Case ID: or_341/html/0156-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Submitted March 3,
    accused censured July 7, 2006
    In re Complaint as to the Conduct of The HONORABLE THOMAS L. MOULTRIE, Accused.
    
    (CJFD 05-72; SC S53272)
    139 P3d 955
    Rene C. Holmes, Hinshaw & Culbertson, LLP, Portland, for the accused.
    Susan D. Isaacs, Beaverton, for the Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

This is a proceeding under ORS 1.420, ORS 1.430, and Article VII (Amended), section 8, of the Oregon Constitution to inquire into the conduct of a circuit court judge. The Oregon Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability (commission) and the accused, Honorable Thomas Moultrie, a Senior Circuit Court Judge for the State of Oregon, agreed to a Stipulation of Facts and Consent to Censure (censure). In the censure, the accused stipulated that his conduct had violated Oregon Code of Judicial Conduct JR 1-101(A) (observing high standards of conduct and acting in manner that promotes public confidence); JR 1-101(B) (engaging in criminal act); and JR 1-101(0 (engaging in conduct reflecting adversely on judge’s character, competence, temperament, or fitness to serve as judge).

We set out the censure, in part:

“FACTS
“If a contested hearing was held in this matter, clear, cogent, and convincing evidence would be presented sufficient to establish the following facts:
“1. At all material times herein Judge Thomas Moultrie was a Senior Circuit Court Judge for the State of Oregon.
“2. On August 5,2005, Judge Moultrie was arrested on an allegation that, on August 4, 2005, he had pushed his wife which caused her to fall and break her wrist.
“3. On August 5, 2005, the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office charged Judge Moultrie with two misdemeanors, Assault in the Fourth Degree and Harassment.
“4. On August 25, 2005, Judge Moultrie entered a plea of guilty to Assault in the Fourth Degree for recklessly causing physical injury to his wife and also entered into the domestic violence deferred sentencing program.
“VIOLATIONS
“Judge Moultrie admits that by engaging in the above-described conduct he violated the following rules of the Code of Judicial Conduct adopted by the Oregon Supreme Court:
“1. JR 1-101(A)[,] which provides, A judge shall observe high standards of conduct so that the integrity, impartiality and independence of the judiciary are preserved and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the judiciary and the judicial system;’
“2. JR 1-101(B)[,] which provides, A judge shall not commit a criminal act;’ and
“3. JR 1-101(C)[,] which provides, A judge shall not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on the judge’s character, competence, temperament or fitness to serve as a judge.’
“SAN CTION/CON SENT TO CENSURE
“Judge Moultrie and the Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability agree that the appropriate sanction in this case is a censure and * * * consent to imposition of censure upon Judge Moultrie by the Oregon Supreme Court.”

Pursuant to ORS 1.430(2), the court has reviewed the stipulation of facts and the disciplinary action to which the accused consented. The court approves the consent to censure.

The accused is censured. 
      
       ORS 1.420(l)(c) provides, in part:
      “The [Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability] may allow the judge to execute a consent to censure * * *[.] If a consent is entered into under this paragraph, the judge and the commission must enter into a written stipulation of facts. The consent and stipulation of facts shall be submitted by the commission to the Supreme Court.”
     
      
       ORS 1.430(2) provides, in part:
      “If the [Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability] has agreed to allow the judge to submit a consent to censure, * * * the Supreme Court shall review the stipulation of facts and the disciplinary action to which the judge has consented. If the Supreme Court approves the consent, the court shall censure the judge [.]”
     
      
       On April 11, 2006, this court entered an order accepting the accused’s stipulation and consent to censure. That order has since been vacated.