Opinion ID: 3163627
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: JQC Recommendation

Text: In evaluating judicial misconduct, we generally place great weight on the recommendation of the Hearing Panel. However, this Court will not approve a recommendation for discipline short of removal for particularly egregious misconduct rendering a judge unfit for office. See, e.g., Sloop, 946 So. 2d at 1056; In re Renke, 933 So. 2d 482, 493 (Fla. 2006). Ultimately, the decision of whether to order removal rests with this Court. Kinsey, 842 So. 2d at 85. In this case, the Hearing Panel’s recommended discipline stops short of removal. However, the JQC, in its Reply to this Court’s order to show cause, - 21 - argued that Judge Murphy’s VA disability did not support his present fitness and described his misconduct as having “single-handedly caused the Florida judicial system to become a national embarrassment.” Judge Murphy’s “intemperate courtroom behavior not only damaged public confidence in him as a judicial officer but struck ‘at the very roots of an effective judiciary, for those who are served by the courts will not have confidence in and respect for the courts’ judgments if judges engage in this egregious conduct.’ ” In re Shea, 110 So. 3d 414, 418 (Fla. 2013) (quoting In re Schapiro, 845 So. 2d 170, 174 (Fla. 2003)). Given the erosion of public confidence caused by Judge Murphy’s misconduct, we reject the JQC’s recommendation of discipline in this case.