Judge Craig Collins: What the NC Court of Appeals Does and Why It Touches Your Life

Peter Pappas: Welcome back to the Carolina Cabinet. I'm your host, Peter Pappas, and I am honored to have as a guest today running for state judgeship, Mr. Craig Collins. Judge Craig Collins, excuse me. Welcome, sir.

Craig Collins: Peter, great to be with you today.

Peter Pappas: Well, I'm looking forward to it. as usual, the cabinet is the voice for conservatives of Fayetteville, Cumberland County and beyond. And not sure if you knew that or not, but you you did sign up blindly, so I appreciate that. I did try to leave the calendar open though. full disclosure, Ms. Christine Walchick is your opponent in this race. we did invite her twice. her staff did decline due to scheduling. at the cabinet we think it's fair to let you know that we have reached out to her but and we'll we hope to hear for her whenever she's ready. She's got a few weeks ahead of the election and we'll see if she decides to find some time in her schedule to come visit us. So You were a judge you you are a judge in Gaston County. So Gaston County to Fayetteville. What's the drive like? You been down here yet?

Craig Collins: I've I've a few few times I've traveled about a hundred thousand miles during this campaign, or three hundred campaign events. So I I I know the seventy

Peter Pappas: wow, wow. But you're not keeping track.

Craig Collins: four the seventy four road pretty well.

Peter Pappas: Okay, okay, okay. So what do people in Gaston County think about us down south or down east? What do they have an opinion about us down easters or what?

Craig Collins: Well, you know, I Gas Gassen County is a wonderful place to be, but I but I've really discovered I I absolutely do I know this sounds like campaigns peak, but love all hundred counties. everybody has their their own restaurants that you just have to go to. And

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: unfortunately for my waistline I I I travel the state by restaurants and I make sure

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: to know where to stop at every every place and who has the best milkshake and who has the best burgers. And so so I've enjoyed traveling across the state. And I always call one of the local judges or prosecutors or or police officers and say, Hey, take take me to the right place. Make sure

Peter Pappas: Right. Yeah.

Craig Collins: I go I know where to go.

Peter Pappas: Okay. Okay. Well, to be fair, so I have to ask you, so and we're just in the fun part right now, so bear with me. But sweeter tea or in sweet guy?

Craig Collins: sweet every time.

Peter Pappas: Okay. Best barbecue in North Carolina, east or west.

Craig Collins: You know, I I have to again it'll sound like the political answer. I absolutely love

Peter Pappas: Ha ha

Craig Collins: both. I I'll tell you, I I don't drive down eighty five without stopping at at Lexington

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: Barbecue. th there's quite a few places in the east. I I love Parker's. I I love literally all of it. And

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: my my doctor doesn't love the fact that I love all of it.

Peter Pappas: Right, right. Yeah. Somebody's got to keep an eye on you, sir. So yeah, I will say I've been to the Western barbecue and the red slaw threw me off, but it was very good. It it's definitely definitely something to look forward to. So

Craig Collins: As long as it's not the South Carolina version.

Peter Pappas: right, well, that's not real barbecue then. Or Texas. That's that's not.

Craig Collins: Exactly.

Peter Pappas: so and I will say I have to ask you the restaurants and stuff because that seems like the reels that get the most hits are the ones when we're just talking about local, where are we gonna feed our face? Like Like we missed a meal in this country. So, down to business here. you've been a prosecutor, a private lawyer, district judge, and a superior court judge. So that's nine years at a time. You've got a thing for nines, I think. I think.

Craig Collins: I do. I I I'm not sure. I think that's where I get my my desire to move on. but I've loved

Peter Pappas: Okay. Well

Craig Collins: every every step of the career.

Peter Pappas: Well, so walk me so that brings me to my question, you know, walk me through why you left each one and why the Court of Appeals and why now?

Craig Collins: Well we had a change of administration in the DA's office and it was the right time just to to move on. the family didn't want to relocate and so it was either a a long drive to a a different prosecutor district or or opening my own law firm. And so I did that and and found it incredibly rewarding in ways I didn't expect. I I knew I was going to enjoy prosecuting, that's what I went to law school to do. but

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: then when I got into prior practice, the ability to help individuals one on one and help families figure out a path forward when when they're struggling. a and when they come to you asking for help when the the world seems to collapse around them and they trust you to be the one to guide through it, I find it incredibly rewarding. I think the only thing that that could be more rewarding in that position is being a pastor. the

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: just when people come and ask for that guidance. Left private practice when we had a a death on our district court bench and Governor Pat McCorry appointed me to fill that seat. got elected a couple of times to that and then the the s the superior court position became available. And it just seemed like the right time to to move on to that. and now now we're in in the middle of the statewide race.

