In re Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 276, Brown

Summary

The North Carolina Supreme Court rejected the Judicial Standards Commission’s recommendation that Judge Shirley H. Brown be censured. The Court held that it had authority to adopt the Code of Judicial Conduct’s three-year limitation on disciplinary proceedings, but that the limitation did not apply retroactively because the proceeding was already pending when the clause took effect. The Court further concluded that Judge Brown’s conduct was not sufficiently egregious to constitute conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

Holdings

1. The Supreme Court had authority to adopt the Limitation of Proceedings clause because the North Carolina Constitution and statutes authorize it to prescribe appellate procedure and standards of judicial conduct.
2. The Limitation of Proceedings clause did not bar the disciplinary proceeding because the Commission filed its formal complaint before the clause became effective; the clause therefore did not retroactively terminate the already-pending proceeding.
3. Judge Brown's conduct did not constitute conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice within the meaning of N.C.G.S. § 7A-376 and was not sufficiently egregious to warrant censure.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Supreme Court of North Carolina had authority to adopt the Limitation of Proceedings clause in the North Carolina Code of Judicial Conduct.
2. Whether the three-year Limitation of Proceedings clause applied to bar disciplinary proceedings that were instituted before the clause became effective.
3. Whether Judge Brown's conduct constituted conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice under N.C.G.S. § 7A-376 and warranted censure.

Disposition

reversed