John
D. Harris
Retired Los Angeles
Superior Court Judge
Counsel for the Commission on Judicial Performance filed a brief
in September urging the commission to reject the findings of a panel
of special masters, which rejected nearly all of the charges of
misconduct brought against Harris. The 30-year judicial officer
retired last month.
The special masters-Court of Appeal Justice Eileen C. Moore of the
Fourth District's Div. Three, San Bernardino Superior Court Judge
Patrick J. Morris, and Ventura Superior Court Judge Henry J. Walsh-heard
evidence for five days in Pasadena in May.
The CJP accused Harris of seeking to establish personal relationships
with sexual assault victims, making inappropriately personal comments
to jurors, attorneys, and court staff, throwing a file at a deputy
city attorney, and lying during an investigation into his conduct.
The masters rejected charges that after two felony sexual assault
trials in 2000, Harris met in chambers with the victims and sought
to initiate personal relationships.
Harris acknowledged that he spoke to the victims in chambers and
that the meetings were improper because the cases were not yet final.
But he testified that he sought only to comfort the victims because
he was moved by their plight, and did not intend to have any extensive
or improper continuing relationships with them.
The masters found that testimony credible, citing many witnesses
who said that Harris was an empathetic person by nature and noting
that despite his years of judicial experience, he was new to handling
felony sex crimes.
The masters also found that the commission had failed to prove that
comments made by Harris to or about female attorneys, court staff
members, or jurors on various occasions were inappropriately flirtatious
or sexual. The comments included invitations to have lunch, a remark
that a staff member was "cute," and thanking a lawyer
for not challenging an attractive female juror because a judge "has
to have something to look at during trial."
The panel
accepted Harris' testimony that in hindsight, he recognizes that
some of his remarks could have been taken as offensive, but that
he had no intention of making anyone feel ill at ease.
Kevin
A. Ross
Los
Angeles Superior
Court Judge
A hearing was held Nov. 15 through 18 in Pasadena regarding Ross,
who was charged May 7 with three counts of judicial misconduct.
Ventura Superior Court Judge Vincent J. O'Neill, Fourth District
Court of Appeal Justice Judith Haller, and San Bernardino Superior
Court Judge Michael A. Smith were the special masters for the hearing,
which was postponed from September after the commission brought
additional charges.
The CJP asserted in its original formal notice of proceedings that
Ross made comments about pending cases on a public television program
on four occasions, was twice absent from court without authorization,
and in four instances treated criminal defendants inappropriately.
It later added allegations that the jurist improperly sought to
promote a courtroom simulation television program in which he would
star.
The CJP originally cited appearances by Ross, a former prosecutor,
on the KCET public television program "Life and Times Tonight"
during 2001 and 2002. Ross, a frequent guest on the public affairs
discussion program, gained a seat on the Inglewood Municipal Court
in 1998 by defeating Judge Lawrence Mason and became a Superior
Court judge upon unification in 2000.
Among the canons of the Code of Judicial Ethics violated by the
four appearances, the CJP asserted, is Canon 3B(9), which says that
a judge shall not shall not "make any public comment about
a pending or impending proceeding in any court."
Both of the unauthorized absence allegations also relate to public
appearances made by the judge.
Ross testified that his television appearances were consistent with
the California courts' efforts to educate the public on the judicial
process and noted that other judicial officers had appeared with
him or on similar programs. He also contended that the restrictions
on judicial comment on pending cases are unconstitutional.
The CJP also cited four instances in which Ross allegedly improperly
communicated with criminal defendants or became "embroiled"
in their cases and "abandoned [his] judicial role." Ross
admitted that in one case, he inappropriately ordered a traffic
court defendant jailed because he believed she had provided false
information about her identity, and that in another matter, he improperly
interrogated an unrepresented defendant after the man said he wanted
to consult with an attorney.
Ross defended his conduct in the other matters, including one in
which he ordered a lawyer escorted from the courtroom for having
continually interrupted him while he was sentencing her client for
a probation violation.
In the amended notice filed Sept. 1, the CJP said the judge contracted
in 2002 with a production company for a show to be called "Mobile
Court." Ross was to resolve small claims cases, with the parties
stipulating to be bound by his rulings.
Among the ethical canons violated by Ross' conduct, the CJP asserted,
was Canon 2B(2), which provides that a judge "shall not lend
the prestige of judicial office to advance the pecuniary or personal
interests of the judge or others."
Ross' attorney and agent testified that his name and title were
not supposed to be used in connection with the presentation. Ross
said he unintentionally violated the ethics code by signing arbitration
awards to the winning "litigants," since judges cannot
engage in private alternative dispute resolution, but denied that
he abused his office by participating in the effort to sell the
program.
|
