Dr. Moodian Updated Presentation

HOW THE CALIFORNIA
COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL
PERFORMANCE PROTECTS THE

PUBLIC FROM JUDICIAL
MISCONDUCT

Dr. Michael A. Moodian
June 23, 2018

V 6/18

AUTHORITY

Commission established as an
independent state agency by voter
approval of an amendment to the

California Constitution in 1960

2

AUTHORITY

Jurisdiction includes all active
California judges and former judges for
conduct that occurred while a judge
Shared authority with local courts over
commissioners and referees (Prop 221,
1998)

3

AUTHORITY

Responsible for investigating
complaints of judicial misconduct
and judicial incapacity, and for
disciplining judges

4

MANDATE

According to the California Supreme Court,
the purpose of a commission disciplinary
proceeding is not punishment, but rather---
• the protection of the public
• the enforcement of rigorous standards of
judicial conduct, and
• the maintenance of public confidence in
the integrity and independence of the
judicial system.

5

CONFIDENTIALITY

Complaints, investigations and the identity of
the complainant are confidential.
Complaints and witness statements are not
given to the judge unless they are required to
be turned over in discovery. There is no
discovery unless and until formal charges are
filed (typically, only 1 to 3 cases a year).

6

MEMBERSHIP

Appointed by the • 2 Trial Court Judges
Supreme Court: • 1 Appellate Justice

Appointed by the • 2 Public Members
Assembly Speaker:

Appointed by the • 2 Public Members
Senate Rules
Committee:

Appointed by the • 2 Attorneys
Governor:
• 2 Public Members

7

COMMISSION PROCEDURES

8

REVIEW OF COMPLAINTS

The commission reviews
and votes to take action

on every complaint.
The commission

receives 1,100 - 1,300
complaints each year.

9

What is judicial misconduct?

Violation of the
Code of Judicial
Ethics

10

INVESTIGATIONS

The commission authorizes
an investigation when a

complaint makes a prima facie
showing of misconduct.

11

CONTACTING THE JUDGE

Unless the informed in given an
commission closes an writing of opportunity
to respond.
inquiry or the
investigation based on allegations,
information received
and
from other sources,
the judge will be:

12

CONFIDENTIALITY

When contacted about the allegations, the
judge is not told the identity of the
complainant or the identity of any
witnesses.

13

FORMAL PROCEEDINGS

} In the most serious cases, the
commission may institute formal
proceedings.

} A hearing is conducted which is like
a civil trial.

14

FORMAL PROCEEDINGS

} At this point in the proceedings,
the judge is entitled to discovery.
The complaint is turned over only
if it is a witness statement or is
otherwise discoverable.

15

SANCTIONS

• ADVISORY LETTER
• PRIVATE ADMONISHMENT
• PUBLIC ADMONISHMENT
• PUBLIC CENSURE
• REMOVAL FROM OFFICE,

INVOLUNTARY RETIREMENT

16

AUTHORIZED JUDICIAL POSITIONS

2017

252 1,844
commissioners judgeships

and referees 17

COMPLAINTS RECEIVED AND
INVESTIGATED - 2017

New complaints considered:
1,251 complaints about judges*
85 complaints about SJO’s

* The 1,251 complaints named a total
of 878 different judges

18

CASE DISPOSITIONS IN 2017

1,229 Total Case Dispositions
1,081
106 Closed After Initial
Review
39
Investigated and
3 Closed Without
Discipline

Discipline
Imposed

Resignation or
Retirement

19

DISCIPLINE 2017

• Advisory Letters 21
• Private Admonishments 13
• Public Admonishments
• Public Censure 3
• Removal From Office 2
0
Total 39

20

TYPE OF COURT CASE
UNDERLYING COMPLAINTS

CONCLUDED IN 2017

Criminal Total Cases Discipline
General Civil Complaints Imposed
Family Law
Small Claims/ 39% 23%
21% 11%
Traffic 17% 20%
All Others
No Court Case 7% 7%

9% 7%
7% 32%

21

SOURCE OF COMPLAINTS
CONCLUDED IN 2017

Total Cases Discipline

Complaints Imposed
33%
Litigant/Family/Friend 86% 18%
24%
Attorney 4% 10%
15%
Judge/Court Staff 3%

All Other Complainants 5%

Non-Complaint Source 2%

(includes anonymous

letters, news reports)

22

MOST PREVALENT TYPES OF MISCONDUCT
RESULTING IN DISCIPLINE (2008-2017)

• Demeanor/decorum 112

• On-bench abuse of authority 79

• Bias/appearance of bias not directed

toward a particular class 61

• Disqualification/disclosure 60

• Failure to ensure rights 57

• Ex parte communications 39

• Abuse of contempt/sanctions 31

• Off-bench abuse of office/misuse of court

information 31

23

CJP Website

http://cjp.ca.gov

24