Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway, J ustices 

# Order

January 27, 2010

140202

In re:

HON. BRENDA K. SANDERS SC: 140202 Judge, 36 th District Court. RFI Nos. 2008-17918 2008-17919

________________ _______________ __________/

The Judicial Tenure Commission has issu ed a Decision and Re commendation, to which the respondent, 36 th District Court Judge Brenda K. Sanders, consents. It is accompanied by a settlement agreement, in which the respondent waived her rights, stipulated to findings of fact and conclusi ons of law, and consen ted to a sanction that would be no less than a public censure and no greater than a public censure and a 42-day suspension withou t pay.

In resolving this matter, we are mindf ul of the standards set forth in In re Brown
, 461 Mich 1291, 1292-1293 (2000):

[E]verything else being equal:

(1) misconduct that is part of a pattern or practice is more serious than an isolated instance of misconduct; (2) misconduct on the bench is usua lly more serious than the same misconduct off the bench; (3) misconduct that is prejudicial to th e actual administration of justice is more serious than misconduct that is prejudicial only to the appearance of propriety; (4) misconduct that does not implicate the actual administration of justice, or its appearance of impropriety, is le ss serious than misconduct that does; (5) misconduct that occurs spontaneou sly is less serious than misconduct that is premeditated or deliberated; (6) misconduct that undermines the ability of the justice system to discover the truth of what occurred in a legal c ontroversy, or to re ach the most just2

result in such a case, is more serious than misconduct that merely delays such discovery; (7) misconduct that involves the unequal application of justice on the basis of such considerations as race, colo r, ethnic background, gender, or religion are more serious than breaches of jus tice that do not disp arage the integrity of the system on the basis of a class of citizenship. In the present case, those standards ar e being applied in the context of the following stipulated findings of fact of the Judicial Tenure Commission, which, following our de novo review , we adopt as our own:

1. Respondent is, and at all material times was, a judge of or a judicial candidate for, the 36 th District Court in Detroit, Michigan. 2. As a judge, and as a candidate fo r a judge, Respondent is subject to all the duties and responsibilities the Michigan Supreme Court imposed on her, and is subject to the standards for discipline set fo rth in MCR 9.104 and MCR 9.205.
Count I Inappropriate Political Activity While a Judge or Judicial Candidate 3. On November 4, 2008, Respondent was elected to the position of judge of the 36 th District Court for a six-year term that began January 1, 2009. 4. On December 8, 2008, Respondent signed the Oath of Office for Judge of the 36 th District Court.

5. While she was still a candidate fo r judge, Respondent also filed to run for Mayor of Detroit in a specia l nonpartisan Detroit mayoral primary to complete the term of fo rmer Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. 6. After becoming a judge, Respon dent remained a candidate on the ballot in the February 24, 2009 special primary. 7. According to campaign rules, Respondent was unable to timely remove her name from the ballot for the mayoral primary. 8. Notwithstanding havi ng been elected to th e position of judge, Respondent actively participated in certain campaign activities for the special February 24, 2009 primary. 9. On December 16, 2008, Respondent filed a Statement of Organization form for mayoral candida te committees which listed the name of her committee: “Committee to Elect Brenda K. Sanders for Mayor” and identified her as Treasurer a nd Designated Record Keeper.3

10. Respondent completed a Metro Ti mes questionnaire which appeared on January 28, 2009, in the Metro Times, a local newspaper, entitled “Detroit Mayoral Candidate Questionnaire: Brenda K. Sanders.” 11. Respondent also appeared on “F lashpoint: Straight Talk from the Candidates,” a televised commercial -free program in which she discussed her platform for mayor, which aired on Sunday, February 1, at 8:30 a.m., and which continued to be accessible to viewers on the station’s web site, ClickOnDetroit.com. 12. Respondent campaigned as a judge during her televised campaign appearance as a mayoral candidate, refe rring to her “former” career as an attorney and her status as a “new face in our local government.” 13. Respondent knew, or should have k nown, that as a judicial candidate and as a judge, she was and is subjec t to the rules governing political and campaign conduct as provided in Canon 7 of the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct [MCJC] and the Michig an Constitution 1963, art 6.
Count II Inappropriate Camp aign Conduct/ Solic iting Contribution 14. On April 29, 2008 , Respondent filed and signed a Statement of Organization Form for Candidate Co mmittee, in which she identified herself, Brenda K. Sa nders, as candidate for the position of 36 th District Judge, as well as Treasurer and Designated Record Keeper. 15. On the form Respondent liste d her own phone number, fax number, e-mail address, mailing and street addr ess as the contacts for her committee. 16. On September 5, 2008, Responde nt filed an Amended Schedule 1A – Itemized Contributions Form a nd Post Primary Campaign Finance Statements, which contin ued to list her as the Treasurer and Designated Record Keeper of her own campaign. 17. On her website, www.brendaks anders.com, Respondent solicited donations to her campaign of which she was manage r and treasurer “Please send donations to The Committee to El ect Brenda K. Sanders,” by check, PayPal or “Email Funds to Brendak1233@yahoo.com.” 18. As a judicial candidate, Responde nt knew or should have known that Canon 7B(2) of the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct prohibits a candidate for judicial office from acti ng as treasurer or personally soliciting or accepting campaign funds. 19. As a judicial candidate, and as stated in the Candidate Committee Manual, Respondent knew or should have known that a judicial candidate may not serve as a treasurer or record keeper of the candidate’s committee.4

20. As a judicial candidate, Responde nt knew or should have known that the Bureau of Elections Campaign Financial Disclosure Information specifically provides that “Judicial Ca nons do not allow a judicial candidate to serve as their own treasurer.” We also adopt the Commissi on’s conclusion that these facts demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that respondent breached the standards of judicial conduct and constituted misconduct in office, as de fined by 1963 Mich Cons t, art 6, § 30, and MCR 9.205:

1. conduct in violation of 1963 Mich C onst, art 6, § 21, which provides that a judge of a court of record sha ll be ineligible to be nominated for or elected to an elective office ot her than a judicial office during the period of his service and for one year thereafter;

2. failure to resign judicial office befo re becoming a candidate either in a party primary or in a gene ral election for non-judici al office, in violation of Canon 7A(3);

3. failure to establish, maintain, en force and personally observe high standards of conduct so that the in tegrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved, contrary to Canon 1;

4. making speeches on behalf of a non- judicial candidate (herself) or publicly endorsing a candidate for n on-judicial office, in violation of Canon 7A(1)(b);

5. personal solicitation of campaign funds, in violation of Canon 7B(2)(a);

6. conduct involving impropriety and the appearance of impropriety, in violation of Canon 2A, wh ich erodes public confidence in the judiciary;

7. conduct prejudicial to the administrati on of justice, in violation of MCR 9.104(A)(1);

8. conduct that exposes the legal pr ofession or courts to obloquy, contempt, censure or reproach, co ntrary to MCR 9.104(A)(2); and

9. conduct that violates the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct, contrary to MCR 9.104(A)(4).I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 27, 2010 p0120 5

After reviewing the recommendation of the Judicial Tenure Commission, the settlement agreement, the standards set forth in Brown , and the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, we accept the recomme ndation of the Commission and ORDER that Honorable Brenda K. Sanders be publicly censured and suspended without pay for 21 days, effective 21 days after the date of th is order. This order stands as our public

censure.