This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
A District Court Judge was arrested on November 25, 2001, and charged with driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs (DWI), no headlamps, no insurance, and running a stop sign. The judge pled nolo contendere to DWI, no headlamps, and running a stop sign, and was later convicted of DWI (first offense) and no headlamps. The judge was sentenced to one year of supervised probation with conditions, including attending DWI school, a Victim Impact Panel, and Alcoholics Anonymous meetings (paras 3-5).
Procedural History
- Las Cruces Municipal Court, November 26, 2001: The judge pled nolo contendere to DWI, no headlamps, and running a stop sign. Charges for no insurance and no seatbelts were not pursued (para 4).
- Las Cruces Municipal Court, January 28, 2002: The judge was convicted of DWI (first offense) and no headlamps. Charges for running a stop sign and no insurance were dismissed (para 5).
Parties' Submissions
- Judicial Standards Commission: Argued that the judge's conduct violated multiple Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct, including upholding the integrity of the judiciary, avoiding impropriety, and minimizing conflicts with judicial obligations (para 6).
- Respondent (Judge): Entered into a plea and stipulation agreement, acknowledging the factual and legal conclusions regarding the violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct (para 2).
Legal Issues
- Did the judge's conduct violate the Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct?
- What disciplinary measures are appropriate for the judge's misconduct?
Disposition
- The judge was suspended from judicial office without pay (para 9).
- The judge was formally reprimanded (para 9).
- The judge was ordered to complete alcohol rehabilitation counseling and an in-patient alcohol rehabilitation program (para 9).
- The judge was required to comply with the terms of the plea agreement and the Code of Judicial Conduct (para 9).
Reasons
Per Chief Justice Patricio M. Serna, Justice Joseph F. Baca, Justice Gene E. Franchini, Justice Pamela B. Minzner, and Justice Petra Jimenez Maes:
The Court found that the judge's conduct, including the DWI conviction and related charges, constituted willful misconduct in office and violated several Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct. These violations undermined the integrity and independence of the judiciary, created an appearance of impropriety, and conflicted with the judge's judicial obligations. The Court determined that the recommended disciplinary measures, including suspension without pay, formal reprimand, and mandatory alcohol rehabilitation, were appropriate to address the misconduct and uphold public confidence in the judiciary (paras 6-9).