25 years ago this month:

• The California Commission on Judicial Performance publicly admonished a judge who had motions in 1 criminal case under submission for 7 months and demurrers in 2 misdemeanor criminal cases under submission for 13 months and who, while he had those cases under submission, executed salary declarations under penalty of perjury stating that he had no cases submitted for longer than 90 days.  Public Admonishment of Oliver (California Commission on Judicial Performance June 16, 1998).
• The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly censured a judge for giving a speech to a group of police officials that cast doubt on his ability to be impartial in one of the first prosecutions under the state’s new capital punishment statute, which was pending before him.  In the Matter of Bruhn, Determination (New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 24, 1998).
• The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a non-lawyer judge for implying that he was a lawyer in a letter sent to voters during his campaign.  In the Matter of Fiore, Determination (New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 25, 1998).
• The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a judge for reducing the charges in 2 traffic cases based on conversations with the defendants and without notice to or the consent of the prosecution.  In the Matter of Hooper, Determination (New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 29, 1998).
• Based on an agreed statement of facts and joint recommendation, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly censured a judge for (1) speaking to 2 defendants whom she knew to be represented by counsel to urge them to enter guilty pleas; (2) making inappropriate quips and engaging in other misplaced humor to attorneys in chambers that appeared to minimize charges brought by the district attorney’s office; (3) prohibiting an assistant district attorney from making a complete record of an oral recusal application based on the judge’s ex parte conversation with defense counsel, and, after giving the prosecutor until 4 P.M. to file a written motion, starting the non-jury trial at 2:40 P.M.; (4) suggesting that the conduct of one member of an ethnic group reflected on all members of that group; (5) having a brief ex parte conversation with a defendant’s counsel under the mistaken belief that counsel had already discussed the subject with the prosecutor; (6) in a case in which the defendant was accused of forcible sodomy and wished to plead guilty while maintaining his innocence, advising defense counsel not to enter a plea of guilty unless the prosecutor could prove the charges, opining that it was unlikely that the alleged victim would appear at trial, and stating that she would not accept a guilty plea unless the victim appeared in court, even though the victim had moved to North Carolina and had recently given birth; and (7) prohibiting a prosecutor from reading a pre-sentence report because she was angry with him for asking to read the report when the parties had agreed on the sentence.  In the Matter of Smith, New Determination (York State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 29, 1998).
• Pursuant to a stipulation and agreement, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly censured a former judge for consuming beer on court premises with jurors and attorneys following a driving while under the influence case.  In re Baldwin, Stipulation, Order of Censure, and Resignation (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 5, 1998).
• Pursuant to a stipulation and consent, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a judge pro tempore who had served as a judge pro tempore while he was suspended from the practice of law for failing to pay dues.  In re Seidlitz, Stipulation, agreement, and order of admonishment (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct June 5, 1998).
• Accepting a settlement agreement, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals publicly censured a former judge who had “initiated a physical confrontation” with a criminal defendant in his courtroom.  In the Matter of Troisi, 504 S.E.2d 625 (West Virginia 1998).

5 years ago this month:

