Opinion ID: 7347068
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Contacts at Fundraising Event and Assisting Ghazal in Retaining an Attorney

Text: The masters concluded that Judge Petrucelli’s brief remarks to Ghazal at a fundraiser on the evening of his release and the calls he made to put Ghazal in touch with an attorney do not constitute misconduct. We agree that the brief remarks at the fundraiser, a contact initiated by Ghazal, do not constitute misconduct. However, we conclude that the judge’s efforts to assist Ghazal in retaining an attorney constitute violations of California Code of Judicial Ethics, canons 2 (judge shall avoid appearance of impropriety) and 2A (judge shall act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary). The judge called Attorney Nuttall 9 about representing Ghazal after having just taken judicial action to obtain Ghazal’s release. He then called Ghazal on his cell phone and gave him Nuttall’s contact information. Under these circumstances, the judge’s efforts to put Ghazal in touch with Nuttall reinforces the appearance that he was acting to benefit a friend and undermines public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. CJP Supp. 4 CJP Supp. 5 CJP Supp. 6 CJP Supp. 7 CJP Supp. 8 CJP Supp. 9 CJP Supp. 10 CJP Supp. 11 CJP Supp. 12 CJP Supp. 13 CJP Supp. 14 CJP Supp. 15 CJP Supp. 16 CJP Supp. 17 CJP Supp. 18 CJP Supp. 19 CJP Supp. 20 CJP Supp. 21 CJP Supp. 22 CJP Supp. 23 CJP Supp. 8