Case Title: Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 14-454 Re: Debra L. Krause

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC14-1812

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2015-06-04T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC14-1812 
____________ 
 
 
INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE, NO. 14-454  
RE: DEBRA L. KRAUSE. 
 
[June 4, 2015] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
We approve of the below stipulation that Judge Debra L. Krause receive a 
thirty-day suspension without pay.   
          It is so ordered.   
STIPULATION 
In this disciplinary proceeding, the Investigative Panel of the Florida Judicial 
Qualifications Commission and Seminole County Judge Debra Krause present the 
following stipulation to this Court pursuant to [a]rticle V, [s]ection 12 of the 
Florida Constitution and [r]ule 6(j) of the Florida Judicial Qualifications 
Commission’s Rules, and the Court’s February 25, 2015, order. 
 
- 2 - 
1. Under [r]ule 6(j), the Investigative Panel “may reach agreement with a 
judge on discipline or disability, and such stipulation shall be transmitted directly 
to the Supreme Court, to accept, reject or modify in whole or in part.” 
2. A Notice of Investigation dated August 15, 2014, was served on Judge 
Krause.  On September 11, 2014, in Orlando, Florida, the Investigative Panel 
conducted a hearing at which Judge Krause appeared, with counsel, and testified 
under oath.  The Investigative Panel concluded that probable cause existed for the 
filing of Formal Charges, which were filed on September 17, 2014. 
3. On November 19, 2014, the Court denied the parties’ Joint Motion to 
Consolidate Judge Krause’s two cases, SCl3-2263 and SC14-1812. 
 
4. The JQC had investigated the incident that prompted the Notice of 
Investigation dated August 15, 2014, and Judge Krause voluntarily testified under 
oath at an expedited hearing by the JQC. 
5. The JQC, in finding probable cause and recommending a public 
reprimand, advised this Court that the primary considerations in coming to its 
recommendation were the commission’s determination that this was a limited 
transgression, albeit magnified by the pending reprimand, and Judge Krause’s full 
cooperation and acceptance of responsibility. 
6. The violation of the [j]udicial [c]anons in this matter arises from Judge 
Krause’s single incident of participating in her husband’s judicial campaign.  Judge 
 
- 3 - 
Krause admits that, while her husband was a judicial candidate, she one time used 
social media to seek the assistance of her friends to help her husband correct 
perceived misstatements of his judicial opponent. 
7. Judge Krause accepted full responsibility for the conduct, admitted that it 
should not have occurred, and apologized.  She explained that her social media 
posting followed multiple private but ignored attempts to correct what she and her 
husband perceived as misstatements about her previous JQC matter.  Judge Krause 
told the Panel that those attempts included seeking counsel from her chief judge, 
twice sending the same letter to the candidate asking her to refrain from 
misrepresenting the record (and never receiving acknowledgement or a response,) 
and enlisting the help of an emissary to speak with her husband’s opponent.  All of 
these attempts proved fruitless. 
8. Judge Krause further explained that she intended her posting, which was a 
frustrated last effort to correct the record, to be a private message to her friends. 
Even still, she removed the message within hours of its posting after realizing it 
could have a reach beyond her circle of friends.  Only through the actions of those 
supporting her husband’s opponent was the posting further disseminated. 
9. The Judicial Qualifications Commission concluded that the judge’s 
conduct was improper but was followed quickly with remedial action, long before 
any notice from the JQC, and the JQC filed a Stipulation in which the JQC and 
 
- 4 - 
Judge Krause agreed that she should receive a public reprimand for her conduct in 
case SC14-1812. 
10. On February 25, 2015, the Court rejected that Stipulation and ordered 
that the public reprimand, and $25,000 fine that the Court previously approved in 
Judge Krause’s prior case, SC13-2263, shall remain in place, and suggested that a 
30-day suspension without pay would be the appropriate resolution to case SC14-
1812. 
11. Pursuant to the Court’s February 25, 2015, order, the parties now agree 
that the Court shall impose a 30-day suspension without pay, in SC14-1812. 
12. The parties agree that oral argument before this Court is not necessary in 
light of the record, the nature of the charges, [and] the contents of this 
Stipulation[.]  As previously noted, Judge Krause waives her right to further 
hearings if they are accepted. 
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, and 
POLSTON, JJ., concur.  
PERRY, J., recused. 
 
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND 
IF FILED, DETERMINED.  
 
Original Proceeding – Judicial Qualifications Commission 
 
Ricardo Morales, III, Chair, and Alexander John Williams, Assistant General 
Counsel, Tallahassee, Florida,  
 
for Judicial Qualifications Commission, Petitioner  
 
- 5 - 
Larry Gibbs Turner and Ronald Kozlowski of Turner, O’Connor, Kozlowski PL, 
Gainesville, Florida,  
 
for Judge Debra L. Krause, Respondent