Florida Judge Punished For Rudeness in Legally Jailing Family Court Witness - California Judge Who Illegally Jailed Family Court Parent Remains Unaccountable, Unpunished

In August 2014, Commission on Judicial Performance Report posted an article about a government whistleblower leaked courtroom security video from Sacramento County. The video recorded controversial Judge Matthew Gary ordering the arrest and incarceration of family court reform activist Robert Saunders in 2009. 

As we reported, two outside independent judges who reviewed the incident determined that the arrest was illegal. The criminal charges against Saunders, including resisting arrest, were dismissed by Judge Richard Gilmour. 

Despite both video and documentary proof that Judge Matthew Gary's actions were illegal, and a violation of multiple sections of the Code of Judicial Ethics, after seven years the Commission on Judicial Performance has failed or refused to discipline the judge.

California Commission on Judicial Performance Receives Failing Grade in Nationwide State Integrity Investigation Project

An investigative report by Center for Public Integrity has criticized California for its lack of judicial accountability. In a nationwide state integrity investigation, California received a failing grade in the category. 

The Center is one of the country's oldest and largest nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative news organizations. The mission of the Center is "to serve democracy by revealing abuses of power, corruption and betrayal of public trust by powerful public and private institutions, using the tools of investigative journalism." 

Holiday Satire: Commission on Judicial Performance and California Judges Have Hot, Sweaty Make-Up Sex

Commission on Judicial Performance Director Victoria B. Henley reportedly has patched up a domestic dispute with the judges of California. 

Special Holiday Edition Satire

The Recorder, an online and print news organization serving judges, lawyers and other Judicial Branch hangers-on has published a story reporting that tensions have subsided between judges in California and the Commission on Judicial Performance, the state agency responsible for oversight and accountability of those same judges.

The satire division here at the Commission on Judicial Performance Report is certainly relieved to hear this news. Having an adversarial relationship between judges and the CJP would be like gangbangers and cops not getting along. But, according to the inside account, the reconciliation didn't come easy.

Commission on Judicial Performance: About the CJP and Director-Chief Counsel Victoria B. Henley

Commission on Judicial Performance is an independent state agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity and for disciplining state judges (see article VI, section 18 of the California Constitution). 

The commission has authority to impose certain discipline on former judges and has shared authority with local courts over court commissioners and referees (see article VI, section 18.1 of the California Constitution). 

The commission does not have authority over temporary judges (also called judges pro tem) or private judges. All commission proceedings are required to be public after formal charges are filed.

Under article VI, section 18(d) of the California Constitution, the commission may

• Remove a judge or censure a judge or former judge for action that constitutes willful misconduct in office, persistent failure or inability to perform the judge's duties, habitual intemperance in the use of intoxicants or drugs, or conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute;
• Publicly or privately admonish a judge or former judge found to have engaged in improper action or dereliction of duty; and
• Retire a judge for disability that seriously interferes with the performance of the judge's duties and is or is likely to become permanent.

The commission also may bar a former judge who has been censured from receiving an assignment, appointment, or reference of work from any California state court. Determinations by the commission to remove, censure, admonish, or retire a judge are subject to discretionary review by the California Supreme Court.

The commission is composed of 11 members: 3 judges appointed by the California Supreme Court, 4 members appointed by the Governor (2 attorneys and 2 nonattorney public members), 2 public members appointed by the Assembly Speaker, and 2 public members appointed by the Senate Rules Committee. Appointments are for four-year terms.

State of California Commission on Judicial Performance - Commission Rules
Article VI, section 18(i) of the Constitution authorizes the commission to make rules for conducting investigations and formal proceedings. The Rules of the Commission on Judicial Performance, rules 101 through 138, were adopted by the commission on October 24, 1996, and took effect December 1, 1996. The rules have been amended periodically thereafter.

State of California Commission on Judicial Performance - Policy Declarations
The Policy Declarations of the Commission on Judicial Performance detail the commission's internal procedures and existing policies. A Code of Ethics for Commission Members is set forth in Division VI of the policy declarations.

Related articles and resources: 

• Commission on Judicial Performance posts at Tumblr: click here and here. 
• Commission on Judicial Performance reviews at Yelp.
• CJP Director Victoria Henley articles on the Web, and at Tumblr.