Throwback Thursday

10 years ago this month:

  • The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct reprimanded a judge for continuing to complain about an administrative decision and withdrawing from a court committee, claiming that he had major philosophical differences with the presiding judge and indicating that he no longer respected her. Carroll, Order (Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct October 3, 2006).
  • Accepting the recommendation of the Judiciary Commission, the Louisiana Supreme suspended a judge for 30 days without pay for failing to act as a neutral arbiter and abusing his authority during a hearing on a motion to recuse another judge from a suit brought by oyster fishermen against the state and the Department of Natural Resources. In re Cresap, 940 So.2d 624 (Louisiana 2006).
  • Based on the recommendation of the Judiciary Commission, to which the judge had agreed, the Louisiana Supreme Court suspended a judge from office without pay until the end of his term for persistent and public abuse of alcohol that manifested itself while performing his judicial duties; the Court deferred all but 6 months of the suspension and placed the judge on probation until the end of his term with conditions, including that he refrain from drinking alcohol and be monitored by the Louisiana Lawyers Assistance Program. In re Krake, 942 So. 2d 18 (Louisiana 2006).
  • The Mississippi Supreme Court suspended a judge from office without pay for 30 days and reprimanded him for telling the sheriff he wanted an arresting officer to be late for court so that DUI charges could be dismissed. Commission on Judicial Performance v. Sanford, 941 So. 2d 209 (Mississippi 2006).
  • Based on a stipulation and agreement, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct reprimanded a judge for conducting a court proceeding and questioning a party in the absence of counsel although he knew that the party was represented. In re Jorgensen, Stipulation, agreement, and order (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct October 3, 2006).
  • The Washington Supreme Court upheld the decision of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct to admonish a supreme court justice for, while visiting a facility for sexual predators, asking questions of inmates about issues currently pending before the supreme court. In the Matter of Sanders, 145 P.3d 1208 (Washington 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