Disciplinary Counsel v. Lemons

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio publicly reprimanded Judge Richard Alan Lemons for independently investigating conditions in a juvenile-court litigant’s home, failing to recuse himself, and failing to perform his judicial duties fairly and impartially. The court adopted the Board of Professional Conduct’s findings that Lemons violated Jud.Cond.R. 2.9(C), 2.11(A)(1), and 2.2. The court recognized that Lemons acted with good intentions but held that those intentions did not excuse the ethical violations.

Holdings

1. A judge may not independently investigate facts in a matter by personally inspecting a residence and interacting with the children and their grandfather; the judge must consider only evidence presented in the proceeding and facts properly subject to judicial notice.
2. A judge must disqualify himself when his personal investigation gives him personal knowledge of facts in dispute or otherwise creates a reasonable question about his impartiality, even if the formal pleadings do not expressly rely on those facts.
3. A judge violates the duty to uphold and apply the law and perform judicial duties fairly and impartially by usurping a children's-services agency's authority, conducting an independent investigation, and sua sponte initiating a custody action because of frustration with the agency.
4. A public reprimand is the appropriate sanction for Lemons's misconduct.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a judge violates Jud.Cond.R. 2.9(C) by independently investigating facts pertinent to a matter by personally inspecting a residence and interacting with persons involved.
2. Whether a judge violates Jud.Cond.R. 2.11(A)(1) by failing to disqualify himself when his personal investigation gives him personal knowledge of disputed facts and creates a reasonable question about his impartiality.
3. Whether a judge violates Jud.Cond.R. 2.2 by conducting an independent investigation, initiating custody proceedings sua sponte, and thereby failing to uphold and apply the law and perform judicial duties fairly and impartially.
4. What sanction is appropriate for the established judicial misconduct.

Disposition

other