William Q. Hayes

My name is Robert Brackney. I live in Mexico. I am the father of defendant VICTOR HUGO BRACKNEY, paroled by you in 2019 for apparent tax evasion. I wish very much to contact him. I am 78 years old and in a wheelchair and want news about my son. My e-mail is as above.

Judge William Q. Hayes assumes every pro se is not licensed in other states. He therefore will manipulate the system. He tells his clerks to refuse to file documents after he reads them and finds they don't support his intended outcome. Watch for the Rooker-Feldman ruse. He will try to get rid of you supporting it with Rooker-Feldman. His biggest trick is to pretend your Complaint does not say what it actually says. At that point you had better familiarize yourself with Judicial Notice. Be certain to get your issues in the record. You might need them for the Appeal.

I experience multiple illegalities with Judge william Q.Hayes. He deliberatly and intentionally derailed my right to an effective attorney.I raised many violation of ineffective assistance of counsel because previous counsel failed to form or established an affirmative defense before entering any critical stage consequently toward my evidentiary hearing.Basically the Judge thwarted the issue of the government using a false report. my attorney failed to do an adversary test on the issue of false reporting;and impeaching the agents whom are part of this boarder patrol scandal with the false report.I strongly feel violated by this Judge; and he is abusing his authority.He will rush a defendant into trial with out caring about if there is or isn't an affirmative defense.He will make you out to be a monster on record.

Was very rude and made the entire courtroom uncomfortable with the high handedness he exhibited. Personally, every court employee should go through what they put innocent defendants through, and then sentence and rate the system and what it does to people and their lives called fallout or collateral damage.

Judge Hayes was totally biased in my case, where I sued for theft of my property. Enough evidence was presented to file a claim according to the law, so we requested a trial by jury. The act of filing a claim dragged on for 17 months. He ruled that the defendant had access to my property in his decision, and still dismissed my claim with prejudice. He made false statements about my life in his decision, saying that I grew up in foster homes, which I did not. He did not want our case in his courtroom.

He sentenced my father for 8 years, I aknowledge the fact that he did something bad but my father is a very smart man and he could be able to change his ways of life, I just believe he could have given him a better sentence. That day I was present in court it was very hard to watch while the judge william Hayes sentenced him.

I have mostly mostly good (and a some bad) things to say about him. On the plus side: He works hard, is intelligent, and is evenhanded. Although he's a former prosecutor, I haven't been able to discern any favoritism toward the government. The negative is his demeanor: he appears humorless and is sometimes impatient and rude to counsel. And he is somewhat inflexible when it comes to case scheduling and giving time to the parties to resolve the case before trial.

Judge Hayes was very even-handed, even while litigating against a government entity. Gave both sides full consideration and was on the level. Allowed both sides to fully air their evidence with no bias.

The "Q" stands for "quality." Because that's the kind of judge he is.

This judge sentenced my client to over four years in custody for a federal trespass. He is very rude, has an overly high opinion of himself and is not judicial in his demeanor. In no way is it a pleasure to appear in his courtroom.

Judge Hayes seems to generally decide civil motions on the papers without hearing arguments. Although I disagreed with his ruling on the motion, it was clear that he had thought about the issue and just disagreed with me. The one time I appeared before him, he appeared to have a good grasp of the case and the law and asked cogent questions.

Excellent courtroom demeanor. Very gentlemanly and patient, even with the most obstructionist litigants -- but not a marshmallow either, when it comes to obstructionists. Careful and impartial.