Summary
The Washington Supreme Court reviewed de novo a judicial disciplinary proceeding involving Justice Richard B. Sanders's visit to the Special Commitment Center and conversations with residents whose cases were pending before the court. The court held that his conduct violated Canons 1 and 2(A) of the Washington Code of Judicial Conduct by creating an appearance of partiality through ex parte contact. The court affirmed the Commission on Judicial Conduct's sanction of admonishment and rejected Sanders's due process and discovery arguments.
Holdings
- A judicial officer's visit to a facility for sexually violent predators is not inherently improper, but conversations with residents about reasons for confinement or issues pending before the judge's court may violate the Code of Judicial Conduct. Justice Sanders's ex parte contact with actual or foreseeable litigants concerning volitional control created an appearance of partiality and violated Canons 1 and 2(A).
- The Commission's failure to find a violation of Canon 3(A)(4) did not preclude findings that Justice Sanders violated Canons 1 and 2(A). Canon 1, together with the more specific restraint in Canon 2(A), provided a sufficiently specific basis for discipline under the circumstances.
- Justice Sanders was not denied due process by the Commission's handling of his discovery requests.
- The Commission correctly applied the ten nonexclusive sanction factors, and admonishment was an appropriate and sufficient sanction.
Questions Presented
- Whether Justice Sanders's conduct violated Canons 1 and 2(A) of the Code of Judicial Conduct even though the Commission did not find a direct violation of Canon 3(A)(4).
- Whether Canons 1 and 2(A), applied to Justice Sanders's conduct, provided a sufficiently specific basis for discipline and avoided a vagueness problem.
- Whether the Commission's discovery rulings denied Justice Sanders due process.
- Whether the Commission's admonishment was an appropriate sanction.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (14)
- In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Turco, 137 Wash. 2d 227, 970 P.2d 731 (1999)(followed)
- In re Deming, 108 Wash. 2d 82, 736 P.2d 639 (1987)(followed)
- In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Ritchie, 123 Wash. 2d 725, 870 P.2d 967 (1994)(followed)
- In re Detention of Thorell, 149 Wash. 2d 724, 72 P.3d 708 (2003)(followed)
- State v. Graham, 91 Wash. App. 663, 960 P.2d 457 (1998)(followed)
- Sherman v. State, 128 Wash. 2d 164, 905 P.2d 355 (1995)(followed)
- In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Sanders, 135 Wash. 2d 175, 955 P.2d 369 (1998)(distinguished)
- In re McCully, 942 P.2d 327 (Utah 1997)(followed)
- In re Parro, 847 So. 2d 1178 (La. 2003)(followed)
- Papa v. New Haven Federation of Teachers, 186 Conn. 725, 444 A.2d 196 (1982)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 14.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…