(File Photo by Kevin Mathewson, Kenosha County Eye)
KENOSHA, Wis. — Multiple legal insiders say Gov. Tony Evers is poised to appoint liberal activist Supplemental Court Commissioner David “One-Dollar” Hughes as the next Branch 4 circuit court judge, replacing the widely respected and beloved Judge Anthony Milisauskas following his announced retirement.
According to sources, the process surrounding the vacancy has already raised serious concerns within the local legal community. When the governor first announced the Branch 4 opening, not a single person applied. The application period had to be extended after zero interest was shown. Insiders say the lack of applicants reflects Gov. Evers’ disastrous track record with judicial appointments, noting that judges appointed by Evers routinely lose when they later face voters.
Several attorneys described an Evers appointment as “the kiss of death,” saying he may have one of the worst re-election records for appointed judges in Wisconsin history. As a result, many qualified candidates reportedly declined to apply, believing that an Evers appointment would ultimately hurt rather than help their judicial prospects. For example, not one of Evers’ judge appointments in Kenosha have won an election, meaning Hughes’ reign will almost certainly be brief. Several conservative lawyers are getting in line to challenge him.
(File Photo by Kevin Mathewson, Kenosha County Eye)
After the extension, multiple people applied, but sources say only two candidates were granted interviews by the governor’s office: Supplemental Court Commissioner David Hughes and Assistant Public Defender Francesco Balistrieri.
Hughes has drawn mounting criticism for what insiders describe as an ideological, far-left approach to criminal justice. His record as a supplemental court commissioner includes a long pattern of extremely low cash bail decisions in serious and often violent felony cases. Critics say those rulings demonstrate a philosophy that prioritizes rapid release over public safety.
Among the most egregious examples cited by insiders are cases in which defendants accused of firing a gun inside a home were released on as little as $150 cash bail; defendants charged across multiple domestic violence cases receiving similarly minimal bail; a felony child abuse defendant released on $500 cash bail; and violent burglary and smash-and-grab suspects seeing bail slashed from five figures down to just a few thousand dollars. In other cases involving firearms, repeated abuse, and credible threats, Hughes’ bail decisions have repeatedly come in far below what prosecutors sought and far below what many judges historically impose for comparable conduct.
Law-and-order advocates argue that this pattern is not incidental but ideological, reflecting Hughes’ belief system rather than an individualized assessment of risk. They also point out that Hughes’ legal background is almost entirely civil. He practices personal injury law at Pontillo, Camilli, and Hughes and has little real-world experience litigating criminal cases. One of his partners, Roberta Pontillo, is a prominent far-left Democrat who has donated substantial sums to Democratic candidates over the years, including Gov. Evers. Multiple insiders believe those political connections may have played a role in Hughes emerging as a frontrunner.
Because of Hughes’ limited criminal law background, some insiders speculate that if appointed, he would be placed into a civil rotation. That has fueled additional concern that Judge Chad Kerkman could be moved from juvenile court into a criminal rotation — a scenario that law-and-order supporters say they fear. Several sources allege Kerkman has already been allowing Hughes to sit on the bench in intake court dozens of times and describe it as deliberate grooming designed to acclimate Hughes to criminal court appearances ahead of a potential appointment.
By contrast, Francesco Balistrieri is viewed by many insiders as the strongest and most electable candidate. Balistrieri has extensive criminal law experience, is widely respected by both prosecutors and defense attorneys, and is seen as balanced and pragmatic. Importantly, sources say Balistrieri enjoys support across the political spectrum, including from Democrats and conservatives alike — a rarity in today’s judicial climate. Several insiders believe that if Gov. Evers were concerned about electability, Balistrieri would have been the safer choice.
(File Photo by Kevin Mathewson, Kenosha County Eye)
Also notably absent from the interview process was former prosecutor Smathers, despite her belief that she was a serious contender for the position. According to multiple sources, Smathers applied expecting to be appointed and was allegedly encouraged by certain judges and insiders who she believed were grooming her for the bench. Despite that, she was not even granted an interview by the governor’s office.
Smathers’ exclusion did not surprise many legal insiders familiar with her history. During her tenure as a prosecutor, Smathers was demoted after internal issues raised concerns about her judgment and performance. She later became the subject of a high-profile defamation lawsuit after allegedly fabricating claims about a respected forensic nurse — accusations that directly led to the nurse being fired. The lawsuit detailed how Smathers circulated those allegations without evidence, resulting in professional and reputational harm.
In addition to the defamation case, Smathers developed a reputation for repeated trial losses in serious sexual assault prosecutions, including high-profile acquittals that drew criticism from within the legal community. Insiders say her courtroom record, combined with the defamation allegations and demotion, rendered her politically radioactive, even for a governor who otherwise favors loyal liberals.
Sources say Smathers’ failure to secure even an interview sent a clear signal that her past misconduct and abysmal trial record outweighed her ideological alignment. Several attorneys said her exclusion underscores that the governor’s office was acutely aware of her baggage — even as critics question why similar scrutiny has not been applied to Hughes’ bail record and lack of criminal law experience.
