State bar can't discipline judge already reprimanded by judicial regulator, top state court rules
The North Carolina State Bar can’t pursue an ethics complaint for a judge’s conduct that already resulted in a reprimand by the state’s Judicial Standards Commission, the North Carolina Supreme Court has ruled.
The court ruled in the case of Judge Jerry Tillett of Dare County in a Dec. 21 opinion, report the News & Observer, the North State Journal and the Outer Banks Voice.
The state bar had argued that judges are still lawyers who must comply with both judicial and lawyer ethics rules. But the state supreme court said only the state supreme court or the Judicial Standards Commission has the authority to discipline a judge for conduct as a judge.
According to the supreme court, the Judicial Standards Commission has the exclusive authority to issue private letters of caution to judges who violate disciplinary rules, while the state supreme court acts on commission recommendations to sanction judges through public reprimands, censures, suspensions or removal.
The Judicial Standards Commission had reprimanded Tillett in 2013 for misusing his authority in a feud with the police chief and assistant town manager for the town of Kill Devil Hills. Tillett had accepted the reprimand. In 2015, the state bar filed an ethics complaint based on the same conduct with its Disciplinary Hearing Commission.
The 2013 reprimand said that Tillett had arranged an in-chambers meeting in 2010 with town and police officials after the Kill Devil Hills Police Department had detained his adult son for an unspecified reason. During the meeting, Tillett complained about his son’s detention as part of a series of other complaints about alleged misconduct involving police. He also talked about a judge’s ability to remove officials from office, according to those at the meeting.
The next year, Tillett heard from people with personnel grievances against the police chief and the assistant town manager. He tried to persuade the district attorney to seek the removal of the police chief, but the request was declined. Tillett sent a letter to the police chief on judicial stationery saying his office would act in accord with his statutory and inherent authority with regard to some of the complaints. He also sent a similar letter to the assistant town manager.
Tillett also drafted an order for production of personnel records involving the police chief and assistant town manager, according to the reprimand. Though he later recused himself from matters involving complaints against police, he communicated with judges adjudicating the complaints by suggesting orders.
Hat tip to the NC Bar v. Sutton Blog.
