When judges need disciplining

When judges need disciplining

DETROIT — They lied, stole, forged bank documents, padded expense accounts, drove drunk, slept with litigants and jailed innocent people.

 

Michigan judges have been in big trouble in recent years. The number of judges disciplined — about 35 per year — has not gone up, but the level of chicanery has soared.

 

Four judges have been removed from the bench and a fifth was forced to retire in the last three years. National experts who are watching the state’s troubled judiciary say the trend is perhaps an aberration, but others say the state’s judges need remedial education on judicial ethics.

 

Judges who have been disciplined in recent years range from a Wayne County Circuit judge who was carrying on an affair with a woman involved in a divorce case he was deciding to a Jackson County judge who dismissed traffic tickets against his wife to a Hudsonville judge who threw a defense attorney in jail for advising his client not to answer potentially incriminating questions.

 

The problems have even reached up to the state’s highest court. Diane Hathaway, a Michigan Supreme Court justice, chose to retire from the bench in January 2013 rather than face removal as she was about to be indicted on a federal mortgage fraud charge. She eventually served nine months in a federal prison and was released in May 2014.

On Monday, proceedings will start to remove yet another Michigan judge from the bench.

 

Officials say Detroit 36th District Judge Brenda Sanders is seriously mentally ill, a danger to herself and others. Sanders, on the bench since 2008, wrote the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Detroit in 2013 that her fellow judges were being murdered to stop them from revealing wrongdoing and that she, too, was in imminent danger. People were hacking into her phone and e-mail. Supreme Court justices had evicted her from her home.

 

A psychiatrist who later examined the letter for court officials said it showed classic symptoms of “psychosis” marked by “insane delusions” and warned that Sanders, who has been known to carry a handgun, could be dangerous.

 

Her attorney, Cyril Hall, in court filings, said the letter was meant to be private and that a psychiatric examination would show that she was not mentally ill.

 

Sanders has been suspended from her duties without pay. At Monday’s hearing, the Judicial Tenure Commission will gather evidence and decide whether to recommend her dismissal to the Michigan Supreme Court, the only authority to remove judges.

 

“I think you can make the point that this is a troubled judiciary,” said Charles Gardner Geyh, a professor of law at Maurer School of Law at Indiana University and a national expert on judicial ethics. “But there is a counterpoint to be made. Michigan is doing a fairly aggressive job of rooting out misconduct.”

 

A message to all judges

 

Paul Fischer, executive director of the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission, will prosecute the case against Judge Sanders.

 

Fischer said the number of complaints about misbehaving judges have remained steady, though recent cases have garnered much more attention, likely because they have involved titillating behavior like sex, theft and lying that ended up in headlines.

“It’s been pretty steady the last several years, but it does seem like there’s been more,” he said. “I think people are paying more attention.”

 

The Center for Judicial Ethics at the National Center for State Courts serves as a clearinghouse for judicial discipline and tracks misdeeds nationwide. Their records show that removing a judge from the bench is rare.

 

In 2013, only five judges were removed from the bench nationwide, and 17 resigned or retired in lieu of removal. Michigan, in just three years, has removed four judges and forced two to retire.

 

Cynthia Gray, the director of the center and considered one of nation’s experts on judicial ethics, has been watching the Michigan judiciary with interest. “Perhaps in a year or so, it will be back to the typical thing, like drunk driving,” Gray said. “When you take a snapshot, you sometimes get an aberration, and I hope, for the sake of Michigan, that’s what this is.”

 

The public punishment of judges may prompt those remaining on the bench to behave, she said.

 

“Part of judicial discipline is to remind them that people are watching, so whatever they might be struggling with, hopefully they resist.”

 

Leslie Abramson, a professor at the Louis Brandeis School of Law at the University of Louisville, said the nature of the transgressions should prompt the state to look hard at how judges are elected and retained.

 

“Even if the numbers are stable, the nature and severity of what these people are doing would suggest a cultural problem,” said Abramson, who lectures extensively on judicial ethics.

 

Noting Hathaway’s forced retirement from the Michigan Supreme Court, Abramson said: “It sounds like a top-down problem and should prompt the question of whether there needs to be a cultural change, either through education, or a reminder that these people are held to a very high standard, and not just on what they do on the bench.”

