Judge Stephanie Garratt

Judge Stephanie Garratt serves on the San Mateo County Superior Court, appointed by Governor Gavin Newsom in 2021. The available public record on her judicial conduct is limited, but two documented data points provide meaningful insight. First, in 2019 she presided over a case involving a Redwood City woman charged with attempting to drown her newborn in a McDonald's restroom, and she imposed a sentence that included no prison time. This outcome in a serious felony case involving a vulnerable victim suggests a willingness to consider alternatives to incarceration in cases involving defendants with potentially mitigating circumstances. Second, Judge Garratt has been publicly associated with courthouse security complaints at San Mateo County Superior Court, specifically involving judges raising concerns to the sheriff about deputies allegedly falling asleep on duty and murder suspects being left unattended without shackles. Her involvement in surfacing these security concerns reflects an attention to courtroom safety and institutional accountability. Beyond these two documented matters, no ruling analyses, attorney observations, or additional case data are available to support broader characterizations of her judicial philosophy or ruling patterns. Attorneys should treat this profile as a starting point and conduct independent research into her more recent rulings.

Given the limited data available, attorneys should approach appearances before Judge Garratt with caution and conduct independent research into her recent rulings on the San Mateo County Superior Court docket. The one documented sentencing outcome — no prison time in a serious felony case — indicates that she has, at least in one instance, departed from incarceration-focused sentencing. Attorneys in criminal matters, particularly those involving defendants with mitigating circumstances, should be prepared to present thorough mitigation evidence and alternative sentencing proposals. However, this single data point is insufficient to establish a pattern, and attorneys should not assume leniency as a default. Regarding courtroom conduct, her documented involvement in courthouse security complaints signals that she takes courtroom order, safety protocols, and institutional decorum seriously. Attorneys should ensure compliance with all courtroom security procedures and should not treat procedural or safety requirements as formalities. No data exists to characterize her preferences regarding oral argument, motion practice, or evidentiary rulings, so attorneys should default to thorough preparation across all dimensions.

• critical

  Conduct Independent Docket Research

  With no analyzed rulings in this profile, attorneys must independently review Judge Garratt's recent rulings on the San Mateo County Superior Court docket before any appearance. Focus on case types relevant to your matter.

• critical

  Prepare Comprehensive Mitigation Materials in Criminal Cases

  The documented 2019 sentencing outcome demonstrates that Judge Garratt has imposed non-custodial sentences in serious felony matters. Defense attorneys should prepare thorough mitigation packages including psychological evaluations, support letters, and alternative sentencing proposals.

• important

  Review All Courtroom Security and Procedural Requirements

  Given her documented involvement in courthouse security complaints, ensure full compliance with all San Mateo County Superior Court security protocols and standing orders before appearing in her courtroom.

• important

  Obtain Local Counsel Insight

  Because no attorney observations are available in this profile, consulting with San Mateo County practitioners who have appeared before Judge Garratt is the most direct way to obtain current, reliable intelligence on her preferences and courtroom style.

• ›Comply strictly with all San Mateo County Superior Court security protocols; Judge Garratt has formally raised concerns about security lapses and treats courtroom order as a priority.
• ›Arrive prepared and on time; her documented engagement with institutional accountability suggests she holds all courtroom participants to professional standards.
• ›Do not make assumptions about her rulings based on the single documented sentencing outcome; treat each matter as requiring independent, thorough preparation.
• ›Consult the court's local rules and any standing orders issued by Judge Garratt before your appearance, as no data exists in this profile to characterize her specific procedural preferences.