• The California Commission on Judicial Performance publicly admonished a judge for commenting publicly to a reporter about a domestic violence case and, later in court in the same case, describing the victim as “white as a piece of wonder bread” when comparing the prosecution’s treatment of her to their treatment of the victim in another case.  In the Matter Concerning Lord, Decision and order imposing public admonishment (California Commission on Judicial Performance April 11, 2018).
• Based on the recommendation of the Commission on Judicial Qualifications, the Kansas Supreme Court publicly censured a former magistrate for revoking a defendant’s probation based only on the motion and without providing the defendant an opportunity to respond and failing to cooperate with the Commission.  In the Matter of Trigg, 414 P.3d 1203 (Kansas 2018).
• Pursuant to an agreement, the Kentucky Judicial Conduct Commission suspended a judge for 60 days without pay for (1) using inmates from the county detention center and publicly owned equipment in the reconstruction of the church he attended and at which he had a leadership role; (2) personally observing community services work and signing documents verifying community services work performed by criminal defendants on probation in his court; (3) misconduct related to the ankle monitoring program; (4) failing to decide a motion for 3 years and failing to decide motions for shock probation within the statutory time limit; and (4) employing a man to work on his property who was under supervised probation for a guilty plea over which the judge had presided.  In re Langford, Agreed order of suspension (Kentucky Judicial Conduct Commission April 2, 2018).
• Adopting the findings of the Judicial Standards Commission and based on its recommendation and the commissioner’s agreement, the North Carolina Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a deputy commissioner of the Industrial Commission for driving under the influence of an impairing substance.  In re Shipley, 811 S.E.2d 556 (North Carolina 2018).
• The Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline publicly reprimanded a former judge for angrily confronting court staff about the complaints they made about him to the Judicial Conduct Board.  In re Tidd, 181 A.3d 14 (Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline 2018).
• The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly reprimanded a judge for (1) hiring a woman with whom he had an intimate relationship and making inappropriate comments about her during office hours and (2) issuing an amended judgment without providing the parties with notice and setting an appeal bond that was over the amount specified by rule; the Commission also ordered the judge to repeat new judges training.  Public Reprimand of Jasso and Order of Additional Education (Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct April 18, 2018).
• The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a judge for (1) referring to a man who was the subject of a guardianship proceedings as “Mr. Maggot,” “Maggot Man,” or words to that effect; (2) comparing the IQ of a woman who was the subject of a guardianship proceeding to the IQ of a pen; and (3) interacting with litigants in 3 guardianship cases in a manner that reasonably led them to feel disrespected, demeaned, and frustrated; the Commission also ordered the judge to receive 1 hour of  instruction with a mentor on demeanor and courtroom decorum.  Public Admonition of Cross and Order of Additional Education (Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct April 18, 2018).

10 year ago this month:

• Based on a recommendation and stipulated resolution, the Arizona Supreme Court publicly censured a judge for improper demeanor, inappropriate statements, and coercive behavior in 2 settlement conferences.  Inquiry Concerning Cornelio, Order (Arizona Supreme Court April 24, 2013).
• Based on a stipulation and the judge’s consent, the New Hampshire Judicial Conduct Committee publicly reprimanded a judge for presiding over 2 arraignments in cases in which the victim was his brother-in-law without disclosing the relationship.  Lyons, Reprimand (New Hampshire Judicial Conduct Committee April 16, 2013).
• Accepting the determination of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, the New York Court of Appeals removed a former judge for sexual contact with a 5-year-old girl in 1972.  In the Matter of Hedges, 988 N.E.2d 509 (New York 2013).
• Pursuant to an agreement, the Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct publicly censured a judge for (1) his intemperate, argumentative, and disruptive conduct during a deposition, which was contrary to a partially deferred discipline agreement in 2009 in which he agreed to cease and desist from injudicious treatment directed at a particular law firm and (2) an improper ex parte hearing and ex parte relief with respect to a petition to modify a permanent parenting plan.  Wilson (Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct April 5, 2013).
• Pursuant to an agreement, the Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct publicly reprimanded a judge for (1) commenting that he believed an attorney who appeared in his court must be having a sexual relationship with another attorney who appeared before him; and (2) asking the spouse of a court employee who had taken a leave of absence in the presence of other individuals who worked with the spouse about the court employee’s potential problem in an abrasive manner that was noted by others who were present.  McKenzie (Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct April 11, 2013).
• Accepting an agreement that included the judge’s resignation and agreement not to seek or accept judicial office in the state, the South Carolina Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a former judge for (1) after setting bond for a defendant, posting the bond on the defendant’s behalf from his own personal funds and signing the bond form as both judge and surety; (2) in a case in which he had arraigned the defendant, signing a paper stating that a victim agreed to drop all charges against the defendant based on payment of $1,178.80; (3) when the jail mistakenly transported a defendant to court, allowing the defendant to plead guilty without the arresting officer and victim being present or being notified of the proceeding; (4) directing his clerk to change a case history from guilty to not guilty; and (5) in announcing his decision to deny a request for a restraining order against a police officer, commenting that granting a restraining order could have a serious effect on the officer’s career and incorrectly applying a reasonable doubt standard.  In the Matter of Bryngelson, 742 S.E.2d 392 (South Carolina 2013).

