Opinion ID: 1680174
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Scope of Review and the JQC's Findings

Text: The first issue before the Court is whether we should approve the JQC's findings. Article V, section 12(c)(1) of the Florida Constitution provides in pertinent part: The supreme court may accept, reject, or modify in whole or in part the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the commission and it may order that the justice or judge be subjected to appropriate discipline, or be removed from office with termination of compensation for willful or persistent failure to perform judicial duties or for other conduct unbecoming a member of the judiciary demonstrating a present unfitness to hold office, or be involuntarily retired for any permanent disability that seriously interferes with the performance of judicial duties. This Court reviews the findings of the JQC to determine whether the alleged violations are supported by clear and convincing evidence, and reviews the recommended discipline to determine whether it should be approved. See In re Diaz, 908 So.2d 334, 336-37 (Fla.2005). In cases where a judge admits to wrongdoing and the JQC's findings are undisputed this Court will ordinarily conclude that the JQC's findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence. Id. at 337. Because Judge Woodard stipulated to the JQC's factual findings, no additional proof is necessary to support the JQC's factual findings. We determine that the stipulated facts constitute clear and convincing evidence. Therefore, the issues we must address are whether the stipulated facts violate Canons 1, 2, and 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct and whether the recommended discipline should be approved.