 

Others say that while the trend is troubling, Michigan residents should be encouraged by the prosecution of bad judges. “But for the discipline, some of this behavior might have continued,” said Geyh. “I tend to see this as the glass half-full.”

 

 

The ‘black robe disease’

 

Judges, by the very nature of their work, are very powerful, and some get into trouble by wielding that power inappropriately.

 

Dennis Wiley, a district court judge in Berrien County in southwest Michigan, was publicly censured in 2012 after he found a woman in contempt and threw her in jail for 10 days because she muttered a profanity in the clerk’s office while trying to take care of traffic tickets.

 

And Kenneth Post, a district court judge in Hudsonville, was given a 30-day suspension in 2013 after he jailed a defense attorney for advising his client not to answer incriminating questions.

 

Professor Abramson calls it the “black robe disease.”

“It seems to be an affliction that overtakes judges perhaps because of the tremendous power they have,” he said, noting that judicial canons require judges to be courteous to all litigants.

 

Michigan is not the only state with judges committing jaw-dropping behavior.

 

In Wisconsin, Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley claimed fellow Justice David Prosser put her “in a chokehold” during a heated argument in her chambers regarding the timing of an opinion. A special prosecutor was appointed but brought no charges. The Wisconsin Judicial Tenure Commission recommended sanctions against Prosser, but the matter was dropped when three of the Supreme Court justices who had witnessed the altercation recused themselves.

 

And in California, two county judges were publicly censured in September in separate cases for having sex in their chambers, one with his clerk, and the other with two of his former law students. The state’s Commission on Judicial Performance declared that Orange County Judge Scott Steiner and Kern County Judge Cory Woodward showed “utter disrespect for the dignity and decorum of the court.”

 

Policing the judiciary

 

The majority of the state’s 1,259 judges, magistrates and referees never face discipline. But once a judge breaks a law or violates one of the strict judicial canons that dictate behavior, they can face sanctions.

 

The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission, made up of five judges, two attorneys and two citizens oversees the complaints, investigates and holds hearings. If the commission determines wrongdoing, it makes a recommendation to the Michigan Supreme Court. Sanctions can include a private censure, a public reprimand, paid or unpaid suspension, mandatory retirement or removal from office.

 

The process is secretive and often lengthy. The commission does not provide information about investigations or allegations unless they take action, and private censures are sealed. The commission is not subject to the Michigan Freedom of Information Act.

 

Critics of the system say citizens should have more access to complaints about judges. Michigan’s secrecy prompted the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization, to give the state a failing grade in “judicial accountability” in a 2012 survey of states. Several other states received failing grades.

 

Michigan is among 39 states that elect their judges. Voters can be dispassionate if not outright uninformed when it comes to electing judges in Michigan. Once a judge wins election, it can become a job for life.

 

Judicial elections tend to be about name recognition and the special incumbent designation that sitting judges get on the ballot. And few practicing attorneys want to risk an election challenge against a judge whom they have to face in court regularly.

 

On occasion, voters will hold judges accountable.

 

After Inkster District Judge Sylvia James was removed from the bench in 2012 for misusing public funds, including money meant for crime victims, she ran for her old seat in the following November election. But James lost to Sabrina Johnson, who was appointed by the governor to finish James’ term and now had the incumbent designation.

 

Some states have tried to provide more citizen access and greater policing.

 

Arizona has a “judicial review commission,” made up of mostly nonlawyers, that queries jurors, litigants, attorneys, court staff and witnesses about their experiences in front of judges.

 

They then rate the judge as qualified or not and make the information public on the secretary of state website and in paid advertising. There are no studies showing the impact, but the experts say it likely keeps judges behaving.

 

“I would regard that form of accountability as reliable,” said law professor Geyh.

 

Judges recently punished by Michigan Supreme Court

 

The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission typically receives about 600 complaints a year. Many are complaints about rulings, out of the jurisdiction of the commission. Some legitimate complaints are resolved through private admonishments and warnings. The more serious end up before the Michigan Supreme Court.

 

Some of the judges most recently punished by the high court:

 

  • Deborah Ross Adams, Wayne County Family Court, removed from the bench in 2013 after lying under oath. She repeatedly contacted an Oakland County judge regarding her divorce pending in that court and forged a document, then lied about it.

 

  • Sheila Ann Gibson, Wayne County Circuit Court judge, issued a public censure and 30-day suspension without pay after a Detroit television crew followed her and filmed her arriving late to the courthouse and leaving early on several days. Some days she worked as little as four hours.

