Judges in America have been held in such esteem that many are never held accountable for their actions. We have seen cases where the most outrageous judicial corruption occurs, and many websites such as J.A.I.L. are focused on this topic.

In California, the Commission on Judicial Performance is starting to weaken the stronghold of judges:

Judge Hall hearings begin that could lead to discipline
By Quintin Cushner/Senior Staff Writer

LINK

After years of legal woes, Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Diana Hall today faces proceedings that may lead to professional punishment, including her possible removal from the bench.

At hearings expected to last two to five days, Hall will confront charges that during separate occasions she drove drunk, violated campaign-finance laws and improperly questioned an attorney.

The hearing convenes today at 9 a.m. at the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Ventura.

The state Commission on Judicial Performance filed the complaint, and three Superior Court judges appointed as special masters will oversee the proceedings. Presiding special master Judge Michael Fields of Monterey County will be accompanied by Judge George Abdallah of San Joaquin County and Judge Mark Forcum of San Mateo County at the hearing.

During the proceeding, attorneys for Hall and the commission can introduce evidence and question witnesses, said Commission Director Victoria Henley. Attorney Andrew Blum will represent the state agency as its examiner. Hall has hired Los Angeles attorney Edith Matthai to represent her.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the three special masters will furnish a public report to the commission assessing whether the charges against Hall are true.

The purpose of the hearing is to determine whether the evidence supports the charges, Henley said. And if so, what kind of action the commission should take. If the charges are not sustained, the matter will be dismissed.

The ultimate decision on how and if Hall will be disciplined rests with the commission, which must decide if proof of the allegations is supported by clear and convincing evidence. This standard is not as stringent as the beyond a reasonable doubt required for a criminal conviction, but is harder to prove than the preponderance of evidence necessary for a plaintiff's verdict in a civil case.

Three judges, two lawyers and six members of the public sit on the commission, which is funded by the state and based in San Francisco.

Each side is allowed to respond to the report filed by the special masters, which means the earliest the commission might make a decision will be during its March 22-23 meeting, Henley said, adding that it's more likely decision will occur at a May 10-11 meeting.

If the commission meets its burden of proof after a formal proceeding, it may issue Hall a private or public admonishment, censure the judge or order her removal from the bench, Henley said. Hall, whose term as judge ends in 2008, may appeal any disciplinary action to the California Supreme Court, Henley said.

While awaiting the proceeding that will determine her future on the bench, Hall continues to rule on civil cases in Superior Court in Santa Maria.

The formal proceeding Hall faces is rare. In 2004, the commission received complaints about 848 of the state's 1,610 judges. However, Hall's case is the first to result in a hearing this year, Henley said.

Hall is charged with willful misconduct in office; conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judge position into disrepute; and improper action within the meaning of the California Constitution.

The drunken-driving allegation, if proved, would appear to violate the Code of Judicial Ethics.

A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, according to Canon Two of the code.

The drunken-driving incident occurred Dec. 21, 2002, after Hall fought with her then-domestic partner, Deidra Dykeman. The judge, whose blood-alcohol level was measured at .18 percent, was arrested while driving near her Santa Ynez Valley home.

Perhaps because a jury convicted Hall on Aug. 28, 2003, of two misdemeanor counts of drunken driving, she did not dispute that allegation in a response she submitted to the commission.

Hall did admit in her response that the drunken driving was a conduct violation and that she broke the law. However, Hall denies that her conduct in any way was related to the integrity, independence or impartiality in her work as a judicial officer.

At trial, Hall was acquitted of misdemeanor charges of domestic battery and exhibiting a firearm and a felony charge of forcibly dissuading Dykeman from reporting the alleged crimes. Jurors deadlocked on a felony count of destroying a telephone to prevent a victim from calling police, and that charge was later dropped.

For the drunken-driving convictions, Hall was sentenced to alcohol counseling and three years probation.

The drunken-driving charge filed by the commission does have a precedent. In 2000, Superior Court Judge Gary Ryan of Orange County was publicly admonished for causing a noninjury accident in Newport Beach while drunk.

