Opinion ID: 1298515
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Censure.

Text: We have concluded that censure is entirely inappropriate in this case. As noted previously, a judge is guilty of serious misconduct when he commits the very offense for which he is called on to judge and sentence others. Nor do we believe it appropriate to treat a judge's possession of marijuana with a mere reprimand or slap on the hand. We are aware we have perhaps been less severe than appropriate in past treatment of serious offenses  sexual harassment in Ackel and driving under the influence in Biggins. Both of those cases, however, involved non-lawyers elected as justices of the peace. Respondent is a merit selection judge, constitutionally given special protection. See generally arts. 6 and 6.1. We believe he and others in that position should be held to a higher standard than elected, non-lawyers who hold a judicial or quasi-judicial office. Finally, we believe a sanction more serious than censure is required considering the Texas court's finding that respondent's possession was knowing and intentional. For the reasons stated, we deem censure too mild a sanction.