Opinion ID: 2545693
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Count I (The Walton Case)

Text: The Hearing Panel found that Judge Eriksson effectively punished Mr. Walton for exercising a legal right and that this result was punitive and gave the appearance of being vindictive. The Hearing Panel further noted, The public could certainly conclude that [defense counsel]'s requests for a stipulated continuance and his request to disqualify the judge had the effect of placing the client in jail. The panel did recognize the witnesses who testified that Judge Eriksson is generally an extremely sincere and fair judge, but ultimately found Judge Eriksson's actions to be in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The Hearing Panel noted that a retaliatory ruling in reaction to a request to disqualify a judicial officer constitutes a violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Abuse of judicial power in connection with motions for disqualification of a judge violates the Code. Good motives of a judicial officer are not a defense to and cannot justify conduct which violates the Code.