The second charge lodged against Hall alleges that, during her 2002 re-election bid for judge, she lied about a $20,000 contribution from domestic partner Dykeman.

In a possible bid to hide her relationship with the woman, Hall allegedly deposited $20,000 from Dykeman into her personal account, then included the money as part of a $25,000 transfer into her campaign fund. She also allegedly claimed on campaign financial statements that she contributed the transferred money herself.

If proven, that activity goes against the promoting public confidence mandate and possibly violates an ethics rule that states a judge or judicial candidate shall refrain from inappropriate political activity.

Misdemeanor criminal charges were filed last year against Hall for allegedly violating the Political Reform Act. However, the charges were suspended Oct. 17 by the state attorney general's office, in part because of the commission's inquiry.

Because criminal charges were still pending against her at the time, Hall did not address the allegations in her response.

No judge in recent record has faced campaign finance fraud allegations from the commission, according to the organization's own records.

The most serious is the campaign contribution charge, said attorney and Santa Barbara College of Law Professor Craig Smith, an attorney who has a case pending in Hall's court. The law is very clear that you must report all campaign contributions.

Smith added that he believes that the commission will likely censure Hall if all charges are proven.

Hall has denied the third and most complex charge, which alleges that she improperly questioned Deputy District Attorney Kevin Duffy on June 22, 2001, after he issued a peremptory challenge against her.

By law, each side in a criminal case is entitled to disqualify a judge on a case without listing a reason. A complaint filed with the council alleges that Hall asked Duffy why he issued the challenge, and threatened to report the prosecutor's action to District Attorney Tom Sneddon.

Duffy has been subpoenaed to testify at the hearing, as have other prosecutors, defense attorneys, court clerks and sheriff's deputies who may have witnessed the alleged behavior.

The ethics code for judges says that A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and diligently. Hall's conduct, if proven, would seem to violate that rule.

Hall acknowledged in her response that the peremptory challenge was issued, but denied that she questioned Duffy.

The problem is she's a repeat offender, said Loyola Law School Professor Laurie Levenson. She has several problems and at some point the commission is not going to want a problem judge serving on the bench. But, we have judges who do far worse who are still on the bench. I don't think this is necessarily the end of her career, but I'd rather not predict what the commission might do.

Appointed as a Municipal Court judge in 1990, Hall was elevated to the Superior Court in 1998.

Commission attorney Blum declined to comment for this story. Matthai, Hall's lawyer, did not return calls for comment. Hall also declined to comment for this story.

Quintin Cushner can be reached at 739-2217 or qcushner

@santamariatimes.com.

November 14, 2005

Another Calif. Judge Accused of Abusing Position
By Julie O'Shea, The Recorder
03-02-2006

LINK

Less than a week after California's Commission on Judicial Performance launched formal proceedings against a Sonoma County judge who allegedly tried to use her position to avoid a DUI arrest, another jurist is facing a similar predicament in Riverside County.

Judge Bernard Schwartz pleaded no contest to misdemeanor charges of driving with a blood alcohol level of more than twice the legal limit while in Pismo Beach last summer.

The commission announced Monday that it had begun formal proceedings into allegations that Schwartz repeatedly tried to avoid arrest and receive preferential treatment because he is a judge.

"It is alleged that these actions constitute willful misconduct in office & that brings the judicial office into disrepute," the commission said in a prepared statement.

Schwartz was pulled over July 16 after police observed his car "swerving all over the road." He was arrested after failing two sobriety tests.

The judge, appointed to the bench by Gov. Gray Davis in 2003, claims he only had "a couple of glasses of wine," and at one point questioned the officers at the scene: "Is this really necessary, all this stuff we have to go through?"

According to the CJP complaint, Schwartz, who is up for re-election this year, told the arresting officers that "this is not a good time."

The officers repeatedly told the judge that they were simply trying to be "fair and unbiased."

