I.

INTRODUCTION

The Connecticut Judicial Review Council receives and investigates complaints about alleged misconduct, disability, or substance abuse of state judges, family support magistrates, and workers' compensation commissioners.

Every state has a body similar to the Council with the same goals. The purpose of the Council is to help enforce high standards of judicial conduct on and off the bench in order to preserve the integrity of the court system and promote public confidence in the courts. It is recognized that judges, family support magistrates, and workers' compensation commissioners must be free to exercise their discretion without fear of disciplinary proceedings. However, they also must be held accountable for misconduct.

II.

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE COUNCIL

Prior to 1969, the only remedies for misconduct were impeachment or removal by the Governor with the approval of two thirds of both the House of Representatives and Senate of the General Assembly. Consequently, there was no remedy for misconduct that did not rise to the level of impeachment or removal.

In 1969 the Legislature established a review council made up of judges and members of the public. Its jurisdiction extended only to judges. Its authority was limited to making recommendations as to reappointments and impeachment of judges. It could not sanction judges for misconduct.

A constitutional amendment was initiated by citizens in 1976, and the establishment of the Judicial Review Council was authorized by Article XI of Amendments to the Constitution of the State of Connecticut adopted on November 24, 1976. The amendment extended the power of removal or suspension to the Supreme Court and empowered the legislature to establish a Judicial Review Council. The Legislature acted in 1977 to carry out the Constitutional Amendment, and judges of all courts, except elected judges, were subject to new procedures. The Council, in its present form, commenced its activities effective January 1, 1978.

The Judicial Review Council has undergone several changes mandated by statute during the many years since its formation in 1977. The most significant of these changes occurring in various years were:

1. Inclusion of judges of the Appellate Court subject to the Council's authority (1985)

2. Inclusion of senior judges and state referees subject to the Council's authority (1986)

3. Inclusion of family support magistrates subject to the Council's authority (1989)

4. Inclusion of workers' compensation commissioners subject to the Council's authority (1992)

5. Establishment of a permanent office (1992)

6. Inclusion of a family support magistrate alternate member and a workers' compensation commissioner alternate member to the Council (1993)

7. Adoption of state regulations and rules of procedure (1994)

8. Addition of seven alternate members (two judges, two attorneys, three public) (1994)

9. Publication of an information handbook (1995)

10. Requirement that twelve members (three judge members, three attorney members, and six public members) constitute a quorum at any public hearing (1996)

11. Addition of four more alternate members (two family support magistrates and two workers' compensation commissioners) (1997)

12. Transfer of the requirement of judges and family support magistrates to file financial disclosure reports from the Judicial Review Council to the Office of the Chief Court Administrator (1997)

13. Development of a new, more comprehensive complaint form (see Appendix F) and accompanying brochure containing guidelines to assist in completing the form (1999)

III.

JURISDICTION

The Council has jurisdiction over justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Appellate Court and Superior Court, senior judges, judge referees, workers' compensation commissioners, and family support magistrates. The Council has no jurisdiction over probate judges, small claims magistrates, motor vehicle magistrates, attorneys, prosecutors, or court clerks.

The conduct of judges and family support magistrates is governed by the Code of Judicial Conduct. (See Appendix C)

The conduct of workers’ compensation commissioners is governed by the Code of Ethics for Workers’ Compensation Commissioners. (See Appendix D)

The Council's jurisdiction over subject matter is limited to the following areas:

• Conduct prejudicial to the impartial and effective administration of justice which brings the judicial office in disrepute
• Willful violation of the Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct
• Willful and persistent failure to perform his or her duty
• Neglectful or incompetent performance of his or her duty
• Temperament that adversely affects the orderly carriage of justice
• Use of his or her office for financial gain
• Final conviction of a felony or of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude
• Willful failure to file a financial statement or the filing of a fraudulent financial statement required under Section 51-46a of the Connecticut General Statutes
• Inability to fully perform his or her duties due to impairment by mental infirmity or mental illness, drug dependency, and/or alcohol addiction

In other words, a person within the jurisdiction of the Council who willfully and persistently does not perform his or her judicial or magisterial duties, or performs them neglectfully or incompetently, or otherwise conducts his personal life in such a way as to give the office an undesirable image, may become the subject of a complaint. Unless a complaint contains facts of misconduct in one of these areas, the Council must dismiss it as being outside the scope of its subject matter jurisdiction.

IV.

NON-JURISDICTION

More than one-half of all complaints do not deal with misconduct. Many complaints attack decisions on trial proceedings, substantive legal positions, or final judgments. Often the complainant turns to the Council to have a decision reversed, something that only an Appellate Court can do. Some examples of conduct complained of which are not within the Council's jurisdiction involve:

• Protection of defendants' rights in criminal matters
• Suggestions by a judge of a specific basis of settlement in pre-trial procedures
• Decisions determining what evidence is admissible
• Setting of bail bonds
• Determination, according to particular standards, of custody and support in divorce proceedings
• Exercise of discretion
• Sentencing

V.

PROCEDURE

Any person can present a complaint to the Council by obtaining a complaint form from any Superior Court clerk's office or by writing or calling the Judicial Review Council office. The complaint, which must be in writing, sworn to and signed, must state facts that substantiate the alleged misconduct.

The complaint must be against a person who is a judge, family support magistrate, or workers' compensation commissioner within the jurisdiction of the Council.

