In re Allen

Summary

The Florida Supreme Court approved the Judicial Qualifications Commission's findings that First District Court of Appeal Judge Michael E. Allen violated Canons 1, 2A, and 3B(5) of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct. The violations arose from a concurring opinion in Childers v. State that the court found personally attacked Judge Charles Kahn and suggested judicial corruption based on unverified, extra-record materials. The court imposed the recommended discipline of a public reprimand.

Holdings

1. The JQC's findings that Judge Allen was motivated in part by dislike of Judge Kahn, personally attacked Kahn, and suggested that Kahn cast a corrupt vote were supported by clear and convincing evidence.
2. Judge Allen committed misconduct and violated Canons 1, 2 A, and 3 B(5) by using his opinion-writing power to make a personal attack and accuse another appellate judge of corruption based on unverified facts outside the record.
3. Judicial independence does not bar the JQC from disciplining an appellate judge who uses a judicial opinion to personally attack another judge and accuse that judge of a crime using unverified, extrarecord material.
4. A public reprimand was appropriate discipline for Judge Allen's misconduct.

Questions Presented

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence supported the JQC's findings that Judge Allen's concurring opinion was motivated by animus toward Judge Kahn, personally attacked Kahn, and suggested that Kahn was corrupt.
2. Whether the JQC's conclusions that Judge Allen violated Canons 1, 2 A, and 3 B(5) of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct were supported by the facts and law.
3. Whether judicial independence barred the JQC from bringing disciplinary charges based on statements in Judge Allen's judicial opinion.
4. Whether a public reprimand was appropriate discipline for the misconduct.

Disposition

approved