Judge Charles S. Crompton

Judge Charles S. Crompton presides at San Francisco Superior Court (Civic Center Courthouse) and has been documented handling serious criminal matters in early 2026. The available record confirms two specific case actions from March 2026: he ordered a competency evaluation for a homicide defendant named Rickleffs, and he appointed both psychiatrists and an attorney for a defendant charged in connection with homophobic and antisemitic church vandalism. These two documented actions, while limited in scope, establish that Judge Crompton handles high-stakes criminal proceedings involving mental health assessments and court-appointed representation. The data available for Judge Crompton is narrow — no ruling analyses, no attorney observations, and no ingested content are available beyond these two case references. As a result, no patterns regarding his judicial philosophy, ruling tendencies, or courtroom management style can be established from the current record. Attorneys should treat this profile as a starting point for further research rather than a comprehensive behavioral guide. What can be stated with confidence is that Judge Crompton has demonstrated engagement with the procedural requirements of competency proceedings under California Penal Code section 1368 and with the appointment of qualified mental health professionals in criminal cases. His handling of the church vandalism matter also indicates familiarity with cases involving hate-crime-adjacent conduct and the procedural protections owed to defendants in such proceedings.

Given that the only documented case actions involve competency evaluations and court-appointed representation, attorneys appearing before Judge Crompton in criminal matters — particularly those involving mental health issues — should ensure that all procedural requirements under California Penal Code sections 1368 and 1369 are meticulously satisfied. The record shows he has ordered psychiatric appointments and engaged with the formal competency evaluation process, so any motion or argument touching on a defendant's mental state should be grounded in the applicable statutory framework and supported by qualified expert documentation. Beyond these two data points, no patterns regarding Judge Crompton's preferred argument styles, motion practice tendencies, or courtroom management approach are available from the current record. Attorneys should conduct independent research — including reviewing San Francisco Superior Court dockets, speaking with colleagues who have appeared before him, and reviewing any published tentative rulings — before making strategic assumptions about his preferences. For matters involving court-appointed counsel or expert witnesses, the documented record suggests Judge Crompton is willing to exercise his appointment authority when procedurally warranted. Attorneys seeking such appointments should present clear, well-documented requests that satisfy the applicable legal standards.

• critical

  Research San Francisco Superior Court Docket Independently

  Given the limited data in this profile, attorneys should independently review Judge Crompton's docket through the San Francisco Superior Court case management system to identify additional rulings and patterns before any appearance.

• critical

  Master Competency Evaluation Procedures

  If your matter involves any mental health or competency issues, prepare thorough compliance with California Penal Code sections 1368 and 1369. The documented record confirms Judge Crompton has engaged with these proceedings and ordered psychiatric evaluations.

• important

  Prepare Expert Appointment Requests with Full Documentation

  If seeking court-appointed experts or counsel, document the legal basis and factual necessity thoroughly. The record shows Judge Crompton has granted such appointments when the procedural context warranted them.

• important

  Consult Colleagues with Direct Courtroom Experience

  No attorney observations are available in this profile. Seek out practitioners who have appeared before Judge Crompton in San Francisco Superior Court to obtain firsthand behavioral and procedural intelligence.

• important

  Review Local Rules for San Francisco Superior Court

  In the absence of judge-specific behavioral data, strict compliance with San Francisco Superior Court local rules and standing orders is the baseline preparation requirement.

• ›Comply strictly with all San Francisco Superior Court local rules and any standing orders issued by Judge Crompton, as no data exists to suggest exceptions are tolerated.
• ›In criminal matters involving mental health, arrive prepared to address procedural requirements under California Penal Code sections 1368 and 1369, as the documented record shows Judge Crompton actively engages with these statutory frameworks.
• ›When requesting court-appointed experts or counsel, present a clear and complete legal and factual basis for the appointment, consistent with the documented pattern of Judge Crompton granting such requests in properly supported cases.