Schwartz allegedly told the officers: "You know what this is going to do; this will substantially impair my career."

One of the officers responded: "If I let you go, it could impair my career."

Proceedings against Schwartz are getting under way just a week after the CJP announced it would be scrutinizing similar charges against Sonoma County Superior Court Judge Elaine Rushing, who tried to use her position and that of her husband, 6th District Court of Appeal Justice Conrad Rushing, to avoid being arrested for drunken driving in June.

Rushing was arrested after driving into a ditch on the side of a Santa Rosa road and damaging a stone wall. Her blood alcohol level was found to be more than twice the legal limit. Rushing eventually pleaded no contest to the incident.

In December, San Bernardino County Judge Donald Alvarez was publicly admonished for failing to report his DUI arrest and conviction to the commission in a timely manner.

And in 2000, Orange County Superior Court Judge Gary Ryan, who is now with JAMS, received a public admonishment for a DUI.

According to the complaint, Schwartz was taken down to the Pismo Beach police station and told he would be held in custody until the next morning or until his wife, who was several hours away, could pick him up.

"There is no professional courtesy here anymore," an angry Schwartz allegedly told officers that night.

Officers told the judge that he was being treated the "same as everybody else. What you are asking for is special treatment."

Schwartz allegedly agreed, saying, "To some degree, I guess."

Schwartz is represented by Edward George Jr., a Long Beach attorney who didn't return calls for comment Monday.

For Release: Tuesday, September 6, 2005

Contact: Commission on Judicial Performance (415) 557-1200
Placer County Superior Court (530) 889-7404

MEDICAL MARIJUANA REFUGEE STEVE KUBBY FILES COMPLAINT
AGAINST TWO JUDGES. ALLEGES FRAUD, CONSPIRACY AND
MALFEASANCE. SUGGESTS JUDGES SEEK ASYLUM IN CANADA.

SAN FRANCISCO -- Cancer patient and medical marijuana refugee Steve Kubby has filed a complaint with the State of California's Commission on Judicial Performance against two judges, alleging that they "secretly and illegally assisted county prosecutors to fraudulently obtain an appellate court ruling that made him a 'felony fugitive.'"

Kubby says this action would have sent him to prison and "a certain death" had he not been in Canada at the time. Kubby depends on cannabis to control his adrenal cancer, and he would not have been able to have access to cannabis while he was incarcerated.

The complaint alleges that on May 25, 2001, Placer County Judge James L. Roeder "secretly and fraudulently ordered and/or directed the Clerk of the Superior Court Appellate Division, Placer County to process my misdemeanor appeal as a felony appeal, causing me to be wrongfully arrested and subsequently labeled a 'felony fugitive.'"

Upholding Judge Roeder's illegal order, Placer Superior Court Presiding Judge Larry D. Gaddis also signed and approved the order, despite the fact that, by law, no such direct appeal of probation could be taken.

"Even worse," says Kubby, "the appeal was signed and approved by both judges, well beyond the 60 day limit allowed for any appeal, since I was sentenced on March 2, 2001 and they did not approve the prosecutor's appeal until May 25, 2001. All subsequent extensions of the appeal were based upon an appeal that was neither lawful nor timely."

Copies of documents are online that Kubby alleges show, "Judge Gaddis unlawfully authorized and ordered an extension and then blacked out his name. Once Gaddis blacked out his signature, no other judge ever signed to grant the Extension Order, proving that Gaddis deliberately granted, then attempted to hide his role in the unlawful conversion of the People's unlawful and untimely review of probation into a felony appeal."

Kubby says, "It is understandable that Judge Gaddis would try to hide his involvement because both he and Judge Roeder had previously been removed from the case, for bias and prejudice, and were officially recused. Clearly they were aware, as judges, that having been recused from a case they were disqualified from any and all future participation in my case. Unfortunately that didn't stop Roeder and Gaddis and it was their signatures that made me a 'felony fugitive' and resulted in me being jailed and deprived of my medical cannabis, something doctors on both sides of the border have said, under oath, could kill me."

