Opinion ID: 836180
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: inappropriate drawings and comment

Text: The remaining allegation of judicial misconduct concerns respondent's sexually inappropriate conduct directed toward female court employees. The testimony indicates that on two separate occasions respondent made lewd drawings one of female breasts and one of a penis on notes that were attached to two court files. The testimony further indicates that respondent commented on the small chest size of a 2nd division female employee during a retirement party at the 2nd division courthouse. Notably, even respondent realized he had made a mistake because he called the employee the following day to apologize personally to her. Unfortunately, she would not return his calls so he finally left a message on her voice mail apologizing for the gaffe. Respondent's counsel acknowledged that respondent's conduct was inappropriate, but contended that it was spontaneous and represented isolated incidents from respondent's nearly 37-year career. Respondent's counsel argues that respondent's conduct warrants, at most, a public reprimand. This argument is consistent with the recommendations of the JTC, which indicated that with respect to count 3, respondent's sexually inappropriate conduct merited a public censure. We agree with the JTC that respondent's sexual conduct was crass and inappropriate; however, we do not agree that respondent's conduct rises to the level of judicial misconduct beyond requiring public censure.