Court Opinion

ID: 9742667
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:17:40.457228+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:34.641819
License: Public Domain

Souris, J.
(concurring). I concur in my Brothers7 finding of facts, the conclusions reached therefrom,, and the recommendation to the legislature and to-the governor that respondent be removed from office-as provided by Const 1908, art 9, § 6. However, our constitutiorially mandated duty to exercise general superintending control over inferior courts (art 7, § 4) requires more from us. We should forthwith enter our order enjoining respondent from exercising the powers and duties of his judicial office pending the legislative and executive action recommended, or until further order of this Court.
We have found that respondent’s misconduct, related to the performance of his judicial duties, was shameful, unpardonable and intolerable and for such misconduct we have recommended his removal from office. How, then, can we justify his interim exercise of judicial authority, authority which rests alone upon the public’s continuing confidence in the-moral integrity of its judgments? I cannot. Nor can I justify exposing the citizens of this State, not alone of Tuscola county, to the possibility of continuing depredations by this respondent until the-legislature and the governor are able to act.
Adams, J., did not sit.