 

  • Diane Hathaway, a Michigan Supreme Court justice, retired from the bench rather than face removal following her 2013 conviction on mortgage fraud. She served nine months in a federal prison and was released in May 2014.

 

  • Sylvia James, Inkster district court judge, removed from the bench in 2012 for misusing public funds meant for crime victims, then lying to the Judicial Tenure Commission about it. She was ordered to repay $16,500.

 

  • James Justin, a district court judge in Jackson, removed in 2012 after dismissing traffic tickets for his wife and members of his court staff without notifying prosecutors.

 

  • Wade McCree, Wayne County Circuit Court judge, removed from the bench in 2014 after carrying on an affair with a female litigant appearing before him, then lying about it to the Judicial Tenure Commission. He also was ordered to pay $12,000 in costs. He made headlines in 2010 after he sent a shirtless photo of himself to a county employee, and when questioned by reporters said, “There’s no shame in my game.”

 

  • Bruce Morrow, Wayne County Circuit Court judge, 60 days suspension in 2014 for mismanaging cases, including his refusal to lock up a convicted rapist pending sentencing.

 

  • Kenneth Post, Hudsonville district court judge, public censure and 30-day suspension in 2013 after he jailed a defense attorney who was advising his client not to answer the judge’s potentially incriminating questions from the bench, a professional obligation all defense attorneys have.

 

  • Dennis Powers, Novi district court judge, retired in September to avoid removal from the bench after investigators found thousands of dollars of improper mileage reimbursement. Powers also was accused of golfing, and attending real estate seminars when he should have been on the bench.

 

  • Kirk Tabbey, Ypsilanti district court, public censure and 90-day suspension without pay in 2014 after being arrested on charges of drunken driving while towing a boat out of a lake. His blood alcohol was 0.17, more than twice the legal limit.

 

  • Dennis Wiley, Berrien County district judge, issued a public censure after he found a woman in contempt and jailed her for 10 days over Christmas because court clerks told him she had muttered an obscenity in the clerk’s office while attempting to take care of traffic tickets.

 

 

More Judges in Trouble links

Shady Probate Judge Kathryn George Jails Mom, Seizes …

Jun 16, 2014 – I’ve seen some wicked judges, but she is the worst. …. The Michigan State Supreme Court removed her as Chief Judge of the Macomb Court in …

 

Immunity lets bad judges off hook for bad behavior

 

July 28, 2014 – The disgraced judge — who once texted a shirtless photo of himself to a female court bailiff — had an affair with a woman while overseeing her child custody case, had sex with her in his chambers and sexted her from the bench.

 

Last on List: Michigan Ranks Worst Among State …

Nov 9, 2015 – Last on List: Michigan Ranks Worst Among State Governments for Integrity …. There are an alarming number of local Judges, lawyers, Court …

 

Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission files complaint against Ypsilanti district court  judge

Nov 13, 2014 – The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission filed formal complaints Wednesday against 14-A District Court Judge J. Cedric Simpson.

 

Michigan one of the worst states when it comes to “dark money…

Jun 25, 2015 – But the judges did say we had a right to demand to know who was … that Michigan is absolutely the worst of all the states when it comes to …

 

Judicial Tenure Commission files complaint against Judge Gorcyca

Dec 15 2015 – A Michigan judge who ordered some siblings to juvenile detention for refusing to meet with their estranged father is now facing backlash. A formal complaint has been filed by the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission against Judge Lisa Gorcyca. The commission has also requested that the Supreme Court appoint a master to preside over a formal hearing in the matter.

 

Complaint dropped against Wayne Circuit judge

January 27, 2016 – A judicial misconduct complaint has been dismissed against Wayne Circuit Judge Richard B. Halloran Jr., who was accused of not following rules in divorce proceedings.

 

Removal of Judges

 

Michigan judges may be removed in one of three ways:

  • Judges may be impeached by a majority vote of the house of representatives and convicted by a two-thirds vote of the senate.
  • The governor may remove a judge upon the concurrent resolution of two thirds of the members of both houses of the legislature.
  • On the recommendation of the judicial tenure commission, the supreme court may censure, suspend, retire, or remove a judge.   However, the Judicial Tenure Commission cannot deal with Supreme Court Justices.  There is currently no mechanism to deal with misbehavior by Supreme Court Justices.

