In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct, 08-90026 (2009)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Number: 08-90026
Visitors: 11
Filed: Sep. 23, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: FOR PUBLICATION JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT IN RE COMPLAINT No. 08-90026 OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT ORDER Filed September 23, 2009 ORDER KOZINSKI, Chief Judge: A misconduct complaint has been filed against a district judge. The subject judge presided over a criminal case, to which complainants were not parties. Complainants allege that the judge made various improper substantive and procedural rulings. These charges relate directly to the merits of the judge’s rulings and must theref
Summary: FOR PUBLICATION JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT IN RE COMPLAINT No. 08-90026 OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT ORDER Filed September 23, 2009 ORDER KOZINSKI, Chief Judge: A misconduct complaint has been filed against a district judge. The subject judge presided over a criminal case, to which complainants were not parties. Complainants allege that the judge made various improper substantive and procedural rulings. These charges relate directly to the merits of the judge’s rulings and must therefo..
More
FOR PUBLICATION
JUDICIAL COUNCIL
OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT
IN RE COMPLAINT No. 08-90026
OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT
ORDER
Filed September 23, 2009
ORDER
KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:
A misconduct complaint has been filed against a district
judge. The subject judge presided over a criminal case, to
which complainants were not parties.
Complainants allege that the judge made various improper
substantive and procedural rulings. These charges relate
directly to the merits of the judge’s rulings and must therefore
be dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. § 352(b)(1)(A)(ii); Judicial-
Conduct Rules 3(h)(3)(A), 11(c)(1)(B); In re Charge of Judi-
cial Misconduct,
685 F.2d 1226, 1227 (9th Cir. Jud. Council
1982).
Complainants also contend that the judge should have
recused himself. The same claim—based on the same facts
alleged by complainants—was rejected in an appeal by one of
the parties to the criminal case. The court of appeals specifi-
cally held that the judge may preside over the case on remand.
The judge’s failure to recuse himself based on these allega-
tions therefore cannot constitute past or future misconduct.
DISMISSED.
13733
PRINTED FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS
BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO
The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted
© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West.
Source: CourtListener