Title: In re Honorable Andrew Adams
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 19S-JD-386, 19S-JD-566, 19S-JD-567
State: Indiana
Issuer: Indiana Supreme Court
Date: November 12, 2019

I N  T H E  
Indiana Supreme Court 
Supreme Court Case Nos. 19S-JD-386, 19S-JD-566, 19S-JD-567 
In the Matter of the Honorable Andrew Adams, 
Judge of the Clark Circuit Court 1, 
Respondent. 
In the Matter of the Honorable Bradley B. Jacobs, 
Judge of the Clark Circuit Court 2, 
Respondent.  
In the Matter of the Honorable Sabrina R. Bell, 
Judge of the Crawford Circuit Court, 
Respondent.  
Decided: November 12, 2019 
Judicial Discipline Actions 
Per Curiam Opinion 
All Justices concur.   
 
FILED
C L E R K
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
Nov 12 2019, 11:36 am
Indiana Supreme Court | Case Nos. 19S-JD-386, -566, -567 | November 12, 2019 
Page 2 of 8 
Per Curiam.  
We find the Respondents—the Honorable Andrew Adams, Judge of the 
Clark Circuit Court 1, the Honorable Bradley B. Jacobs, Judge of the Clark 
Circuit Court 2, and the Honorable Sabrina R. Bell, Judge of the Crawford 
Circuit Court—engaged in judicial misconduct by appearing in public in 
an intoxicated state and behaving in an injudicious manner and by 
becoming involved in a verbal altercation. We also find that Judge Adams 
and Judge Jacobs engaged in judicial misconduct by becoming involved in 
a physical altercation for which Judge Adams was criminally charged and 
convicted. Respondents’ actions were not merely embarrassing on a 
personal level; they discredited the entire Indiana judiciary. 
This matter is before us on the Indiana Commission on Judicial 
Qualifications’ (“Commission’s”) “Notice[s] of the Institution of Formal 
Proceedings and Statement of Charges” against Respondents. After 
charges were filed, each Respondent separately tendered, jointly with the 
Commission, a “Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement 
for Discipline” stipulating to certain facts.  
Although these proceedings were filed under different case numbers, 
we issue a single opinion for all three cases because the misconduct 
charges stem from the same incident. 
Background and Stipulated Facts 
Judge Adams was admitted to the Indiana Bar in 2001 and has served 
as the Judge of Clark Circuit Court 1 since January 1, 2015. Judge Jacobs 
was admitted to the Indiana Bar in 1999 and has served as the Judge of 
Clark Circuit Court 2 since January 1, 2015. Judge Bell was admitted to the 
Indiana Bar in 2011 and has served as the Judge of Crawford Circuit Court 
since January 1, 2017. At all times pertinent to the charges, Respondents 
presided over general jurisdiction dockets that included criminal and civil 
cases.  
On the evening of April 30, 2019, Respondents traveled to Indianapolis 
to attend the Spring Judicial College the next day. After checking into 
Indiana Supreme Court | Case Nos. 19S-JD-386, -566, -567 | November 12, 2019 
Page 3 of 8 
their hotel rooms, Respondents spent the evening socializing with other 
judicial officers and drinking alcoholic beverages.  
At around 12:30 a.m. on May 1, Respondents and Clark Circuit Court 
Magistrate William Dawkins (“Magistrate Dawkins”) met at a local bar, 
where they continued to drink alcohol. At around 3:00 a.m., the group 
walked to a strip club and tried to enter, but found that it was closed.  
The group then walked to a nearby White Castle. While Magistrate 
Dawkins went inside, Respondents stood outside the restaurant. At 
around 3:17 a.m., Alfredo Vazquez and Brandon Kaiser drove past the 
group and shouted something out the window. Judge Bell extended her 
middle finger to Vazquez and Kaiser, who pulled into the White Castle 
parking lot and exited the vehicle. Judge Bell, who was intoxicated, has no 
memory of the incident but concedes that the security camera video shows 
her making this gesture.  
A heated verbal altercation ensued, with all participants yelling, using 
profanity, and making dismissive, mocking, or insolent gestures toward 
the other group. At no time did Respondents move to another location in 
the parking lot to avoid a confrontation or de-escalate the conflict.  
After a verbal exchange between Judge Bell and Vazquez, a physical 
confrontation ensued. At one point, Judge Jacobs had Kaiser contained on 
the ground. With his fist raised back, Judge Jacobs said, “Okay, okay, 
we’re done, we’re done,” or “This is over. Tell me this is over,” or words 
to that effect. At another point during the confrontation, Judge Adams 
kicked Kaiser in the back. The confrontation ended when Kaiser pulled 
out a gun, shot Judge Adams once, and shot Judge Jacobs twice.  
Judge Adams and Judge Jacobs were transported to local hospitals for 
treatment of their serious injuries. Judge Adams, who sustained a single 
gunshot wound to the abdomen, had two emergency surgeries, including 
a colon resectioning. Judge Jacobs, who sustained two gunshot wounds to 
the chest, also had two emergency surgeries and was hospitalized for 14 
days.  