Peter Pappas: Right, right. Well, how does this compare to your Okay, so the death in the district court or superior court, I'm sorry, I lost track of that one, but

Craig Collins: Well th the the death was in district court. the superior

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: court position was a newly created position in in the state budget.

Peter Pappas: So you didn't run for the appointment, but did you run for well, you had to run for reelection if you were there for nine years, right?

Craig Collins: Yeah, I so I was elected twice to district court as well.

Peter Pappas: Okay. Okay. So how does this campaign compare to either one of those?

Craig Collins: you know what? It's I campaign full time during campaign season. as soon as court's over every day I I go out and do events. The difference is the amount of mileage I put it on the car.

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: the that's the really the hard part is the amount of time between events. You know when you're

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: campaigning in one one county or a smaller district, you can get to multiple events in in the evening after work. Saturdays, if you spend a whole day traveling your one county, you can you can visit a lot of voters. Statewide, quite often I I've had eighteen, twenty plus hours, and you get to speak at three or four events, but you you have to go where the the voters are. And so some days it's just a lot of time on the road.

Peter Pappas: Yeah, yeah, that's that that is a big time killer, but it's a necessary evil. I mean, so if let's see, have you how many of the counties do you think you've been to so far? I mean, there's a hundred counties in North Carolina. I mean, do you think you've done a good ninety percent, seventy percent of them?

Craig Collins: certainly over seventy percent. I

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: the the actual number I I couldn't tell you.

Peter Pappas: It should be a blur by now. I don't think you'd be able to tell me

Craig Collins: Ha ha.

Peter Pappas: with as much. so yeah, that's definitely a big difference from a local race to a statewide. So what makes you want to do the Court of Appeals now? What makes you want to sit on that bench?

Craig Collins: Well, you know, I think it's just so essential to have judges who who'll do one simple thing and that's read the Constitution. And so it it's it's actually a a a issue of contention between me and my opponent. I believe the Constitution means what it says. I believe as a judge I should always follow it, and judges

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: should never amend the Constitution to fit their political agenda. I I don't sign up for the the belief that the Constitution evolves or modifies its meaning. based off the whims of the court or societal changes. We have a process to amend the constitution and I think it's essential that we stick to that that process. It's worked through throughout our history and and it should never be done in the in the judges' chambers.

Peter Pappas: So, and I meant to preface our entire conversation and let you know that this is not going to be like a Senate confirmation hearing, and I will not be asking you how you will rule on certain topics. We're gonna leave that for the guys in Washington. so essentially what you're telling me is that judges should not legislate from the bench. most every judge is gonna tell you that. Now, what does it actually mean on an appellate court when you're reviewing other judges? Give me two kinds of cases where you think the Court of Appeals has gotten it wrong in recent years. And so let's go ahead and start there.

Craig Collins: Well be careful not to violate the code of judicial standards and and and discuss certain things, but judges will often make decisions that that doesn't fit to their own personal wishes. so there are times where government action may need to be suppressed because they didn't follow the constitution or the statutes. and and that's not something that that a law and order kind of guy like myself would always enjoy doing. But first and foremost, I'm I'm a rule of law guy. And so the the rule of law is is my passion when I'm on the bench. it's it's not issue oriented, it's not to come up with a policy. And so if there if there's a law that the legislature properly legislates and it falls within the constitution, even if it's a statute that I wouldn't have ever voted for in the legislature, it's one that should be upheld. And so that's the hard part as a judge to put your personal desires aside. and what you would want the law to say and just simply follow it as it's written.

Peter Pappas: Right. That's gotta be tough. Absolutely. when it comes to so and this is just me trying to be a student over here, with the federal constitution, the United States Constitution, there are different schools of thought that went into creating it, and I think it gets referenced like the Federalist Papers and other things, kind of to determine founder intent, if I'm saying that correctly. Does North Carolina Constitution have similar, like great thinkers of the day that we try to go back and understand? So we can't interpret their intention.

