Pages

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

State: JUDGE POST VIOLATED 20 LEGAL DOCTRINES

 The group responsible for monitoring Michigan's judges, the Judicial Tenure Commission, released a scathing report today on the conduct of Ottawa County's 58th District Court Judge Kenneth Post, charging him with three counts of misconduct. Post has 14 days to respond to charges of:
  • Failure to follow the law
  • Improper demeanor to counsel
  • Trivialization of court proceedings
JUDGE POST


He will then face the Commission in a hearing. Depending on the outcome of the hearing, he could be censured, suspended without pay, or even removed.

Official report here: http://woodtv.triton.net/news/judge-post-judicial-tenure-complaint-072412.PDF

The conduct described in paragraph nos. 1 – 57 constitutes:

(a) Conduct which violates the 5th Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and Article I, Section 17 of the Michigan
Constitution.
(b) Conduct which violates the 6th Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and Article I, Section 20 of the Michigan
Constitution.

(c) Conduct which violates MCL 600.1701, addressing contempt.

(d) Misconduct in office, as defined by the Michigan Constitution of
1963, as amended, Article 6, Section 30 and MCR 9.205.

(e) Conduct clearly prejudicial to the administration of justice, as
defined by the Michigan Constitution of 1963, as amended, Article
6, Section 30 and MCR 9.205.

(f) Conduct which is prejudicial to the proper administration of
justice, in violation of MCR 9.104(1).

(g) Failure to establish, maintain, enforce, and personally observe high
standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the
judiciary may be preserved, contrary to the Code of Judicial
Conduct, Canon 1.

(h) Failure to be aware that the judicial system is for the benefit of the
litigant and the public, and not the judiciary.

(i) Irresponsible or improper conduct which erodes public confidence
in the judiciary, in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct,
Canon 2A.

(j) Conduct involving impropriety and the appearance of impropriety,
in violation of the Code of

k) Failure to respect and observe the law and to act at all times in a
manner which would enhance the public’s confidence in the
integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, contrary to the Code of
Judicial Conduct, Canon 2B.

(l) Failure to be faithful to the law, contrary to the Code of Judicial
Conduct, Canon 3A (1).

(m) Failure to be patient, dignified, and courteous to lawyers with
whom the judge deals in an official capacity, contrary to the Code
of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3A (3).

(n) Unnecessary interruptions of counsel during arguments, contrary to
the Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3A (8).

(o) Conduct, which exposes the legal profession or the courts to
obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR
9.104(2).

(p) Conduct, which is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty or good
morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3).

(q) Conduct that violates the standards or rules of professional
responsibility adopted by the Supreme Court, contrary to MCR
9.104(4).

(r)Conduct that violates the 5th Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and Article I, Section 17 of the Michigan
Constitution, addressing a defendant’s privilege against selfincrimination.

(s) Conduct that violates the 6th Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and Article I, Section 20 of the Michigan
Constitution, addressing a defendant’s right to counsel in a
criminal proceeding.

(t) Conduct that violates MCL 600.1701, addressing contempt.

1 comment: