Judge John W. Lua

  • Law School: Whittier Law School (J.D.)
  • Year Appointed to Bench: 2010
  • Appointing Governor: Arnold Schwarzenegger
  • Prior Legal Experience: 11 years (Kern County Deputy District Attorney, 1999–2010)
  • Years on the Bench: 15 years (2010–present)
  • Election History: Re-elected in 2012, 2018, and 2024 (unopposed; automatic retention each term)
  • Leadership Roles: Presiding Judge (2025-present); Assistant Presiding Judge (2024–2025); Presiding Judge of Appellate Division (2017)

Education and Early Legal Career

John W. Lua was born and raised in Sonoma County, California, as the youngest of seven children. He is of half-Hawaiian and half-Samoan heritage. Lua earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of California, Santa Barbara, and went on to obtain his Juris Doctor from Whittier Law School. After law school, he moved to Kern County in 1999 to begin his legal career in the Kern County District Attorney’s Office. As a Deputy District Attorney for over a decade, Lua prosecuted a wide range of criminal cases, gaining extensive trial experience before his judicial appointment.

Judicial Appointment and Service

In April 2010, John W. Lua was appointed to the Kern County Superior Court by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. At the time of his appointment, he brought roughly 11 years of prosecutorial experience to the bench. Since then, Judge Lua has served in the Superior Court’s Criminal Division, where he has presided over numerous misdemeanor and felony trials. In addition to handling a heavy trial calendar, he was assigned to the court’s Appellate Division (which hears appeals from limited jurisdiction cases) starting in 2015. He served as Presiding Judge of the Appellate Division in 2017, demonstrating his peers’ confidence in his legal knowledge and leadership. Judge Lua has now accrued 15 years of judicial service, and he has been re-elected to subsequent six-year terms without opposition in 2012, 2018, and 2024. This unopposed election history reflects both his strong professional reputation and the community’s continued trust in his role on the bench.

Notable Cases

  • Sex Offense Case: In 2025, Judge Lua sentenced a 51-year-old convicted sex offender to six years in state prison after the man pleaded no contest to sexually abusing a minor. The defendant was a repeat offender with a prior child molestation conviction. During sentencing, Lua underscored the seriousness of the crime and the importance of protecting the victim and the community.
  • Arson Case: Judge Lua presided over a high-profile arson case stemming from a September 2024 blaze that destroyed a historic downtown Bakersfield building known as the “Toucan” building. The 48-year-old defendant ultimately pleaded no contest to unlawfully causing the fire. In 2025, Lua approved the negotiated plea and imposed a two-year prison sentence (with credit for time served), holding the man accountable for the damage while acknowledging the plea agreement reached by prosecutors and defense.
  • Officer Assault Case: In a notable trial involving an attack on law enforcement, Lua oversaw the case of a defendant who opened fire on police officers during a confrontation. The jury convicted the man of the premeditated attempted murder of a peace officer along with multiple related charges (including assault with a firearm on an officer and resisting arrest). In 2017, Judge Lua sentenced the offender to a term of 15 years to life in prison plus an additional 29 years, reflecting the severity of violently assaulting a peace officer. This hefty sentence underscored that attacks on law enforcement carry grave consequences.
  • DUI Fatality Case: Judge Lua also handled a notorious DUI homicide case arising from a 2014 incident in which a driver impaired by PCP caused a high-speed crash that claimed two young women’s lives. After the defendant was found guilty of second-degree murder and other charges, Lua delivered a stern sentence in 2017: effectively 73 years to life in prison (comprised of consecutive 30-years-to-life terms for each victim, plus additional years for related counts). In addressing the courtroom, he emphasized the tragic repercussions of the defendant’s choices and the need for a punishment commensurate with the loss of life.

Reputation and Leadership

Throughout his tenure, John Lua has developed a reputation as a fair, knowledgeable, and even-keeled jurist. Colleagues often cite his strong work ethic and calm judicial demeanor. In October 2023, the judges of the Kern County Superior Court unanimously selected him to serve as the court’s next Assistant Presiding Judge, a leadership position he assumed in January 2024. This role involves helping guide court administration and policy, and it positions him on track to become the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in an upcoming term. Upon Lua’s selection as a court leader, then-Presiding Judge J. Eric Bradshaw praised him as “a judge’s judge,” lauding Lua as a brilliant jurist and a thoughtful, decent man. Bradshaw noted Judge Lua’s remarkable ability, integrity, and commitment to the community, court staff, and fellow judicial officers. Indeed, Lua’s leadership has been characterized by a collaborative approach and dedication to upholding the court’s mission. His prior experience heading the Appellate Division and his current service as Assistant Presiding Judge both reflect the respect he has earned from his peers.

Appellate Court Reversal of Plea Deal Decision

One of Judge Lua’s case decisions was scrutinized on appeal, leading to a notable appellate court reversal related to a plea deal. In that case, the defendant and prosecutors had reached a plea bargain calling for a four-year prison term, but during the plea hearing Judge Lua declined to accept the agreement. The judge withdrew the plea from consideration without stating a specific reason, opting to proceed to trial instead. The case went to trial and resulted in a significantly harsher sentence for the defendant. On review, the California Court of Appeal found that the trial court (Judge Lua) had abused its discretion by rejecting the negotiated plea without placing justification on the record. The appellate panel reversed the resulting conviction and sent the case back to Kern County for further proceedings. This outcome underscored that while trial judges do have authority to reject plea bargains in the interest of justice, they must articulate sound reasons for doing so. The reversal served as a reminder of the importance of transparency and discretion when deviating from agreements reached by the parties in criminal cases.