Opinion ID: 2120247
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Issue 1: Removal for Court's Administrative Failures

Text: In Judge Rose's first issue, he contends that clerical and administrative failures in the court's processing of cases, depositing funds, and making reports are [not] sufficient grounds to remove an elected judge from office. ( See Rose Br. at ix.) In connection with this issue, Judge Rose notes parenthetically, An issue of first impression. ( Id. at ix.) Judge Rose briefs this issue in Section I of his argument. ( See id. at 10-12.) There is precedent for removal for administrative misconduct in Texas, and precedent for lesser discipline for such misconduct is well-established. Moreover, removal for such misconduct is well-established in other states. Perhaps the most significant changes in the judicial role in recent years have been those relating to a judge's administrative responsibilities. JEFFREY M. SHAMAN, STEVEN LUBET & JAMES J. ALFINI, JUDICIAL CONDUCT AND ETHICS § 6.01 (3d ed.2000). The increase in judicial reporting requirements would lead to the conclusion that there [i]s another dimension to judging, a dimension of administrative responsibility applicable to each judge for the particular court over which that judge presides. See id. (quoting In re Alvino, 100 N.J. 92, 494 A.2d 1014, 1017 (1985)). Justices of the peace, in particular, act in many instances in an administrative capacity. 47 AM.JUR.2D Justices of the Peace § 1 (1995). Indeed, Texas Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3(C) specifically concerns administrative responsibilities. See TEX.CODE JUD. CONDUCT, Canon 3(C). Canon 3(C) provides: A judge should diligently and promptly discharge the judge's administrative responsibilities without bias or prejudice and maintain professional competence in judicial administration, and should cooperate with other judges and court officials in the administration of court business. TEX.CODE JUD. CONDUCT, Canon 3(C)(1). Contrary to Judge Rose's assertion, the issue of the removal of a judge for conduct similar to his is not one of first impression in Texas. See In re Hilton, No. 56 (Tex.Rev.Trib. Feb. 7, 1991) (judgment), Jud. Discipline & Disability Dig. (Am. Judicature Soc'y Supp.1989-1991), available at WESTLAW, JDDD Database. [26] In Inquiry Concerning Hilton, the examiner charged a justice of the peace with, among other misconduct: (1) receiving some $4,452 over a period of two years and failing to report it as required by Texas Local Government Code Section 114.003; and (2) failing to forward abstracts of six traffic convictions in his court to the Texas Department of Public Safety as required by former Texas Revised Civil Statutes Article 6701d, Section 152. Notice Formal Proceedings at 4-7, 10-12, Hilton (No. 56); Report Spec. Master at 3-5, 7-8, Hilton; see Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways, 50th Leg., R.S., ch. 421, § 152, 1947 Tex. Gen. Laws 967, 1001 (amended 1989) (repealed 1995) (current version at TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. §§ 543.201-543.206 (Vernon 1999 & Supp.2004)). A special master reported findings that the Commission had fully met its burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence as to the failure to report receipts and as to three of the unreported convictions. See Report Spec. Master at 5, 8, Hilton. The Commission affirmed the special master's findings and recommended removal. Concls. Law, Hilton. A review tribunal approved, confirmed, and affirmed the Commission's conclusions, and ordered removal. Hilton (judgment). Across the country, removal for administrative misconduct is well-accepted. Since 1990, including Judge Hilton in Texas, at least fourteen judicial removal cases involved exclusively administrative malfeasance, and in at least thirteen more, administrative lapses were part of the findings supporting removal. Discipline for Failure to Perform Administrative Duties, 24 JUD. CONDUCT REP. No. 4, at 3 (2003); see CYNTHIA GRAY, A STUDY OF STATE JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE SANCTIONS 9-10 (2002) (covering 1990-2001); see also Am. Judicature Soc'y, Judicial Discipline Sanctions in 2003, at http:// www.ajs.org/ethics/story.asp?content  id=259 (Feb. 17, 2004); Nine Judges Removed in 2002, 24 JUD. CONDUCT REP. No. 4, at 1 (2003). For example, in In the Matter of Corning, the Court of Appeals of New York accepted the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct's recommendation of removal of a town court justice for failing to deposit court funds in his official account within seventy-two hours after receipt in violation of court rules, and for failing to remit court funds to the state comptroller by the tenth day of the month following collection in violation of statutes. [27] In re Corning, 95 N.Y.2d 450, 718 N.Y.S.2d 272, 741 N.E.2d 117, 118, 119-20 (N.Y.2000) (per curiam) (interpreting N.Y. COMP.CODES R. & REGS. tit. 22, § 100.3(B)(1) (LEXIS through changes received June 4, 2004) (judge shall be faithful to the law)); see N.Y. COMP.CODES R. & REGS. tit. 22, § 214.9(a) (LEXIS through changes received June 4, 2004); N.Y. UNIFORM JUST. CT. ACT § 2021(1) (Consol.Supp.2004); N.Y. TOWN LAW § 27(1) (Consol.1976); N.Y. VEH. & TRAF. LAW § 1803(8) (Consol.Supp.2004). [28] Moreover, discipline less than removal for administrative misconduct is well-established in Texas. Indeed, the Commission has recently sanctioned one of Judge Rose's colleagues, Dallas County Justice of the Peace Juan Jasso, for conduct similar to Judge Rose's, although on a much smaller scale: In two complaints, plaintiffs' cases remained pending for years with no disposition as a result of a backlog of cases, disorganization, and other administrative problems among the judge's court staff. In a third complaint, the judge was found to have engaged in fiscal mismanagement by failing to fulfill his statutory obligation to deposit monies as required by the Local Government Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure. An auditor reported to the County Commissioner's Court that the judge's court had thousands of dollars worth of unposted receipts, numerous posting errors, and approximately $6,650.00 in missing funds. These audit findings indicated that similar findings and recommendations had been made to the judge on numerous occasions in the past. Further, it was determined that the judge failed to file monthly activity reports with the Office of Court Administration (OCA) since 2001, despite receiving notices that the reports were overdue. A follow-up audit reflected that receipts still were not being immediately given when payment was tendered, even after the judge became aware of the Commission's investigation. The Commission concluded that the judge persistently failed to maintain and monitor his civil court docket, and had failed to properly account for and deposit monies collected by his court and to timely file with the OCA the required monthly activity reports. The judge's persistent failure to comply with statutory requirements in the Local Government Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Government Code was clearly inconsistent with the proper performance of his duties. [Violation of Article V, Section 1-a(6)A, Texas Constitution and Canon 2A, Texas Code of Judicial Conduct.] Public Admonition and Order of Additional Education of Justice of the Peace Juan Jasso (08/25/03). STATE COMM'N JUD. CONDUCT ANN. REP. 27-28 (2003) (bracketed material and italics in orig.); see Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 71.035(b) (Vernon 1998) (OCA reporting requirements). See also the following examples of improper judicial conduct similar to Judge Rose's for which judges have been disciplined:  The Judge's court unreasonably delayed defendant's traffic case for eighteen (18) months after the Judge recused herself.... [E]ighteen (18) months was an unreasonable delay constituting an unjustifiable failure to timely execute the business of the court. STATE COMM'N JUD. CONDUCT ANN. REP. § 9 (2002), http://www.scjc.state.tx.us/ANNUAL  REPORT  2002.pdf (last visited Mar. 2, 2004) (admonition and order of education).  A justice of the peace who failed to credit a defendant's fine payment to the defendant's case, failed to correct the error after it was brought to her attention, issued a warrant for the defendant's arrest on the grounds of failure to pay the fine, later denied that she had received the defendant's payment, and failed to refund the defendant's double payment timely after he paid the fine a second time, lacked the professional competence to perform the responsibilities, including the clerical duties, required of a justice court. Discipline, 64 TEX. B.J. 291, 291 (2001) (public admonition).  A judge received monies in his judicial capacity and thereafter failed to report the same to the county auditor as required by statute and county practice. STATE COMM'N JUD. CONDUCT ANN. REP. (1991), 55 TEX. B.J. 1061, 1064 (1992).  A judge allowed her staff complete responsibility for the recording and reporting of fines collected and the judge's inattention to her responsibility resulted in thousands of dollars being unaccounted for. Id.  A judge failed to establish appropriate internal controls within his office so as to properly safeguard and account for public funds coming into the office. STATE COMM'N JUD. CONDUCT ANN. REP. (1987), 51 TEX. B.J. 464, 465 (1988).  A judge failed to handle the business of his court, including accounting for county funds paid through his court. STATE COMM'N JUD. CONDUCT ANN. REP. (1985), 49 TEX. B.J. 844, 848 (1986). [29] Accordingly, abundant precedent supports judicial discipline, including removal, for administrative misconduct. Judge Rose's first issue is overruled.