Craig Collins: Well absolut absolutely. I you know the the North Carolina Constitu Constitution is pretty young. I I I'm I'm of enough age that the Constitution written in nineteen seventy one seems like a pretty young constitution. It's been amended forty two times since. So so we do have a constitution that that has been modified with time, but forty two times by the right process. when the constitution is clear and tells us exactly what we're supposed to to say, We don't need to worry about intent. And that that's really the goal,

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: I think, of every bit of legislation and and court decisions. Just be as clear as possible and then you don't have

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: to worry about interpretation. interpretation gets dangerous. I find most of the time the constitution's clear and you just have to follow it. And

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: and sometimes w lawyers are taught to overthink these things and and it it's just part of the process of law school and then

Peter Pappas: Isn't that what you're taught to do, is just make sure we build by the word or something? I thought you guys

Craig Collins: Well

Peter Pappas: in

Craig Collins: and and and your clients want you to do that too when you're in practice. they want you to win. they don't

Peter Pappas: Right. Yeah. Okay.

Craig Collins: they don't always care what the the law says. A lawyer is gonna advocate for their client within the law, but a judge's responsibility isn't to advocate for one side or the other. It's simply to advocate for the constitution and the rule of law.

Peter Pappas: Okay. So do we have the great thinkers that we try to refer back to with our co North Carolina constitution?

Craig Collins: Of course. I but again we North Carolinians, we we really question the Constitution again, forty-two times that it's been amended. three times on this year's ballot that voters will have the opportunity to sign if they want to amend it three more times.

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: so I I don't know that that our citizens just sit in awe of of what they wrote in nineteen seventy one. they want me to follow it, they want me to follow to the letter, but when they don't like the outcome, they want the legislature to put it on the ballot to to amend it. And so so don't I don't think North Carolinians do groupthink very well. we we're independent minded and we just simply follow the constitution. If we don't like what the constitution

Peter Pappas: Right, right.

Craig Collins: says, we have no problem changing it again.

Peter Pappas: Yeah, I'm a member of a certain party that we eat our own sometimes more than we don't really let us just be

Craig Collins: Ha ha.

Peter Pappas: good whatever's it's like, you know, we're gonna question how good of a so and so you are. But yeah, we don't do group think very well at all. And I think on with my situation, it is you have a bunch of smart people in a room and we just we gotta be right. Somebody does. so let's see. sh you say so If I was gonna ask you how should a judge treat a law you personally think is bad policy, you really have to hang your hat and walk in there. Yeah.

Craig Collins: Is it constitutional? Is it constitutional? That that's all that's the only question I have. And and I'd never look at a law as a judge. As a citizen's different. As a judge, you look

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: at the law and say, th do I like this law? What's what's the consequence of this law? The only consequence I care about is does that mean the government violates our rights? So it it's kind of a boring campaign to run as a c as a conservative constitutionalist. That

Peter Pappas: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Craig Collins: that all I d every answer comes back to the what's the constitution telling me to do? And what's Quite honestly, what does my oath of office tell me to do as well, which is in the Constitution? And

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: when when a judge puts their hand on the Bible, it takes the oath of office, swearing to uphold that Constitution, it means all of it, not just the parts you like. And so if the statutes in front of you fall within that constitution, they're upheld. And if if they don't, then they're struck down. So even if there's a law that that you may really want, if it's not written in a way that that passes constitutional muster, It it needs to be it needs to be strict.

Peter Pappas: Right, right. And that's I think that's difficult for people in general. I think we have conflicts on boards of election and local boards of commissioners and stuff like that. It's like check your partisanship, check your personal stuff at the door, and just do what's right for in your case, do what's right for the constitution, but in our case, the other things, do what's right for the community. Put yourself aside from those things.

Craig Collins: Well, and and I think if all those other elected officials simply do what's right for the community, make sure they're following within the constitution, that is what's doing what what's right for your party. because what's because the party, either party is or any of the third parties, the the idea is to to come up with policies that's best for for our communities. And but the local communities and the state, so the commissioners and the legislature will decide what they think is in the interest of their constituents. the the only interest that I have in play as as a judge is to make sure that that the constitution is followed, the laws are followed. Now as a as a trial judge, there are times of where it goes beyond that. It's it's what's what's right within the sentencing laws. So I do a lot of criminal trials. so that that's a constitutional authority of the trial judge. And so that that's where a judge gets to impact a little bit based off of their own own personal Reading of a case of where a case falls within sentencing structure once they find the sentencing block. But most of the time, the Superior Court judge outcomes are determined by juries in civil and criminal court. And so I go through through serious felony trials routinely, and I don't allow myself to think what what do I think the outcome should be? What what should the jury do? That's not my lane. I I don't worry about that. I worry about what to do if there's in criminal case a sentencing hearing. in both criminal and superior or criminal and civil court, I worry about what is the law requirement to do on evidentiary issues, but it it's never what outcome do I want. it's quite honestly you're relevant to a to a superior court judge.