 

Read more and see some pictures here

 

 

 

Detroit Free Press
News-December 7, 2014

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/07/when-judges-need-disciplining/20053455/

L.L. Brasier, Detroit Free Press

Former St Louis prosecutor who helped cover up beating of suspect loses her law license

Former St Louis prosecutor who helped cover up beating of suspect loses her law license

ST LOUIS DISPATCH

9/1/16

A disgraced former St. Louis prosecutor who admitted helping cover up a city police detective’s beating of a handcuffed man has been stripped of her law license by the Missouri Supreme Court.

 

Bliss Barber Worrell was disbarred Aug. 10 and no longer has a right to practice law in the state of Missouri.

 

She pleaded guilty in October to misprision of a felony, or helping conceal a crime. She admitted failing to tell supervisors and a judge what she knew about the officer’s attack, and also admitted helping file a bogus charge against the victim.

 

Worrell said she was repeatedly told by then-detective Thomas A. Carroll that he had beaten Michael Waller and stuck a gun in his mouth, possibly chipping his teeth. It happened at a police station in 2014, after other officers caught Waller with a credit card stolen from Carroll’s daughter’s car.

Worrell would later help file charges against Waller, including attempted escape. Those charges were dropped after other prosecutors approached supervisors with concerns that the case was a sham, according to court testimony.

 

As part of the plea agreement, prosecutors recommended probation if she testified truthfully in court. She testified against Carroll in a two-day hearing. The former officer was sentenced in July to 52 months in federal prison.

 

 

The next day, Worrell was sentenced in U.S. District Court to 18 months on probation and 140 hours of community service.

 

Worrell was hired in the prosecutor’s office in August 2013 and left her job in late July 2014 amid internal and criminal investigations into allegations of misconduct. She is the daughter-in-law of former St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Todd Worrell.

 

Blog Article with pics PDF

News Link Article

 

 

If you or someone you know is facing charges as a result of Medical Marijuana recommended to you as a medical marijuana patient under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, contact Komorn Law and ensure your rights are protected.  Michael Komorn is recognized as a leading expert on the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. He is the President of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association (MMMA), a nonprofit patient advocacy group which advocates for the rights of medical marijuana patients and their caregivers.

 

Contact us for a free no-obligation case evaluation at 800-656-3557.

 

www.komornlaw.com

Editorial: Court puts limit on police stealing

Editorial: Court puts limit on police stealing

A state court has broken up one of the biggest theft rings in Michigan.

 

The state Supreme Court should let the ruling stand and the Legislature should enshrine it in law.

 

The Michigan Court of Appeals recently ruled that a key provision of the civil forfeiture law violates the due process rights of defendants.

 

It is a welcome decision and long overdue. State and local law enforcement agencies use civil forfeiture to steal the property of people who not only are never convicted of a crime, but often are never even charged with one.

 

It is a perversion of justice that should have never passed constitutional muster.

 

The appellate court ruled in the case of Shantrese Kinnon, who was arrested along with her husband in Kent County on drug charges.

 

After searching the couple’s home, police seized several pieces of property, including an SUV, a pickup, a motorcycle, laptop computer and $400 in cash.

 

That’s become standard operating procedure for drug arrests. Officers move through a home like burglars, grabbing everything of significant value under the pretense they might have been purchased with the illegal gains from narcotics trafficking.

 

But the Kinnons were never convicted of the charges for which they were arrested, nor for any other crime.

 

And yet when Shantrese Kinnon challenged the property seizures and tried to get her vehicles and other valuables returned, she couldn’t because she was unable to post the required 10 percent bond.

 

In her case, that amounted to $2,000, which she didn’t have.

 

In most forfeiture cases, even if the person whose property was taken can post the bond, getting their stuff back can still cost hundreds or thousands of dollars because it most often requires hiring an attorney and paying other fees.

 

So in effect they are being punished without being convicted. Often, defendants choose to let police have their belongings rather than go through the long and expensive process of getting it back.

 

It’s a lucrative scheme for law enforcement agencies. A report from the Michigan State Police found that in 2014 forfeitures netted police departments $24 million.

 

And they get to keep it all. For most departments, revenue from property seizures makes up a significant part of their budgets.

 

That creates a perverse incentive for agencies to grab as much property as they can, and do everything possible to hang onto it, even bargaining with defendants to drop charges in exchange for their seized assets.