Upon admission to the hospital, Judge Adams’s serum blood alcohol 
level was 0.213 (or approximately 0.157 using whole blood) and Judge 
Indiana Supreme Court | Case Nos. 19S-JD-386, -566, -567 | November 12, 2019 
Page 4 of 8 
Jacobs’s serum blood alcohol level was 0.177 (or approximately 0.13 using 
whole blood). Judge Bell’s blood alcohol level was not tested, but she was 
intoxicated enough that she lacks any memory of the incident. 
Judge Bell remained on the scene to speak to the police and was later 
taken to the police station to give a recorded statement. In her statements 
to the police, Judge Bell asserted that she does not remember what she 
said to Vazquez or Kaiser or what started the physical altercations. 
However, while on the scene, the media videotaped Judge Bell telling 
police detectives, in an excited state, “I feel like this is all my fault” or 
words to that effect. Judge Bell does not remember making this statement.  
After being informed during her recorded statement that police 
detectives had video of the incident, Judge Bell remarked that 
• “I’m afraid that I said something to them first, I don’t know.” 
• “[W]e’re all very good friends and they’re very protective of me. 
And I don’t know, and I’m afraid that I said something to those 
two strange men at first, and then they said something back to 
me. And then I said something and then [Judge Adams and 
Judge Jacobs] went to defend me.” 
• “I’m not denying that I said something or egged it on … because 
I drink … I mean I fully acknowledge that I drink and get 
mouthy, and I’m fiery and I’m feisty, but if I would have ever 
thought for a second that they were gonna fight or that that guy 
had a gun on him, I would never, never …”  
Judge Bell later indicated that she was hypothesizing scenarios to the 
police about what might have happened, as she had no memory of the 
verbal altercation, but concedes that she made these statements.  
On June 28, 2019, a special grand jury filed an indictment against Judge 
Adams for two counts of Level 6 felony Battery Resulting in Moderate 
Injury, two counts of Class A misdemeanor Battery Resulting in Bodily 
Injury, two counts of Class B misdemeanor Battery, and one count of Class 
B misdemeanor Disorderly Conduct. Judge Jacobs also was the target of a 
grand jury investigation in June 2019, but no criminal charges were filed 
against him. 
Indiana Supreme Court | Case Nos. 19S-JD-386, -566, -567 | November 12, 2019 
Page 5 of 8 
On June 28, 2019, we suspended Judge Adams from the bench until 
further order under Indiana Admission and Discipline Rule 25(V)(A), 
which provides that a judicial officer shall be suspended with pay “upon 
the filing of an indictment or information charging the judicial officer … 
with a crime punishable as a felony under the laws of Indiana or the 
United States.” 
On September 9, 2019, Judge Adams pleaded guilty to Class A 
misdemeanor Battery Resulting in Bodily Injury. In his plea agreement, 
Judge Adams admitted to kicking Kaiser in a rude, insolent, or angry 
manner on May 1, 2019, resulting in bodily injury (pain) to Kaiser. All 
other charges were dismissed, and Judge Adams was sentenced to 365 
days in jail, with 363 days suspended.  
Discussion 
The Commission charges, and Respondents agree, that their respective 
conduct violated the following provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct:  
• Rule 1.2, requiring judges to act at all times in a manner that 
promotes public confidence in the integrity, independence, and 
impartiality of the judiciary; and  
• Rule 3.1(C), prohibiting judges from participating in extrajudicial 
activities that would appear to a reasonable person to undermine 
the judge’s integrity, independence, or impartiality.  
The Commission further charges, and Judge Adams agrees, that his 
conduct violated Rule 1.1 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which requires 
a judge to respect and comply with the law.  
Our legal system “is based upon the principle that an independent, 
impartial, and competent judiciary, composed of men and women of 
integrity, will interpret and apply the law that governs our society.” Ind. 
Code of Judicial Conduct, Preamble. The effectiveness of the judiciary 
ultimately rests on the trust and confidence that citizens confer on judges. 
Judges, therefore, must remain vigilant to guard against any actions that 
erode that public trust. Respondents’ alcohol-fueled actions during the 
early morning hours of May 1, 2019, fell far short of the Code’s directive to 
Indiana Supreme Court | Case Nos. 19S-JD-386, -566, -567 | November 12, 2019 
Page 6 of 8 
“aspire at all times to conduct that ensures the greatest possible public 
confidence in their independence, impartiality, integrity, and 
competence.” Id.  
Respondents acknowledge that their misconduct damaged the public’s 
respect for and confidence in the integrity of the Indiana judiciary, both 
within the state and nationally. Their misconduct occurred while they 
were in Indianapolis for a statewide judicial educational event, and Judge 
Adams’s misconduct resulted in a criminal conviction.  