As the appointment decision approaches, insiders warn that the Branch 4 selection could shape the future of Kenosha County’s courts for years to come. Many believe appointing Hughes would energize opposition and reinforce criticism of Gov. Evers’ judicial judgment, while passing over a broadly supported candidate like Balistrieri could prove politically costly.
23 Responses
To all the Evers voters are you happy now a judge who is for the criminals think Kenosha is bad now wait…
Yup.
Evers don’t care … and he’s got nothing to worry about.
The stupid republican party of wisconsin run the most banal
candidates against their opponents.
Evers has plenty of personal security so he don’t worry
about any of the street violence that the peasants
have to deal with on a daily basis.
David Hughes is a nice guy, not particularly a liberal activist, but rather naive as nice guys who practice civil law can be. Being a criminal court judge requires a bit more “worldly” exposure to recognize the bad people.
He’s a one dollar male stripper for Chad
Hit by the ugly stick, more than once.
God, he looks like such a little twit
Why wouldn’t he? Evers has been soft on crime forever. Democrats love electing incompetents.
I like Balistrieri, and from what I’ve seen and heard, I also like Hughes. He seems to be very attentive to the rule of law, including the rules of pretrial criminal procedure. We can’t have judges that do the bidding of the prosecutor. Liberty is at stake. In my nearly 25 years of defending individuals against the state, a lot of politically liberal judges have simply bowed down to the prosecutor and ignored individual rights. Conversely, some conservative judges, such as “America’s Judge,” Bruce Schroeder, have often enforced the rules of criminal procedure. And from what I’ve seen and heard, David Hughes shows promise (as does Balistrieri). If Hughes is elected, I have real hope that he’ll stand up against the government to protect individual rights. Political affiliation, itself, doesn’t matter. And bail amounts are an incredibly small part of the picture — after all, the defendant is presumed innocent.
“if Hughes is elected”? What does an election have to do with that rat bastard Evers appointing him to the job?
Yes, you’re right, the appointment comes first. Although that will be short lived and election will follow relatively soon after. But “appointed” probably would have been the better word choice.
And see, man, this is why people want YOU to run.
Well Mike, he/she is so right! Why don’t you entertain the idea? Definitely you are the man for the job
Ha! Thanks Anon and MP. But it’s definitely not the job for me!
There is no doubt that you are one of the best, if not the best, criminal defense attorneys in the county. That said, a low bond is not always the most appropriate approach. If you review the attached article, it may provide a different perspective for assessing the appropriate bond amount. With a properly set bond, many individuals are less likely to reoffend during the pendency of the proceedings.
https://kenoshacountyeye.com/2025/12/18/judge-issues-arrest-warrant-after-suspected-killer-skips-court-earlier-low-bail-decision-sparks-outrage/
Good. Best governor ever.
Evers is a lousy puke. Probably got re-elected by cheating. Yeah, let’s have ballot boxes no one watches
Tommy Thompson probably was the last good governor we had. Probably the only reason Evers is there is to prevent one party rule.
“If my guy didn’t win, the other guy cheated” said every schoolyard bully ever known.
I recall a legal writing Mr. Cicchini had written some time ago that described judge’s as presumptuous in the defendants guilt, A prosecutor in a robe. Yes, a defendant is supposed to be presumed innocent though I was left with the feeling from your literature the judge assumes guilt upon the defendant entering the courtroom. That many judges aren’t very knowledgable about law.
This is a good comment. Judges and juries approach a case from different postures. The jury is told to presume a defendant is innocent, listen to the evidence and then the judge’s instructions on the law before they go into the jury room and rack their memories to see if the elements of the offense were proven by the prosecution. When a judge hears a case, they know what the law is at the outset and then as they hear the evidence they are looking for whether the elements of the offense are present. This “real time” analysis focuses on the law and is not as reliant on memory. When judges hear the evidence they know what they’re looking for and if it isn’t there, then the defendant should be acquitted. Let’s use a simple example of a person with a speeding ticket clocked by moving radar. There is a very specific checklist of things the officer must have done before that speed can be accepted as evidence. The jury doesn’t get to hear about it until the trial is over but judges know what the checklist is and are checking the boxes as the case is being heard. In cases that are complicated or the defense is technical, a bench trial may be preferable.
Assistant Public Defender Francesco Balistrieri possibly related to Joe or John Balistrieri? Possibly the son or nephew of either as they were both lawyers I believe. Would his grandfather have been Frank, Joe and John’s father all of Milwaukee at one time?
Believe he is John’s son born in 2002. Omerta, say no more.
The general public should understand that most attorneys are self important a$$holes.
You would not want to hang around with 90% of them, much less work with them.
The inflated egos are intolerable.
Yes they can regurgitate some rules in a test.
I did it and it was incredibly easy.
No, most of them could not jump a car battery or change a faucet.