Throwback Thursday

25 years ago this month:

  • Agreeing with the Commission on Judicial Conduct, the Arizona Supreme Court removed from office a judge who had been convicted of soliciting prostitution; thrown a woman with whom he was living against a wall; after he was no longer living with her, verbally abused her friend, pushed the friend, and threatened his life, and pushed his ex-girlfriend with enough force to injure her; and yelled obscenities at another friend of his ex-girlfriend’s, pushed him backward, and threatened his life.  In re Koch, 890 P.2d 1137 (Arizona 1995).
  • Based on the recommendation of the Commission on Judicial Performance, the California Supreme Court publicly censured a judge for a pattern of inappropriate and offensive comments to female members of court staff and inappropriate and non-consensual touching or attempted touching of women he supervised.  Fitch v. Commission on Judicial Performance, 887 P.2d 937 (California 1995).
  • The California Commission on Judicial Performance publicly reproved a judge for a pattern of failing to dispose of judicial matters promptly and efficiently.  Letter to Breen (California Commission on Judicial Performance February 28, 1995).
  • The California Commission on Judicial Performance publicly reproved a justice court judge who (before justice court judges were prohibited from practicing law) abandoned a client for whom he was attorney of record.  Letter to Kelly (California Commission on Judicial Performance February 28, 1995).
  • The California Commission on Judicial Performance publicly reproved a judge for abuse of the contempt power, interference in an attorney-client relationship in a driving under the influence case, and refusing to consider traffic school as a possible disposition in traffic matters.  Letter to Vassie (California Commission on Judicial Performance February 28, 1995).
  • Based on the presentment of the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, to which the judge consented, the New Jersey Supreme Court removed a former judge from office for managing the affairs of a corporation while serving as a judge; receiving compensation from the corporation; and pleading guilty to theft from the corporation.  In the Matter of Imbriani, 652 A.2d 1222 (New Jersey 1995).
  • Approving the recommendation of the Judicial Standards Commission, the North Carolina Supreme Court publicly censured a judge for his behavior while publicly intoxicated in Florida that resulted in his arrest and in a negotiated plea of nolo contendere to trespass after warning; his behavior while publicly intoxicated in North Carolina that resulted in his conviction for indecent exposure; and his continuing refusal, even after admitting psychological dependency, to abstain from consuming alcohol.  In re Leonard, 453 S.E.2d 521 (North Carolina 1995).
  • Agreeing with the recommendation of the Board of Commissioners on Judicial Standards and a panel of hearing masters, the South Carolina Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a judge for issuing a bench warrant against a process server who had served a summons and complaint on him after he was named as a defendant in a civil action.  In the Matter of Edwards, 459 S.E.2d 837 (South Carolina 1995).
  • Affirming an order of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, after a trial de novo, a Texas Special Court of Review publicly admonished a judge who held a litigant in direct contempt for criticizing the judge in the hallway of the courthouse and mischaracterized the events as taking place in open court in the contempt order.  In re Bell 894 S.W.2d 119 (Texas Special Court of Review 1995).
  • Pursuant to a stipulation, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a former part-time judge for conducting a hearing in a case in which he had advised the defendant over the telephone regarding the implied consent law and, in a second case, representing a defendant who had been arrested pursuant to a bench warrant he had signed as a judge.  In re Monson, Order of admonishment (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct February 3, 1995).
  • The Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly censured a judge for initiating and considering ex parte communications regarding a petition for a name change pending before him; used words and descriptions that humiliated the petitioners in the name change case; and acquired personal knowledge of evidentiary facts from ex parte communications that contributed to a personal bias and/or prejudice.  In re Hutchinson, Commission decision (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct February 3, 1995).

 

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s