge on the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Early life and education[edit]

Born in Tuskegee, Alabama,[2] Wright received a B.A. from California State University at Los Angeles in 1976 and a J.D. from Southwestern Law School in 1980. He was in the United States Marine Corps from 1963 to 1966, remaining in the United States Marine Corps Reserve until 1969. He was a deputy sheriff in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department from 1969 to 1980. He was a deputy attorney general in the Office of the Attorney General, California Department of Justice from 1980 to 1983. He was in private practice in Los Angeles, California from 1983 to 2005.

Judicial service[edit]

On October 28, 2005, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced that he would be appointing Wright to serve as a judge on the Los Angeles County Superior Court.[3] Wright replaced Judge Lorna Parnell.[3]

Wright was nominated to the United States District Court for the Central District of California by President George W. Bush on January 9, 2007, to a seat vacated by Gary L. Taylor.[4] He was confirmed by the United States Senate on March 15, 2007, and received his commission on April 16, 2007.[4]

Notable cases[edit]

Case Year Reason for becoming widely discussed or noted
Prenda Law 2013 Ruling against a "notorious" U.S. law firm and principals, which was viewed by onlookers and the court as engaging in copyright "trolling", and alleged legal extortion practices, often via shell companies; case resulted in sanctions and law firm' dissolution.[5][6]
U.S.A. v. Hudson, Whitfield & Dunlap 2014 Ruling against legitimacy of a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ("AFT") fictional stash-house robbery sting operation; such operations had drawn significant media and judicial concerns previously for a perceived inherent lack of fairness.

References[edit]

External links[edit]