PRYOR — Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice John F. Reif was in Pryor Friday to speak to the Rotary Club.

Judge Shawn Taylor introduced Reif, who was appointed to the high court in 2007 by Gov. Brad Henry.

Reif is a graduate of Cascia Hall, the University of Tulsa and the University of Tulsa School of Law. Reif was on the Indian Nation Council of Government, an assistant district attorney in Tulsa County, an adjunct law professor at Oral Roberts University, an Owasso policeman, a special judge for the 14th Judicial District, and a Judge for the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.

Reif told the Rotary Club he travels throughout the state giving talks about the judiciary and that Oklahomans have the right to elect judges. Reif said the judges are non-partisan, which he described as a “strength and benefit” of choosing judges.

Reif said he was not on the ballot this election and not campaigning for his job. He encouraged voters to know who their judges are. He brought a brochure about the state judiciary which introduces them to the public. The judges face retention elections when their terms expire. These judges on the supreme court, the court of civil appeals and the court of criminal appeals are on the retention ballot.

“I think its real important that you get to see the people that are making decisions about your lives. That you get to literally size them up.” He went on to say he hoped the voters at Rotary will make a decision about him when he is on the ballot for retention.

Since 1969, Oklahoma has had a unified court system. Before 1969, Oklahoma had justices of the peace and a county judge. The court was common pleas and there were superior courts. But 1969 brought court reform. Judicial offices were brought into a single district court and all the cases are heard at the county seat courthouse. Reif said in some unusual cases, the county has two courthouses, as in Kay County, with Newkirk the county seat and Ponca City south of Newkirk.

The changes brought about in 1969 were due to a scandal in the mid-1960s in which three state supreme court justices were removed for accepting bribes. This scandal brought about legislative changes in the state judiciary. One of those changes was a merit-based judicial nomination process.

Court reform made civil and criminal cases decided at the local levels by district court. The judges are special judges, associate judges and district judges. These judges can hear general cases, both criminal and civil.

The appeals courts are divided into criminal and civil. Appeals are presented to the supreme court for an initial review. The Supreme Court then hands most of the cases (about 95 to 97 percent) back to the appeals court, which in Oklahoma is the court of last resort. The Supreme Court retains a small number of cases to hear which they deem especially important for the citizens and state of Oklahoma.

Reif stressed that just because a case is not heard by the supreme court does not make it any less important to the people involved, it just means that it is not a case with direct impact on the state of Oklahoma. The supreme court does give itself the right to review a lower court decision, but most cases are not reviewed by the state’s highest court. Reif said occassionally a lower court judge makes an error and the high court takes up that case.

The members of the Supreme Court come from nine districts in the state. Reif’s district is District 1, from Ottawa County to Grant County. Reif’s district does not cover Mayes County. Mayes County’s Justice is James E. Edmondson.

Reif said that the framers of Oklahoma wanted the justices to come from nine geographic districts rather than have all of them come from Tulsa or Oklahoma City. There are five judges on the court of criminal appeals, from different districts. There are 12 judges on the court of civil appeals. Six of those judges hold court in Oklahoma City and six in Tulsa. Those judges come from the old six congressional districts. Oklahoma now has five congressional districts.

Reif took questions. He was asked about unanimous decisions. Reif said he does prefer consensus as it makes for a strong decision, but he says that those are rare.

“Surely nine of us can’t all be wrong. I’m very comfortable with a seven-two, six-three decision. But when we come to those five four decisions, that means there’s a lot of room for reasonable civil disagreement about the meaning of a statue, the effect of a law.”

‘Stare Decisis’ is a rule courts use to stand by the law as it was decided by another court. Reif said that a lot of stare decisis cases are based on a five-four basis.

“I don’t want you to leave here thinking that’s any less law than a nine-0 opinion.” He said even if he disagreed with that decision, he has to stand by that ruling for the good of the people of Oklahoma.