In California, it is only when an appeal proceeds as a felony appeal, that the defendant must be present. Because Kubby was in Canada - with the permission of the court on probation for misdemeanor conviction - he was not present and therefore the appeal court was fraudulently induced to consider the Peoples appeal as a felony appeal.

The actions of Roeder and Gaddis resulted in Canadian authorities "being duped into believing" Kubby was a felony fugitive and therefore ineligible for entry into Canada. Consequently, Kubby was arrested in Canada in 2002 and jailed for four days.

Michele Kubby notes, "My husband was then deprived of the medicine he uses with the blessings of Health Canada. This caused long term damage to his health that we are still attempting to heal today."

Steve Kubby says, "Even though their actions nearly resulted in my death, I would suggest that the judges seek asylum in Canada. After all, they are living proof that it is very hard to get a fair trial in California."

A copy of the Complaint to the Commission on Judicial Performance
COMPLAINT OF FRAUD, CONSPIRACY AND MALFEASANCE
AGAINST JUDGES JAMES ROEDER AND LARRY GADDIS

Today's date: September 6, 2005
Your name: Steve Kubby
Your telephone number: N/A
Your address: #1 2160 Sun Peaks Rd., Sun Peaks, BC V0E 5N0
Your attorneys name: William McPike
Your attorneys telephone number: (559) 841-3366
Name of judges: Judge James L. Roeder and Judge Larry D. Gaddis
Court: Superior Court
County: Placer County
Name of case and case number: PEOPLE vs. STEVEN KUBBY, C036443, SCP990023

Please specify what action or behavior of the judge, court commissioner or referee is the basis of your complaint.

Recused for cause, Placer County Superior Court Judge James L. Roeder and Presiding Judge Larry D. Gaddis secretly and illegally assisted county prosecutors to fraudulently obtain an appellate court ruling that would have sent me to prison and a certain death.
See full Complaint on Page 2. Evidence to support these allegations is enclosed with this Complaint and is also available online at:
--Judge Roeder's Death Warrant:
--Sworn Statement by Diane Carrol, Court Clerk
--Sworn Statement by Judy Boucree, Court Reporter
--Sacramento Bee confirming the recusal of Judge Roeder
--Auburn Journal confirming recusal of Judge Gaddis
--Admonishment of Judge Roeder

From an online search that showed the Commission had publicly admonished Judge Roeder on December 16, 2003 for violating the rights of defendants.

Sent on this date, via FAX and mail to: The Commission on Judicial Performance, 455 Golden Gate Ave, Suite 14400, San Francisco, Ca 94102, Fax (415) 557-1266, Tel: (415) 557-1200

February 6, 2006

The Crimes of Pot Justice
When marijuana arrests might be death sentences
Brian Doherty

LINK

Last week a man was shivering and vomiting in a cold cell in Auburn, California, at the foot of the Sierra Nevadas in Placer County, his urine bloody, the medicine he needs denied him.

His name is Steve Kubby. He was the Libertarian Party's 1998 gubernatorial candidate, and a major player in the crafting and passing of California's Proposition 215, the 1996 initiative that legalized medical marijuana in the state.

Kubby did not enjoy the protection of the law he helped pass. Prompted by an anonymous tip, police in California's Placer County began surveilling Kubby's home near Lake Tahoe in 1998, including digging through his garbage. Eventually on January 19, 1999, 12 armed officers raided his home and arrested him and his wife, claiming to have found 265 pot plants. (More than half, Kubby insists, were unsexed seedlings, and California law does not have a specific numerical limit on personal use marijuana growth for medical marijuana patients.) The warrant was obtained partially on the basis of claims that a journalist who had been seen visiting the Kubbys' home was in fact a known Jamaican drug smuggler, according to a DEA report later found not to exist; Kubby is certain his prominence in the pro-marijuana movement made him a target.

Kubby is struggling with a rare and usually fatal form of adrenal cancer, pheochromocytoma, which he has suffered from since the late 1960s. A doctor who helped treat him for the condition in the 1970s, Vincent DeQuattro of the University of Southern California, was amazed, upon seeing Kubby's name in California's voter guide during his gubernatorial race, to discover that his old patient was still alive. As High Times reported:

"In some amazing fashion," DeQuattro subsequently advised the judge in Kubby's case, "this medication has not only controlled the symptoms of pheochromocytoma, but in my view, has arrested growth" of the cancer. "Every other patient than Steve, with Steve's condition, has died in the interval of time (that Kubby has had the disease.) Steve was the only survivor."
Kubby insists the only treatment he's taken in a long while for the cancerwhose effects include sudden rushes of adrenalin and noradrenaline, resulting in high blood pressure spikes, headaches, and panic attacksis marijuana; that it, and only it, had kept him alive this long; and that without it, as he now is in Placer County lockdown, he'll likely die.

Is he right? Even with the grim reports of his vomiting, chills, and bloody urine this past week in jail, it's hard to be sure. He's merely one anecdote, and concerted research into such questions of marijuana's medical efficacy are hamstrung by restrictive federal regulations and supply constraints. But right now his Placer County jailers are conducting a very dangerous experiment to test Kubby's theory. A Canadian doctor, Dr. Joseph M. Connors, chair of the Lymphoma Tumor Group at the British Columbia Cancer Agency, has testified that without his pot, Kubby is at high risk of suffering potentially fatal heart attacks, seizures, or strokes from his cancer's effects.

Kubby was acquitted of the pot charges arising from the raid, but convicted in 2001 for some peyote buttons and a psychedelic mushroom the cops also found. Before serving his term, he and his family left for Canada, where they've spent the past five years. He, his wife Michele, and his two daughters were finally deported back to the U.S. last week. They were met at the San Francisco airport by a gang of officers, Kubby was handcuffed and taken away, avoiding the press and well-wishers awaiting him in the airport, and ended up in Placer County jail.

Kubby has become something of a cause célèbre because of his intimate connections with the libertarian and medical marijuana communities. But he's not the only one suffering in prison because of lack of marijuana. In a similar situationill, in prison, denied marijuana that helps them cope or survive their illnessare Joe Fortt (in jail in Fresno, his T-cell count plummeting, he'd been using pot to cope with AIDS while free), Robert Schmidt (currently in Leavenworth, a prison under full "lockdown," denied both medicine and visitors), and many others. Prisons in California may, at their discretion, but are not required under the law, provide inmates with their medical marijuana-and generally don't.

As of this writing, Kubby is being permitted the use of marinol, a pharmaceutical synthetic THC, though not the whole marijuana plant. His blood pressure has stabilized and the blood has left his urine. (When he refused to take standard blood pressure medicine, inappropriate for the spiked variety of high blood pressure his adrenal problems caused, they made him sign a waiver absolving his jailers of all responsibility for what might happen to him.) His pre-trial hearing on a charge of failure to appear for probation is scheduled for February 15.

The Kubby case presents many unresolved controversies; is it really the marijuana that has kept his adrenal cancer from killing him? Did his status as a felony fugitive arise from judicial misconduct? (His conviction was originally for a misdemeanor, raised to a felony level by a judge during his appeals process, which is what made his lack of appearance at a hearing because he was in Canada a crime. Kubby has filed a complaint with California's Commission on Judicial Performance, alleging the judge, who had been earlier recused from his case, was acting illegally.)

Whatever the final resolution of those questions, in Auburn, California, a man is in jail ultimately for growing a plant he believes helps him, suffering from cancer, his vitals erratic, deprived of medication that makes his life bearable. He has harmed no one, and is being harmed for it.

Brian Doherty is a senior editor of Reason and author of This Is Burning Man, (Little, Brown), whose paperback edition will be released by BenBella Books in summer 2005.

Final Report of the California Judicial Council Advisory Committee on Racial and Ethnic Bias in the Courts

Memorandum on Judicial Election and Judicial Independence

Craig Smith Blog