No. 27807 (Amendment): R595-4-2. Sanctions Guidelines

DAR File No.: 27807
Filed: 04/08/2005, 11:17
Received by: NL

 

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

The existing rule requires the Judicial Conduct Commission (JCC) to disregard, when determining an appropriate sanction for judicial misconduct, any publicity generated by the complainant or someone acting in concert with the complainant. The proposed change allows the JCC to consider any such publicity, but to also consider the source of the publicity.

 

Summary of the rule or change:

This amendment eliminates a proviso in the existing rule that requires the JCC to disregard, when determining an appropriate sanction for judicial misconduct, any publicity generated by the complainant or someone acting in concert with the complainant.

 

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 JCC, and therefore, do not result in either costs or savings to the State.

 

local governments:

None--The JCC 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 JCC, and therefore, do not result in either costs or savings to other persons.

 

Compliance costs for affected persons:

None--These revisions do not alter the basic operations or functions of the JCC, and therefore, do not result in either compliance costs or compliance savings 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 R. 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:

05/31/2005

 

This rule may become effective on:

06/01/2005

 

Authorized by:

Colin Winchester, Executive Director

 

 

RULE TEXT

R595. Judicial Conduct Commission, Administration.

R595-4. Sanctions.

R595-4-2. Sanctions Guidelines.

In determining an appropriate sanction for misconduct, the Commission shall consider the following non-exclusive factors:

A. the nature of the misconduct;

B. the gravity of the misconduct;

C. the extent to which the misconduct has been reported or is known among court employees, participants in the judicial system or the public, [provided that the complainant or someone acting in concert with the complainant is not]and the source of the dissemination of information;

D. the extent to which the judge has accepted responsibility for the misconduct;

E. the extent to which the judge has made efforts to avoid repeating the same or similar misconduct;

F. the length of the judge's service on the bench;

G. the effect the misconduct has had upon the confidence of court employees, participants in the judicial system or the public in the integrity or impartiality of the judiciary;

H. the extent to which the judge profited or satisfied his or her personal desires as a result of the misconduct; and

I. the number and type of previous sanctions imposed against the judge.

 

KEY: judicial conduct commission

[February 1, ]2005

Art. VIII, Sec. 13

78-8-101 through 78-8-108