Court Opinion

ID: 9822168
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 08:49:27.642774+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:39:02.288839
License: Public Domain

WEIMER, J.,
dissenting.
Iil respectfully dissent.
Although in no way condoning what this Justice-of the Peace has admitted were “egregious” legal errors in failing to have hearings on' the modifications of peace bonds and failing to properly notarize affidavits related to peace bond applications, I believe a sanction less than removal from office would serve the interests of justice. The law related to peace bonds" is less than clear. Most of the errors made relative to peace bonds occurred at the beginning of Justice of the Peace’s term of office, although the effect of the errors spanned a longer time frame. There was no finding that the Justice of the Peace was motivated by family, social, political, or other relationships. It is my belief that there was insufficient proof respondent lent the prestige of his judicial office to advance his private interests or the interests of others. Further, on the record before the court, I am not convinced that the respondent issued orders in conflict with the jurisdiction of the district court.
HUGHES, J., dissents for the reasons assigned by Justice WEIMER.