20 years ago this month:

• Pursuant to a stipulation for discipline by consent, the California Commission on Judicial Performance public censured a former judge and barred him from receiving an assignment, appointment, or reference of work from any California state court for (1) during his re-election campaign, making false and misleading statements in response to questions posed by a television reporter about reports that he had used the county computer to access sexually explicit sites, (2) threatening to bring legal action against the television station in an attempt to dissuade the publication of facts about him that he knew to be true, and (3) engaging in improper campaign activities in and around the courthouse.  Inquiry Concerning McGraw, Decision and order (California Commission on Judicial Performance April 3, 2003).
• Adopting the recommendation of the Judicial Qualifications Commission based on a stipulation, the Florida Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a judge for a pattern of rude and intemperate behavior, including, for example, routinely embarrassing and belittling counsel in court and questioning their competence; the Court also ordered the judge to continue to participate in psychological/behavioral therapy and to send letters of apology.  Inquiry Concerning Schapiro, 845 So. 2d 170 (Florida 2003).
• Accepting the determination of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, the New York Court of Appeals removed a town court justice from office for misappropriating $2,300 in legal fees from his law firm employer, altering a receipt book to disguise 1 theft, and his disbarment as a result of his conduct.  In the Matter of Tamsen, 789 N.E.2d 613 (New York Court of Appeals 2003).
• Accepting an agreement for discipline by consent, the South Carolina Supreme Court suspended a judge for 6 months for talking to witnesses during a break in a trial in which he was also a witness and giving incorrect testimony in a hearing in that case.  In the Matter of Johnson, 579 S.E.2d 308 (South Carolina 2003).
• Pursuant to an agreement, the South Carolina Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a judge for referring to his former position as magistrate in a telephone message requesting voters to support a candidate for lieutenant governor.  In the Matter of Koon, 580 S.E.2d 147 (South Carolina 2003).
• Pursuant to an agreement, the South Carolina Supreme Court suspended a judge for 6 months without pay for failing to report missing court funds and checks drawn on her bond account that were returned for insufficient funds.  In the Matter of McCullough, 580 S.E.2d 143 (South Carolina 2003).
• Pursuant to the judge’s consent, the Utah Supreme Court approved the implementation of the Judicial Conduct Commission’s order of formal reprimand of the judge for angrily engaging detectives who had stopped his daughter’s car.  In re Dobson, Order (Utah Supreme Court April 17, 2003).
• Pursuant to a stipulation and agreement, the Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a former judge for using a court facility to assist the personal interests of a former client and friend and attempting to testify without subpoena as a character witness for that former client and friend.  In re Lukevich, Stipulation, agreement, and order (Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct April 4, 2003).

5 years ago this month:

• Accepting the parties’ agreement with the masters’ proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommended sanction, the Indiana Supreme Court suspended a judge for 6 days without pay for barring the county clerk from the courthouse after a hearing at which the clerk was not present and for which she had not been given adequate notice; presiding over the hearing even though he had an interest in the matter; commanding 2 deputy clerks to appear for the hearing without prior written notice of its purpose; and impatient, undignified, or discourteous conduct during the hearing.  In the Matter of Young, 92 N.E.3d 628 (Indiana 2018).
• Based on the judge’s approval and acceptance, the Kansas Commission on Judicial Qualifications entered a cease-and-desist order after a judge denied a defendant the opportunity to present evidence within 21 days of the filing of a petition for protection from stalking and/or sexual abuse as required by statute.  Inquiry Concerning Lynch, Order (Kansas Commission on Judicial Qualifications March 19, 2018).
• Based on the recommendation of the Judiciary Commission, the Louisiana Supreme Court suspended a judge for 6 months without pay for a pattern of stalking and harassing his ex-wife, in violation of protective orders.  In re Sachse, 240 So. 3d 170 (Louisiana 2018).
• Based on a stipulation and agreement, the New Hampshire Judicial Conduct Committee publicly reprimanded a judge for her over-zealous cross-examination of a defendant in an assault case, polling the courtroom about whether the defendant’s need for a knee replacement constituted a disability, characterizing the defendant as “somebody with that knee dragging along,” and using her recall of a prior hearing involving the defendant to make conclusions about the defendant’s veracity.  In the Matter of DeVries, Reprimand (New Hampshire Judicial Conduct Committee March 8, 2018).
• The Oregon Supreme Court suspended a judge for 3 years without pay for (1) making a false statement to the Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability during its investigation of his conduct at a soccer game; and (2) having inappropriate out-of-court contacts with a probationer in the veterans treatment court; affirmatively permitting the probationer to twice handle a gun despite the prohibition on possession of firearms that was a condition of his probation; and making a false statement to the presiding judge in a meeting about the gun-handling incidents.  Inquiry Concerning Day, 413 P.3d 907 (Oregon 2018).