Opinion ID: 1755033
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 39

Heading: Propriety of Sanctions

Text: We have stricken Items 1 and 5 from consideration in determining whether Respondent has violated the Texas Constitution and the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct. We have found sufficient evidence to support the Special Master's findings with regard to Items 2, 3 and 4. Accordingly, sanctions could be properly imposed based upon violations of the following:  Article V, § 1-a(6)(A) of the Texas Constitution, providing in pertinent part that a judge may be disciplined, censured, or removed from office for willful or persistent violation of rules promulgated by the Supreme Court of Texas, incompetence in performing the duties of the office, willful violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, or willful or persistent conduct that is clearly inconsistent with the proper performance of his duties or casts public discredit upon the judiciary or administration of justice.  Canon 2 A of the Texas Code of Judicial ConductA judge shall comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.  Canon 2 B of the Texas Code of Judicial ConductA judge shall not lend the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others.  Canon 3 B(2) of the Texas Code of Judicial ConductA judge should be faithful to the law and shall maintain professional competence in it.  Canon 4 A(1) of the Texas Code of Judicial ConductA judge shall conduct all of the judge's extra-judicial activities so that they do not cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a judge. Willful as applied in TEX. CONST. art. V, § 1-a(6)A is the improper or wrongful use of the power of his office by a judge acting intentionally, or with gross indifference to his conduct. [7] In re Thoma, 873 S.W.2d at 489. Respondent has misused the power of his office either intentionally or with gross indifference. His actions have cast public discredit upon the judiciary. We thus uphold the findings of the Special Master, adopted by the Commission, that Respondent's conduct as enumerated in Items 2, 3, and 4 was willful and that sanctions are appropriate. Having established judicial misconduct, we next address the severity of the sanctions imposed.