10 years ago this month:

• The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly reprimanded a judge for calling a pro se criminal defendant’s legal arguments “stupid” and “screwy” and telling him, “If you don’t like it, move to Mexico.”  Holt, Order (Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct May 31, 2013).
• Pursuant to the judge’s agreement, the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission publicly reprimanded a judge for (1) directing that a subpoena duces tecum be issued to provide an audio tape recording of a traffic stop and documentation, reviewing the tapes, and relying on them to deny a motion to suppress; and (2) directing his case coordinator to contact another court to inquire about a prior conviction and proof of representation.  Letter of Reprimand to Crow (Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission May 17, 2013).
• Pursuant to the judge’s agreement, the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission publicly censured a judge for filing a complaint with the Committee on Professional Conduct against a public defender after the public defender had filed a complaint against him with the Commission.  Letter of Censure to Crow (Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission May 17, 2013).
• Pursuant to the judge’s agreement, the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission publicly reprimanded a judge for his statements to a traffic defendant, for example, telling him that he was acting like an idiot and was prejudiced against white people and to “put that in your report,” and for, as the defendant left the courtroom, commenting to the audience “there goes another angry black man.”  Letter of Reprimand to Batton (Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission May 17, 2013).
• Accepting a statement of circumstances and conditional agreement for discipline, the Indiana Supreme Court barred a former judicial candidate from seeking judicial office for 5 years and publicly reprimanded her for failing to ask a newspaper to retract a misstatement about her campaign opponent attributed to her; authorizing a statement on her campaign web-site that her campaign opponent, the incumbent judge, had “worked . . . for free” for a criminal defendant; and posting misinformation on her web-site after she learned it was inaccurate.  In the Matter of Davis, Order (Indiana Supreme Court May 7, 2013).
• Accepting a recommendation of the Judicial Tenure Commission based on stipulated facts, the Michigan Supreme Court suspended a judge from office for 30 days and publicly censured him for failing to provide the sheriff’s department with direction on how to transport an attorney he had found in contempt, making improper comments to the attorney, and failing to be patient and dignified toward the attorney.  In re Post, 830 N.W.2d 365 (Michigan 2013).
• Based on a stipulation, the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline publicly reprimanded a judge for taking possession of 2 pieces of heavy equipment that he knew were subject to a court order in a divorce case that prohibited the man, who was dating the judge’s court clerk, from disposing of community property and making misrepresentations to the Commission investigator.  In the Matter of Graham, Findings of fact, conclusions of law, imposition of discipline (Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline May 17, 2013).
• Adopting the findings and recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, which the judge accepted, the New Jersey Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a former judge for, after he became judge of the Montville Township Municipal Court, continuing to represent the mayor of the township in 3 personal matters in violation of a court rule and creating the appearance that he was representing the mayor in a 4th matter.  In the Matter of Davenport, 65 A.3d 255 (New Jersey 2013).
• Adopting the Judicial Conduct Commission’s findings, conclusions, and proposed sanctions, based on stipulations, the Utah Supreme Court publicly censured a judge for exceeding the statutory salary cap for justice court judges employed by more than 1 municipality; the Court also ordered him to repay the excess salary.  In re Christensen (Utah Supreme Court May 21, 2013).
• Based on a stipulation and agreement, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a judge for (1) signing bench warrants in cases in which he had been disqualified and (2) making a comment that created the appearance that he had relied on unsolicited factual assertions from a court clerk when imposing a sentence for theft and revoking bail without disclosing the ex parte communications.  In re Porter, Stipulation, agreement, and order (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct May 10, 2013).
• Based on a stipulation and agreement, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a former judge for, during a traffic stop, identifying himself as a judge and mentioning several times that he had been with another judge earlier in the evening.  In re Ryan, Stipulation, agreement, and order (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct May 10, 2013).