Peter Pappas: With evidentiary issues, you mean whether to admit or accept or suppress it, that kind of thing? Okay.

Craig Collins: Whether evidence is admissible based under the rules of evidence.

Peter Pappas: Okay. All right. And how how much latitude do you really have as a as a sitting judge? I mean, you have rules to follow, do you not? I mean

Craig Collins: Well, there there's a good amount that's discretionary, but but not all that much as far as what the law says to do. Now the discretionary part is really how the facts before you get applied to that law. So the trial judge we have to remember and appellate judges, I think it's really important for appellate judges to remember that the trial judge is the one in the courtroom during suppression hearings, during evidentiary issues, they get to watch the witness, get to get to see the witness. They gives the the cu the the cues of whether they're being truthful or not. the the way they respond. Whereas the appellate court is looking solely on a transcript and looking at the words from that hearing. They don't get to h hear the inflection of voice, they don't get to see the the physical responses. And so judges get a lot of leeway in how they read the facts. As long as the evidence supports their their findings and what the facts are, that that's generally upheld As long as the judges aren't abusing their discretion.

Peter Pappas: Right, right. Well, I don't think anybody likes their cable company. Not everybody's gonna like their judge. I mean, that's just kind of the way it's gonna be. let's bring it local now. most people in Cumberland County, they're only gonna see a district court, if they're unlucky enough to see traffic, custody, small claims, some kind of issue like that. What does the Court of Appeals do that's going to touch their lives? we are a heavy military county. Custody and support cases that cross state lines are very common here. what should a family at Fort Bragg know about how the appeals process works?

Craig Collins: Well, so th they rarely will actually see the Court of Appeals and they may

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: not know the direct impact, but the Court of Appeals impacts our everyday lives literally all the time. It impacts when a law enforcement officer is standing outside someone's door for the officer to know when they're allowed to go through that door in ways that evidence will be u upheld and and omitted. It allows the the prosecutor in that same case to know what to argue and your trial judge to know when the evidence should come in or shouldn't come in. If the Court of Appeals is doing its job right, and then your trial judge is following the the case law and following the statutes and following the the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, then the people in that trial courtroom probably never really think about the appellate courts. But the appellate courts are going review all these cases, make sure that the law was followed, give opinions on it, and and give an order, and then the trial judge, such as myself, will read that case decision. Make sure to follow what the what the law is, what the rules of evidence are. And again, if the trial judge does those things, the case rarely gets anything of significant impact out of the appellate courts. But the decision decisions throughout the case, even before the case, when the evidence is being collected, the the decisions written by the appellate courts, and and quite honestly, over ninety percent of the time the final decisions are made by the Court of Appeals. Those are decisions that are impacting how evidence is gathered, how evidence is admitted in trial. what the what the outcomes of cases are gonna be. So

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: you don't always see it, but it but it's as a trial judge, it's always in the background. And it has incredible influence on what we do both during my time as a district court judge and now as a superior court judge. When I was a prosecutor as a private attorney, the appellate decisions impact everything that we do in our court system.

Peter Pappas: Well, you guys are the appellate court is the check to the check of the balance. I mean, you're you're the extra step of the check and balance.

Craig Collins: Well as as one appellate judge told me one day, I I was I was joking around with her we we were just having fun and and and she looked at me and said, You better keep keep in mind, I'm going home to grade your papers this weekend. So so

Peter Pappas: Yeah.

Craig Collins: they've reviewed but but in all truthfulness, these are judges who literally

Peter Pappas: Yeah.

