Throwback Thursday

 10 years ago this month:

  • The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct reprimanded a judge for becoming angry during a hearing with a litigant, arguing with him from the bench, raising his voice in a manner that was not patient, dignified, and courteous, and telling the litigant he would incur attorney’s fees when he lost the case. Williams, Order (Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct June 14, 2006).
  • Pursuant to a stipulation, the California Commission on Judicial Performance censured a judge who had pled no contest to driving while under the influence and engaged in dishonest conduct and repeatedly invoked her judicial office and that of her husband (an appellate court justice) in an effort to avoid being arrested and to receive preferential treatment. Inquiry Concerning Rushing, Decision and Order (California Commission on Judicial Performance June 8, 2006).
  • Pursuant to a stipulation for discipline by consent, the California Commission on Judicial Performance censured a judge for driving while under the influence of alcohol and repeatedly attempting to avoid being arrested and incarcerated because of his status. Inquiry Concerning Schwartz, Decision and Order (California Commission on Judicial Performance June 9, 2006).
  • The California Commission on Judicial Performance publicly admonished a judge for using court stationery in a personal dispute with the city. In the Matter of DiLoreto, Decision and Order (California Commission on Judicial Performance June 13, 2006).
  • The California Commission on Judicial Performance publicly admonished a judge for (1) a series of ex parte communications about a plea; (2) assuming the role of prosecutor while presiding over an arraignment, disposition, and plea conference; and (3) a pattern of conduct that was inconsistent with the duty to be patient, dignified, and courteous, including sarcastic, demeaning, and belittling comments to attorneys and litigants and referring to “malpractice” when admonishing attorneys while their clients were present. In the Matter Concerning Mills, Decision and Order (California Commission on Judicial Performance June 12, 2006).
  • Accepting an agreement and stipulation, the California Commission on Judicial Performance censured a former judge and barred him from receiving an assignment, appointment, or reference from any California court following his guilty plea to 4 felony charges of criminal possession of child pornography. Inquiry Concerning Kline, Decision and Order (California Commission on Judicial Performance June 15, 2006).
  • Adopting the recommendation of the Judiciary Commission based on stipulated facts, the Louisiana Supreme Court censured a judge who made public comments to a newspaper reporter about a hotly contested case while it was pending on appeal, including criticizing an attorney in the case and making comments about the general anti-state bias of the citizens of the parish, and posed for the photograph that accompanied the newspaper article based on the interview. In re Roe, 931 So. 2d 1076 (Louisiana 2006).
  • Based on an agreed statement of facts and proposed recommendation, the Mississippi Supreme Court reprimanded a judge who had ordered that his grandson’s driver’s license be reinstated pending the disposition of DUI charges and contacted the county sheriff regarding the housing of his grandson in the county jail rather than a state facility. Commission on Judicial Performance v. Cole, 932 So. 2d 9 (Mississippi 2006).
  • Adopting the findings of the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, the New Jersey Supreme Court suspended a judge for 60 days without pay for making an unwanted advance to his law clerk. In the Matter of Subryan, 900 A.2d 809 (New Jersey 2006).
  • Accepting the determination of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, the New York Court of Appeals removed a judge for directing a court officer to escort a defendant out of her courtroom through a non-public, back stairway to elude a police detective who was waiting to effect a lawful arrest. In the Matter of Blackburne, 851 N.E.2d 1175 (New York 2006).
  • Based on an agreed statement of facts and joint recommendation, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct censured a judge who, after being told that a defendant had left a “nasty” message on the court answering machine but without listening to the message, telephoned the defendant and, while repeatedly referring to his judicial office, angrily berated him and threatened to send him to jail in a lengthy harangue. In the Matter of Wiater, Determination (New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 29, 2006).
  • The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the order of the Court of Judicial Discipline banning a former judge from holding judicial office for 5 years for parking her car at expired parking meters and placing parking tickets that had been issued to others on the windshield of her car. In re Harrington, 899 A.2d 1120 (Pennsylvania 2006).
  • The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct admonished a former appellate court judge who violated the federal conflict of interest statutes by approving trips for himself at federal government expense that included travel for personal purposes. Public Admonition of Andell (Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 15, 2006).
  • The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a part-time justice of the peace for authorizing his name to be used in an advertisement endorsing a candidate for public office. Public Admonition of Powers (Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 9, 2006).
  • The Utah Supreme Court implemented an order of reprimand entered by the Judicial Conduct Commission for a judge who had met with a defendant outside of court 4 times during her probation period. In re Halliday, Order (Utah Supreme Court June 8, 2006).
  • Based on a stipulation and agreement, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct censured a former judge who admitted that his poor attempts at humor and failure to understand the potentially offensive nature of his use of the word “Chinaman” violated the code of judicial conduct and that the Commission would be able to prove other allegations by clear and convincing evidence, although he denied those allegations. In re Martin, Stipulation, Agreement, and Order of Censure (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 2, 2006).

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s