Voting tips for Allen County Superior Court Judge

Hey Locals,

Today, we’re tackling some of the big issues related to the county’s judicial system, inspired by a recent panel discussion* we attended at the Allen County Prosecutor’s office between two candidates for Allen County Superior Court Judge. (Watch the full panel here.)

The event was moderated by Allen County Prosecutor Mike McAlexander, with questions by WANE 15 News Anchor Dirk Rowley and Jamie Duffy, host of a local podcast called The Probable Cause. 

For a quick refresher: 

• Voters this fall can cast a ballot for the Allen County Superior Court Judge seat currently held by Chief Judge Fran Gull, who will retire at the end of the year.
• The Superior Court race is non-partisan, which means candidates aren’t affiliated with a particular party (so if you vote straight ticket, you’ll still need to select a candidate).
• Also on the ballot? A proposed amendment that would allow judges to deny bail for defendants deemed “a substantial risk to any other person or the community.”

So… what should voters know about the Allen County Superior Court system? Who are the candidates for judge? And what key issues are they talking about?

Let’s dive in.

1. What basic information should voters know about the Allen County Superior Court system?

While we found some information online about how to prepare for appearing in court, the amount of public information about how our local court systems function and the role they play in civic life is seriously lacking. 

A guide from the Indiana Bar Foundation explains how Superior Courts developed in the state. But to get more specific information about the open seat in Allen County this fall, we had to do some digging.

Here’s a brief overview of what we learned:

• Allen County Superior Court consists of nine judges in three divisions: Civil, Criminal, and Family Relations. 
• Retiring Judge Fran Gull serves as Administrative Judge for the court's Criminal Division. This division handles cases ranging from misdemeanors like traffic violations to major felonies such as murders, and decisions made at the Superior Court level can be appealed at the Indiana Court of Appeals.
• Judges serve six-year terms, but if re-elected, they can serve for decades. Gull has been on the bench for 30 years now, and she’s overseen many high-profile cases, including the Delphi murder case. So her successor could have a similar influence for decades to come.

2. Who are the candidates running for Gull’s seat on Allen County Superior Court? 

We mentioned that two candidates spoke at the recent panel, but there are actually three candidates on the ballot for judge.

• Sam Keirns, Allen Superior Court Magistrate, who has served in the Criminal Felony Division since 2011. He previously worked as a Deputy Prosecuting Attorney in the juvenile and child support division, the misdemeanor and traffic division, and the felony division.
• Jesus “Rick” Trevino, Allen Circuit Court Magistrate, a position he’s held since 2021. He previously worked in the Allen County Prosecutor’s office, and eventually became Section Chief of the Level 6 Felony Division.
• Christina Gull, a Deputy Prosecutor in the Allen County Prosecutor’s office, who also happens to be the daughter of retiring Judge Fran Gull. She previously worked in prosecutor’s offices in other Indiana counties, including Marion, Clinton, and Hamilton. 

What do magistrates and prosecutors do?

• Magistrates (like Keirns and Trevino) are appointed by the court in which they serve, and effectively function as assistant judges. They work alongside judges, handling civil and criminal proceedings (depending on their area), and ease the “heavy burden brought on by increasing case filings,” according to The Indiana Lawyer.
• Prosecutors (like Christina Gull) bring criminal charges against a defendant on behalf of the state. The Allen County Prosecutor’s Office, led by Prosecuting Attorney Mike McAlexander, is tasked with representing the State of Indiana in all felony and misdemeanor criminal prosecutions resulting from crimes committed within Allen County. The office also pursues investigations, supervises Grand Jury proceedings, and handles juvenile cases, among other responsibilities.

It’s worth noting: Keirns and Trevino participated in the recent panel, and Christina Gull was invited, but did not attend.

Here’s what we’ve gathered about potential reasons why:

• In July, Christina Gull was suspended for a week without pay, transferred to a different office division, and had her salary reduced. This was the result of “not reviewing cases in a timely manner multiple times in the fall of 2025,” according to reporting by WANE15. Following the penalties, she posted on Facebook that these delays were due to the “physical and emotional toll” of her work, as well as challenges related to her father’s cancer diagnosis. 
• Local journalist and Journal-Gazette alum, Jamie Duffy, reported on the incident for The Probable Cause, and she was one of the panel hosts. Duffy also investigated Gull’s role in another case, noting that numerous sources identified Gull as the deputy prosecutor in a child sex crimes case in Hamilton County that ended in a fine against the prosecutor’s office.

Now here’s where it gets more interesting…

There are a few things to note about how judges are elected and appointed in Allen County. In fact, how a new judge is chosen depends on whether their predecessor serves out the end of their term or retires mid-term. 

• When judges retire mid-term, the Allen County Judicial Nominating Commission – rather than voters – vets and chooses potential candidates to replace them. These candidates then go to the Governor for final approval, and they still have to run for re-election at the end of their terms. (But incumbents usually have a significant advantage and rarely face opponents.)
• All but one of the current Allen County Superior Court Judges – retiring Judge Fran Gull being the lone exception – were appointed to their position (rather than elected by voters). This suggests it’s become somewhat of a common practice for judges to retire mid-term, and leave it to the Commission to identify their successor, rather than voters. Since many voters aren’t aware of the nuances of the judicial system, this could make it difficult for them to select the judges who can then go on to serve for decades at a time and shape our local legal system. 
• Judge Gull has allowed her seat to go to re-election (rather than retiring mid-term), and the race for Allen Superior Court Judge has a $10,000 spending limit. This limit is due to (arguably outdated) campaign finance laws from the 1980s, according to Prosecutor Mike McAlexander. Compared to other races, $10,000 is quite low, which means other factors – like name recognition – could play a larger role in influencing outcomes when voters are choosing....

