25 years ago this month:

• Approving a stipulation, the Florida Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a judge who had been charged with misdemeanor driving while under the influence of alcoholic beverages and with careless driving for being at fault in an accident. Inquiry Concerning Gloeckner, 626 So. 2d 188 (Florida 1993).
• The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly censured a judge for (1) summarily convicting and jailing 2 men for criminal contempt without affording them procedural due process and without a factual or legal basis, (2) after agreeing to release a defend­ant, re-committing him based on ex parte information, and (3) immediately after arraignment, accepting a guilty plea from a 16-year-old unrepresented defendant whose mental stability he questioned, refusing to set bail as required by law, and denying repeated requests to allow the defendant to withdraw the plea and go to trial, even though the prosecutor consented. In the Matter of Meacham, Determination (New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct October 28, 1993).
• The South Carolina Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a former magistrate who had pled nolo contendere or guilty to 6 counts of misconduct in office, 2 counts of assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature, and 1 count of assault of a high and aggravated nature. In the Matter of Lee, 437 S.E.2d 85 (South Carolina 1993).
• Based on a stipulation and agreement, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a judge for writing a letter on official stationery and an affidavit on behalf of a child living in his home, a minor of no relation, to the American Schools of Correspondence, representing himself as a judge in the documents, and providing legal representation for the minor in the documents. In re Moynihan, Stipulation and order (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct October 1, 1993).
• Pursuant to a stipulation and agreement with a judge, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly reprimanded a judge for using his chambers telephone to make numerous long distance phone calls for personal matters and for having court personnel prepare his personal correspondence using county equipment and supplies on 3 to 5 occasions over 8 years. In re Eiesland, Stipulation and order (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct October 1, 1993).