Craig Collins: are reviewing it because the trial judge is making so many decisions on the fly. You really don't have you don't have clerks, you don't have a day to go back to your chambers while the jury's sitting in the jury room. to go and research every issue. So your trial judges have to know so much law in so so many different areas that it's important to have it reviewed later in in a more sterile environment by judges who have clerks, who have access to all the the legal books, and but more importantly, and we have all that, but the time to sit there

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: and truly study it and make sure that we got it right, because nobody wants a a criminal case or a civil case decided on inappropriate evidence. None of us would want to lose a a custody battle because the judge got a decision wrong. And and no judge wants that. So as a judge, I welcome that review. Make sure that it was done right. Make sure that that whatever decisions are made in the courtroom are done fairly, constitutionally, and under the statutes. And so that's the biggest role that the appellate courts have for us.

Peter Pappas: Okay. And this is not in my list of questions, but it just as you were speaking, it dawned on me. I have had other local superior and district court judges on recently. you're a sitting superior court judge now. what did your docket look like? Like how how packed are your because you mentioned the speed that you've got to respond. that's got to be like a marathon. So, like, what does your docket look like for the week? Okay.

Craig Collins: Well it it really depends on the day. So when I was in district court and I I could have one case it would take the whole day, or I could have three hundred files on on one docket. I I I always actually enjoyed the the large volume dockets to figure out how to get all all those cases fairly heard and through the the small timeline that we have. but I I'll tell you, in Superior Court, it's not unusual to have one case for the week. not necessarily

Peter Pappas: Okay. Okay.

Craig Collins: the docket, where you have a bunch of cases on the docket. For trial. but one case that starts and takes you the whole week. not long ago I I had a sex offense with quite a few accounts and quite a few witnesses that took us about three weeks to try. murder cases quite often take several weeks. so superior court is a lot slower paced on that level than than a district court, although I'll tell

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: you the the evidence and the witnesses come at you just as fast and y and the objections have to be ruled on just as fast, but but it's

Peter Pappas: Right. Yeah.

Craig Collins: it's a case that's gonna get the the scrutiny like none no other cases.

Peter Pappas: Well, I asked because I think a lot of citizens don't realize you know, they think you got this cushy judge job, you know, and it's you're earning your pay as a sitting judge in North Carolina. especially when I spoke to the district and superior people here, you know, it's it's crazy what you can have on your docket in district court, especially. are we short handed jurists in this state?

Craig Collins: That that's not a decision for me to make. That's quite honestly

Peter Pappas: I know.

Craig Collins: a legislative decision. I I think that we we do a good job with the resources we have. I I don't know what the what the impact of more judges would be, because remember if you add more judges, that means you need to to appoint more prosecutors, you need to appoint

Peter Pappas: Right?

Craig Collins: more court appointed defense accounts counsel, we're gonna need more jurors. Quite often in many of the courthouses, we're gonna need additions built on for more courtrooms. more staff. So the cost becomes really high to add to add courtrooms. it's not just one judge that you just hire and it's just their salary. It's court reporters,

Peter Pappas: Right, right, right.

Craig Collins: courtroom clerks, courtroom deputies. so those are all factors that that I'm glad the legislature gets to figure that out. And and we have we have a great leadership the administrative office of the courts

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: that advocates for the court system. when

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: they ask me my opinion on on On specific issues I I I answer it, but I I also really believe it's important for the judicial system to speak with one voice and to do that through through the leadership there and and allow

Peter Pappas: Okay.

Craig Collins: them to make those decisions.

Peter Pappas: So somebody's watching mind in the store when it comes to that as far as our right sizing of our courts. It's not just we're struggling and we need to call the senators.

Craig Collins: Absolutely. In fairness though, I in fairness I've never heard of a government agency claim that they had plenty of resources and didn't need more. but

Peter Pappas: Yeah.

Craig Collins: but but I also think and I I went through all the expenses of having more court, but think of

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: the expenses we have of people sitting in jail waiting on trial. th th there's just the cost of justice of not getting cases heard quickly is a is a issue on the other side of that that balancing scale. th those are all issues that that need to be considered. I I just show up each day, handle as many cases as I possibly can, and and try to be as fair as humanly possible.

Peter Pappas: Okay. So coming to a close here. judicial races in North Carolina, they are partisan now, and you're running with an R next to your name. let's see. If I see I keep reading my question, I'm like, well, maybe. if you can think of in general a case where the law forced you to result to a result that you personally thought was wrong, but tell me how you ruled, if you if you can generically talk about that.