 

Forfeiture is legalized theft, and should not be part of a legal system that purports to value justice.

 

If a defendant is convicted of a crime and prosecutors can make the case that the proceeds of the illegal activity were used to purchase property, an argument can be made for seizure. But that should come only after conviction.

 

Rep. Peter Lucido, R-Shelby Township, has introduced a bill to eliminate the bond requirement on forfeiture challenges. That’s a good first step.

 

The Legislature should pass broader reforms that get police entirely out of the business of stealing other people’s property.

 

11:25 p.m. EDT August 23, 2016

 

 

If you or someone you know is facing charges as a result of Medical Marijuana recommended to you as a medical marijuana patient under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, contact Komorn Law and ensure your rights are protected.  Michael Komorn is recognized as a leading expert on the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. He is the President of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association (MMMA), a nonprofit patient advocacy group which advocates for the rights of medical marijuana patients and their caregivers.

 

Contact us for a free no-obligation case evaluation at 800-656-3557.

 

www.komornlaw.com

Editorial: Court puts limit on police stealing

Feds using forfeiture to their advantage

The Justice Department recently announced that it is resuming the “equitable sharing” part of its civil asset forfeiture program, thus ending one of the major criminal justice reform victories of the Obama administration.

 

Civil asset forfeiture is a legal tool by which police officers can seize and sell private property without a convicting the owner of any crime, and equitable sharing is a process by which state and local police can circumvent state restrictions on civil asset forfeiture and take property under the color of federal law.

 

It may sound like a scene from a dystopian novel, but under civil asset forfeiture, a police officer can pull you over, claim he smells marijuana, and then take all the cash you have — and maybe even your car, too. Getting your property back requires going through lengthy court procedures to prove that the property is “innocent.”

Back in December, after Congress enacted reductions to the Justice Department’s civil asset forfeiture fund by $1.2 billion, the Justice Department announced that the program was being deferred until further notice.

 

Criminal justice reform advocates hailed this as a major victory, but Attorney General Loretta Lynch said that it was “imperative” that the “decision to suspend the equitable sharing program be immediately reconsidered.” The Justice Department now says that “it was always our intent to resume payments as soon as it became financially feasible.

 

… And now, we are finally at a point where it is no longer necessary to continue the deferral.”

 

Over the past decade and a half, civil asset forfeiture has exploded, and federal incentives have played a large role in that transformation. Last year, American police seized more private property than actual thieves.

 

The Justice Department’s forfeiture fund has provided a huge financial boon to the federal government. The Institute for Justice notes that the federal government “took in nearly $29 billion from 2001 to 2014, and combined annual revenue grew 1,000 percent over the period.”

 

Because federal forfeiture policies allow local police to keep up to 80 percent of what they seize, abuses are rampant. When police are allowed to directly benefit from seizing assets, stark injustices can occur.

 

For example, an art gallery party in Detroit was raided in 2008 because the “gallery did not possess a proper license to hold such an event.” Police seized and impounded 44 vehicles parked on the adjacent street.

 

Outrage over this incident lead to Michigan officials passing a law to raise the evidentiary standard in state asset forfeiture proceedings. Now, to avoid the restrictions of that legislation, all local police will need to do is involve federal officials, entitling them to equitable sharing in the program.

 

Under the federal civil asset forfeiture program, state and local police are encouraged to join in federal drug investigations because their participation entitles them to a large portion of the seized assets — dispersed from the equitable fund.

 

While that may seem like good policy, without proper restraints it simply means the states are just as encouraged as the federal government to seize money from private citizens without just cause.

 

Through programs like granting clemency to nonviolent drug offenders, the Obama administration has made important strides in reigning in our oversized and overused criminal justice system. Resuming the equitable payment system is an unfortunate step in the wrong direction.

 

Trevor Burrus is a research fellow and Randal John Meyer is a legal associate at the Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies.

 

If you or someone you know is facing charges as a result of Medical Marijuana recommended to you as a medical marijuana patient under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, contact Komorn Law and ensure your rights are protected.  Michael Komorn is recognized as a leading expert on the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. He is the President of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association (MMMA), a nonprofit patient advocacy group which advocates for the rights of medical marijuana patients and their caregivers.

 

Contact us for a free no-obligation case evaluation at 800-656-3557.

 

www.komornlaw.com