All of this to say: We’d like to know more about the factors that determine whether judges decide to serve out their full term, or step down earlier, and what process produces the best outcome for Allen County, as a whole. 

Now, let’s get into the issues facing our candidates for judge.

3. What key issues are the candidates talking about?

Here are three issues to watch, and what the two candidates who attended the panel have to say about them. (Note: We did not find a website for Christina Gull’s campaign, but voters may learn more on her campaign’s Facebook page.)

1. Court congestion and case volume: Allen County is currently tied for first in the state as the county most in need of additional judicial officers. However, both candidates, Keirns and Trevino, acknowledge the budgetary and staffing constraints that would make hiring extremely difficult. 

• Keirns suggests a new case allocation strategy. Currently, cases are divided between the Superior Court judges in each division in a way that, according to Keirns, means certain judges preside over the more time-intensive jury trials. Part of this is due to space limitations, as these cases require a courtroom that could accommodate a 12-person jury. Keirns suggests the three judges split these criminal cases, though this would require finding another courtroom. 
• Trevino identifies space, staffing, and budget as big hurdles. He says the Indiana legislature is currently “more inclined to contract the judiciary than expand it.” He notes that it’s a “zero-sum” situation, which means if Allen County gets a new judicial officer, that’s one fewer officer for another county in Indiana. Thus, he recommends advocating for a courtroom at the new jail that could handle a 12-person jury to provide more space for trials.

2. Problem-solving courts: Allen County is home to multiple problem-solving courts, including Drug Court, Restoration Court, OVWI Court, and Veteran’s Court. These pre-trial diversions (and post-incarceration, in the case of ReEntry Court) are spread between the Circuit Court and Superior Court. (Judge Gull has supervised Allen County’s Drug Court since 2002.) Funding for these problem-solving courts is being cut at the state level, and Marian County Reentry Court had to fold recently due to a lack of funding. 

• Trevino has presided over OVWI Court, Restoration Court, and Veteran’s Court, and sees the main goal of these courts as “helping people, which then hopefully reduces recidivism… which then leads to ultimately taxpayer savings.” He views the decision to cut funding to these programs as shortsighted, and notes that spending money upfront on these programs makes sense given the long-term benefits.
• Keirns agrees that “problem-solving courts work,” and while he’s in favor of expansion, given the current budget situation, he says “we’re just trying to preserve them.” He notes that Community Corrections was recently faced with a budget shortfall, and County Council helped with funding to overcome the gap. Expanding these programs, no matter how effective, is simply “not in the cards,” Keirns says.

Note: Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court is a supporter of these courts. We’re interested in this issue, and will be following it in the coming months as the legislature prepares to go back in session.

3. The new county jail: At the panel, interviewer Dirk Rowley mentioned that Community Corrections plans to move to the new jail, and there’s also talk of adding misdemeanor courts and possibly a trial court to the campus, as well.

• Keirns sees the new jail as an opportunity for the judicial system to have productive, collaborative conversations with elected officials to ensure court systems operate efficiently while still preserving due process rights of individuals. And if the new jail ends up including courtrooms, it will be up to the judges in the criminal division to help usher in a new court process while working closely with other elected officials involved in the judicial system, Keirns says.
• Trevino is also in favor of having courtrooms at the new jail, and sees some benefit to the consolidation and centralization of criminal division services and pre-trial services, Community Corrections, and the probation department. He notes that with the current system, offenders might be reporting to three different places at any given time. Consolidating these different areas could help improve efficiency, given the constraints of the current situation.

Another key issue on the ballot? 

Senate Joint Resolution 1, which would allow judges to deny bail if a defendant is deemed a public safety threat. Since judge candidates cannot comment on this, we reached out to Chief Counsel for the Allen County Prosecutor’s Office, Tesa Helge, to weigh in. 

• Earlier this month, the Prosecutor’s Office announced its support for the amendment. While Helge believes the amendment “provides several safeguards to prevent it from violating due process rights,” others have expressed concerns. 
• On the flip side: The ACLU of Indiana says the amendment would “give Indiana new power to take away a person’s freedom before they have been convicted of a crime.” The ACLU warns this measure would keep defendants behind bars based “not only on what they are accused of, but on a judge’s assessment of the person and what they might do in the future.”

Learn more about the resolution in a recent report by the Indiana Capital Chronicle, which notes: It would still require the state to prove via “clear and convincing evidence” that no other release conditions would “reasonably” protect public safety. If the state chose to deny bail, defendants would still be entitled to a hearing and attorney and could appeal the court’s decision.

Whew, that was a lot of information! Thanks for sticking with us. We hope this week’s issue helps you feel more prepared to vote.

What other questions do you have about voting this fall? Hit reply to this email, and let us know.

Have a good weekend, Locals!

Your Reporter and Editor,

Rachel Horton and Kara Hackett