Craig Collins: Well, you some of the hardest cases I've dealt with as a judge were were custody matters and and things like termination of parental rights when when parents just weren't weren't doing what they're supposed to do. And there's pretty strict guidelines of of of what to do. The first step quite often that we get a lot of cases with grandparent rights, where grandparents are the ones attempting to the community have custody. And quite often when when that grandparent files that motion, they're clearly what would be the the better home for the child, all things equal. But the first hurdle they have to get over before I get to get to the best interest of the child is certain rights to protect for the parent. And so we have to make sure that the parents' rights are are honored. And of course I believe in in family rights and and parental rights. I also want children to be in the best home possible. And so the judge has to, in those cases, be really careful to not not jump to that second phase of asking, well, where would the kid be raised better? because otherwise The the danger there is the government starts plucking kids out of homes and say we have a better home for you and and just randomly finding a a house where where they have more resources and and parents that that may do things a little differently and take away our our right to parent our children. but it sometimes it's really hard when you when you look at somebody and and and have to give them bad answers. terminating parental rights at all, looking across the courtroom and telling a parent that the the statutes have required me to to grant the motion. they those cases can be really hard. And the other issue of that can get really challenging for a judge is when someone comes before you and they they are in need of a remedy. And the remedy they want is is is something that not only you want to give, but it's the right thing to do, but

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: they filed at the wrong motion or they're in the wrong court. And you have to tell them that they're gonna have to leave without the remedy that deep down you want to give them, but

Peter Pappas: Mm-hmm.

Craig Collins: you have to follow the law first.

Peter Pappas: Right.

Craig Collins: And so sometimes they leave unhappy with the lack of result, but sometimes they just need to go to the the right location for it. And so it it's

Peter Pappas: So it's definitely your your knowledge and and your institutional knowledge of twenty seven years at least that I've counted. it's still hard as a human being to your gut says one

Craig Collins: yeah.

Peter Pappas: thing, but the law says nope.

Craig Collins: So I'm coming up on three decades now. It's almost thirty years. And it the cases that that that wake you up in the middle of the night are children. Not just Cussie. When when when you have a a a child, I had to visit a client in the in a youth detention center and it was Halloween night. And I had to go up there 'cause we had court the next day and some pretty important, weighty decisions to make that I can't go into publicly, obviously. But watching kids that that truly look like babies walking around there. with the cement floor and the cinder block walls, I I I that's an image that wakes me up still to this day, and and it's been probably coming up on t two decades since that one particular visit. And there's a couple of kids that just it gets etched into your brain of of just how sad that is. Now I'm not saying that the these kids weren't where they belonged at all. I trust the system, I trust that that's that was appropriate. setting based off of whatever it is that those kids were were accused of doing. But just knowing that it's children. those are the cases and trying to reach them the best we can, knowing what they can have in life, but the path that they're on and what that would give them in life. Those are cases that are just heart wrenching. and you just have to eventually learn how to turn that off and not not let it impact you when

Peter Pappas: Yeah, yeah.

Craig Collins: you go home so you can still be healthy and and good for your own family.

Peter Pappas: Right. Well, and that's the thing. You're, you know, i i church is for charity and and the those feelings, but you're in a position that you have to be pragmatic and you have to say, This is it this is it. That you you don't get that luxury that other people in their careers do. So last one, I'm gonna let you go. what's the one thing that you'd want people watching to take out of the last half hour about you and your campaign?

Craig Collins: Okay, I just plan on working tirelessly to protect our constitution, defend our constitutional rights, to fight against anybody who wants to do us harm, whether that's harm through the community with with violent criminal acts or in our courtroom, by putting judges in there who want to ignore, erase and rewrite the constitution. I I just look forward to serving our community in this new capacity.

Peter Pappas: Okay. Well, Judge Collins, thank you. You came into a room where you weren't sure if the host was gonna agree with you at all, but

Craig Collins: Ha.

Peter Pappas: you did answer every question. not everybody does that. So where do people find you?

Craig Collins: my website is votecraigcollins.com. So that's just votecraigcollins.com, all one word.

Peter Pappas: Simple. Colloquial. Yeah. Okay. All right. Well, folks, go look it up yourself. That's the point. You know what Google's for. So Judge Collins, the door is always open. Come back after November 3rd, win or lose, and tell us what you've learned. So with that, enjoy your evening, sir. Thank you for being here.

Craig Collins: You too. I'm looking forward to the next time.