No. 28351 (Amendment): R595-4-1. Dismissals with Warning or upon Stated Conditions

DAR File No.: 28351
Filed: 11/11/2005, 02:52
Received by: NL

 

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

The reason for the change is to more closely follow the Supreme Court's mandate located in footnote 5 of In re Anderson, 2004 UT 7.

 

Summary of the rule or change:

The Supreme Court, in footnote 5 of In re Anderson, stated that the condition for which a dismissal may be granted must be one of no further misbehavior. The proposed amendment limits the conditions for which a dismissal upon a stated condition may be granted to that condition.

 

State statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

Art. VIII, Sec 13; and Sections 78-8-101 through 78-1-108

 

Anticipated cost or savings to:

the state budget:

None--These revisions do not alter the basic operations or functions of the Judicial Conduct Commission, and therefore, do not result in either a cost or savings to the state.

 

local governments:

None--The Judicial Conduct Commission operations do not affect local governments, therefore, there are no costs or savings.

 

other persons:

None--These revisions do not alter the basic operations or functions of the Judicial Conduct Commission, and therefore, do not result in either a cost or savings to other persons.

 

Compliance costs for affected persons:

None--These revisions do not alter the basic operations or functions of the Judicial Conduct Commission, and therefore, do not result in a compliance cost to affected persons.

 

Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

None--The Judicial Conduct Commission operations do not affect businesses. Colin Winchester, Executive Director

 

The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Division of Administrative Rules, or at:

Judicial Conduct Commission
Administration
645 S 200 E
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111-3837

 

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

Colin Winchester at the above address, by phone at 801-533-3200, by FAX at 801-533-3208, or by Internet E-mail at [e-mail]

 

Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:

01/03/2006

 

This rule may become effective on:

01/04/2006

 

Authorized by:

Colin Winchester, Executive Director

 

 

RULE TEXT

R595. Judicial Conduct Commission, Administration.

R595-4. Sanctions.

R595-4-1. Dismissals with Warning or [upon Stated]on Conditions.

A. The Commission may dismiss a complaint or formal complaint with a warning or [upon stated conditions]on conditions of no further misbehavior if:

1. the judge stipulates that the conduct complained of has occurred;

2. the Commission finds that the stipulated conduct constitutes misconduct; and

3. the Commission finds that the misconduct is troubling but relatively minor misbehavior and that no public sanction is warranted.

B. The Commission will not dismiss a complaint or formal complaint with a warning or [upon stated conditions]on conditions of no further misbehavior if:

1. the Commission finds that a public sanction is warranted;

2. the Commission has previously dismissed a complaint or formal complaint against the judge [upon stated conditions]on conditions of no further misbehavior and the current misconduct violates [one or more of those]such conditions; or

3. the Commission finds that the current misconduct is the same or similar to misconduct established from a previous complaint or formal complaint that was dismissed with a warning or [upon stated conditions]on conditions of no further misbehavior.

 

KEY: judicial conduct commission

[June 2, 2005]2006

Art. VIII, Sec. 13

78-8-101 through 78-8-108