R595-4. Sanctions, R595. Judicial Conduct Commission, Administration, Utah Administrative Code

Utah Administrative Code (Current through November 1, 2019)

R595. Judicial Conduct Commission, Administration

R595-4-1. Dismissals with Warning or on Conditions

Latest version.

A. The Commission may dismiss a complaint or formal complaint with a warning or 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 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 on conditions of no further misbehavior and the current misconduct violates 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 on conditions of no further misbehavior.

R595-4-2. Sanctions Guidelines

Latest version.

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, 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.