Court Opinion

ID: 9659509
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 21:48:27.821136+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:09.059176
License: Public Domain

GRANT, Justice,
concurring.
Because of our disposition on other grounds, we do not reach the issue in this case involving the separation of powers doctrine. But I want to stress the importance of that doctrine because I believe that is one of the salient reasons our system works. It must be remembered that the primary function of our courts is not fund raising, but justice. Just because a branch of our government may have the right to appoint judges does not mean that that nonjudicial branch can dictate the judicial decisions and acts of the court.
The United States Supreme Court pointed out in Ward v. Monroeville, 409 U.S. 57, 93 S.Ct. 80, 34 L.Ed.2d 267 (1972), that a mayor cannot serve as a city judge because an official then occupies two seriously inconsistent positions, one partisan and one judicial. As a mayor or someone directly involved in the financing of the city, there is an incentive to convict in order to increase the income of the city. This creates an interest that is the antithesis of the neutral and detached judge to which any defendant is entitled, whether the offense charged be a misdemeanor or capital crime.
I concur in the present opinion, but emphasize the need for a clear separation of the functions of government on all levels.
CORNELIUS, C.J., not participating.