The Conditional Agreements note, as mitigators, the following factors: 
• Respondents have no prior disciplinary history as judges or as 
lawyers and this misconduct constitutes an isolated incident in 
their judicial careers;  
• Respondents have accepted responsibility and expressed remorse 
for their conduct;   
• Respondents have made efforts to address their behavior by 
contacting the Judges & Lawyers Assistance Program and by seeing 
counselors; 
• Judge Adams and Judge Jacobs suffered serious physical injuries as 
a result of the altercation;  
• After the physical altercation began, Judge Bell made several 
attempts to stop the fighting, including seeking help from those 
inside the White Castle by pounding on the door;  
• Judge Bell immediately called 911 after shots were fired;  
• Judge Adams and Judge Jacobs have been active leaders in their 
community; and  
• Judge Adams and Judge Jacobs cooperated fully with the 
Commission and have been forthcoming about the incident.  
“The purpose of judicial discipline is not primarily to punish a judge, 
but rather to preserve the integrity of and public confidence in the judicial 
system and, when necessary, safeguard the bench and public from those 
who are unfit.” In re Hawkins, 902 N.E.2d 231, 244 (Ind. 2009). The sanction 
must be designed to deter similar misconduct and assure the public that 
judicial misconduct will not be condoned. Id.   
Indiana Supreme Court | Case Nos. 19S-JD-386, -566, -567 | November 12, 2019 
Page 7 of 8 
The Commission and Judge Adams agree that an appropriate sanction 
for his misconduct is a 60-day suspension without pay. The Commission 
and Judge Jacobs agree that the appropriate sanction for his misconduct is 
a 30-day suspension without pay. The Commission and Judge Bell agree 
that the appropriate sanction for her misconduct is a 30-day suspension 
without pay.  
“A suspension from office without pay, regardless of duration, is not a 
minor sanction. Even more than a public reprimand, any such suspension 
is a significant blemish on a sitting judge’s reputation.” Hawkins, 902 
N.E.2d at 246. Unpaid suspensions of 30 days or longer, then, are among 
the most severe sanctions short of removal from office. Id; see also Matter of 
Freese, 123 N.E.3d 683, 688 (Ind. 2019) (accepting conditional agreement 
for a 45-day unpaid suspension of a judge who appointed his unqualified 
friend as trustee of a trust without disclosing his financial relationship 
with the friend to the parties, and did not act promptly when faced with 
evidence that the friend embezzled trust funds). We agree that these 
suspensions are warranted in light of Respondents’ misconduct.  
While in town to attend a statewide educational conference for judicial 
officers, 10 hours before the program convened, Respondents walked the 
streets of downtown Indianapolis in a heavily intoxicated state. When 
Judge Bell extended her middle finger to a passing vehicle, neither Judge 
Adams nor Judge Jacobs discouraged the provocation or removed 
themselves from the situation. Instead, all three Respondents joined in a 
profane verbal altercation that quickly turned into physical violence and 
ended in gunfire, and in doing so, gravely undermined public trust in the 
dignity and decency of Indiana’s judiciary.  
Conclusion 
The Court orders that Andrew Adams, who already is under an interim 
suspension, shall be suspended without pay from the office of Judge of 
the Clark Circuit Court 1 for sixty (60) days, effective immediately. The 
suspension shall terminate and the Judge shall automatically be reinstated 
to office at 12:01 a.m. on Monday, January 13, 2020.   
Indiana Supreme Court | Case Nos. 19S-JD-386, -566, -567 | November 12, 2019 
Page 8 of 8 
The Court orders that Bradley B. Jacobs shall be suspended from the 
office of Judge of the Clark Circuit Court 2 without pay for thirty (30) days 
commencing at 12:01 a.m. on Friday, November 22, 2019. The suspension 
shall terminate and the Judge shall automatically be reinstated to office at 
12:01 a.m. on Monday, December 23, 2019.  
The Court orders that Sabrina R. Bell shall be suspended from the office 
of Judge of the Crawford Circuit Court without pay for thirty (30) days 
commencing at 12:01 a.m. on Friday, November 22, 2019. The suspension 
shall terminate and the Judge shall automatically be reinstated to office at 
12:01 a.m. on Monday, December 23, 2019.    
This discipline terminates the disciplinary proceedings relating to the 
circumstances giving rise to these cases.  
All Justices concur.  
A TT O R N E YS F O R  RES P O N DE N T, AN D R EW  A DAMS  
James H. Voyles 
Jennifer M. Lukemeyer 
Indianapolis, Indiana 
A TT O R N E Y F O R  RESP O N D E NT , B R A DL EY  B.  JA C OBS  
Larry O. Wilder 
Jeffersonville, Indiana 
R E S P ON D E NT  P R O  S E , SAB R I NA R . BE LL  
A TT O R N E YS F O R  I ND I A NA C OM MIS SI ON  O N J U DI C IAL  
Q U AL I FI CA TI O NS  
Adrienne L. Meiring, Counsel to the Commission 
Marcus McGhee, Staff Attorney to the Commission 
Indianapolis, Indiana