Court Opinion

ID: 9899121
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-15 22:00:42.92692+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:58.590058
License: Public Domain

FOR PUBLICATION

             JUDICIAL COUNCIL
            OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT

                                          No. 22-90006
IN RE COMPLAINT OF
JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT                       ORDER

                 Filed November 15, 2023

                         ORDER

MURGUIA, Chief Judge:

    Complainant, a pro se litigant, has filed a complaint of
judicial misconduct against a district judge. Review of this
complaint is governed by the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and
Judicial-Disability Proceedings (“Judicial-Conduct Rules”),
the federal statutes addressing judicial conduct and
disability, 28 U.S.C. § 351 et seq., and relevant prior
decisions of the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council. In
accordance with these authorities, the names of the
complainant and the subject judge shall not be disclosed in
this order. See Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(g)(2).
2           IN RE COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

     The Judicial-Conduct Rules provide a remedy if a federal
judge “has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective
and expeditious administration of the business of the courts.”
28 U.S.C. § 351(a). A chief judge may dismiss a complaint
if, following review, he or she finds it is not cognizable
under the statute, is directly related to the merits of a decision
or procedural ruling, or is frivolous or lacks sufficient
evidence to raise an inference of misconduct. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 352(b)(1)(A)(i)-(iii). Judicial misconduct proceedings are
not a substitute for the normal appellate review process, and
may not be used to seek reversal of a judge’s decision, to
obtain a new trial, or to request reassignment to a different
judge.
    This misconduct complaint arises out of an attorney
disciplinary matter. In the misconduct complaint, the
complainant alleges that the district judge “made a gross
error in his decision to affirm the Bar’s suspension” and that
the district judge refused to consider evidence. These
allegations are related to the merits and must be dismissed
on that ground. See 28 U.S.C. § 352(b)(1)(A)(ii); In re
Complaint of Jud. Misconduct, 838 F.3d 1030 (9th Cir. Jud.
Council 2016) (dismissing allegations that a district judge
and magistrate judge made various improper rulings as
merits related); Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(B).
     Complainant also alleges that the district judge violated
his due process rights by improperly acting as a prosecutor
in lieu of the State Bar. A review of the record reveals that
the disciplinary proceedings were conducted pursuant to the
local rules of the district court and the district judge
explained that the district court did not have appellate
jurisdiction over the State Bar’s decisions. Initiating
reciprocal attorney disciplinary proceedings is not improper.
See In re Kramer, 282 F.3d 721, 724 (9th Cir. 2002) (finding
           IN RE COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT            3

the district court's imposition of reciprocal attorney
discipline proceedings based on a state's disciplinary
adjudication was not an abuse of discretion); see also 9th Cir.
R. 46-2(c). Because complainant provides no objectively
verifiable evidence of misconduct in this matter, this
allegation must be dismissed.             See 28 U.S.C.
§ 352(b)(1)(A)(iii); Judicial-Conduct Rule 11(c)(1)(D).
   DISMISSED.