Each complaint is screened by the staff to determine that the above requirements are met. If the complaint is against a person not under the jurisdiction of the Council, the complaint is directed to the proper agency.

Every complaint is investigated by the Council, except any barred by the one-year statute of limitation.

If the Council determines that a complaint cannot be decided on the information supplied by the complainant, it may request further information, court transcripts and/or audio tapes, or obtain interviews with witnesses.

The judge, family support magistrate, or workers' compensation commissioner complained against may file a reply to the complaint together with any evidence or documentation he or she wishes to include.

If, after investigation, the Council determines that no misconduct has occurred, it dismisses the complaint.

If the Council determines that misconduct may have occurred, it schedules a confidential probable cause hearing. The respondent may request that the hearing be public. At such a hearing, the executive director produces, through witnesses and documents, evidence relevant to the alleged misconduct. The judge, family support magistrate, or workers' compensation commissioner has the right to be present, to be represented by counsel, to examine and cross-examine witnesses and submit any evidence in defense of the complaint.

If the Council finds probable cause, the Council is required under Connecticut General Statutes Section 51-51l(c) to hold a hearing concerning the conduct or complaint. All such hearings are required to be open to the public. Again, the judge may appear and is entitled to counsel, to present evidence and to cross-examine witnesses.

In a litigated matter, whether it be a confidential probable cause hearing or a full public hearing, the executive director represents the Council. In all its determinations, however, the Council acts alone, without the presence of the executive director or any other non-member.

On the conclusion of the testimony, arguments and briefs, if any, the Council may take any of seven actions allowed by law:

1. Publicly censure the judge, family support magistrate, or workers’ compensation commissioner

2. Suspend the judge, family support magistrate, or workers’ compensation commissioner for a definite term not to exceed one year

3. Refer the matter to the Supreme Court with a recommendation that the judge or family support magistrate be suspended for a period longer than one year

4. Refer the matter to the Supreme Court with a recommendation that the judge or family support magistrate be removed from judicial office

5. Refer the matter to the Governor with a recommendation that the workers’ compensation commissioner be removed from office

6. Exonerate the judge, family support magistrate, or workers’ compensation commissioner from all charges

7. Admonish the judge, family support magistrate, or workers’ compensation commissioner and recommend a change in judicial conduct or practice, if necessary, if the Council finds that judicial conduct under Connecticut General Statutes Section 51-51i has not occurred, but he or she has acted in a manner which gives the appearance of impropriety or constitutes an unfavorable judicial practice

The public censure is filed with the Chief Justice, the Chief Court Administrator, and the joint standing committee on judiciary and, after time to appeal has expired, published in the Connecticut Law Journal.

If an admonishment is issued, the complainant is notified, but the substance of the admonishment is not disclosed. Effective October 1, 2005, if an admonishment is issued, Connecticut General Statutes Section 51-51l(b) requires the Council to also notify the joint standing committee of the General Assembly having cognizance of matters relating to the judiciary that an admonishment was issued and provide said committee with the substance of the admonishment, including copies of the complaint file.

VI.

MEMBERSHIP AND STAFF

The Council consists of the following:

Three Superior or Appellate Court judge members
Three attorney members
Six public members
Two alternate judge members
Two alternate attorney members
Three alternate public members
Three alternate family support magistrate members
Three alternate workers' compensation commissioner members

Whenever the Council considers a complaint against a workers' compensation commissioner member, an alternate workers' compensation commissioner member replaces a judge member. Likewise, when the Council considers a complaint against a family support magistrate, an alternate family support magistrate member replaces a judge member.

At the present time terms of regular members are four years. A regular member may not serve consecutive terms.

Alternate members serve terms of three years and cannot serve consecutive terms as an alternate member. An alternate member could, at the termination of his or her term, be appointed a regular member.

The Chairperson and members are appointed by the Governor with the approval of the Legislature.

The names of the present regular and alternate members of the Council and the dates their terms expire are listed on the following page.

REGULAR MEMBERS	(Four-year terms)	DATE TERM EXPIRES
Judges Members:
Honorable Patrick L. Carroll, III		12/1/07
Honorable Susan B. Handy		12/1/06
Honorable Christine E. Keller		12/1/08
Attorney Members:
G. Kenneth Bernhard		12/1/06
Brian R. Farnen		12/1/08
Raymond M. Hassett (Chairman)		12/1/07
Public Members:
Carlos A. del Portal		12/1/07
Thomas H. Ferguson		12/1/08
Molly Ingram		12/1/06
Caren Kittredge		12/1/08
John C. Langenus		12/1/06
Vacancy		12/1/07
ALTERNATE MEMBERS:	(Three-year terms)	DATE TERM EXPIRES
Family Support Magistrate Members:
Richard G. Adams		12/1/09
Katherine Y. Hutchinson		12/1/09
Linda T. Wihbey		12/1/09
Workers' Compensation Commissioner Members:
Charles F. Senich		12/1/06
Amado J. Vargas		12/1/06
George A. Waldron		12/1/06
Judge Members:
Honorable Frank A. Iannotti		12/1/06
Honorable Lynda B. Munro		12/1/06
Attorney Members:
Mercedes G. Alonzo		12/1/06
Cathryn A. Reynolds		12/1/06
Public Members:
N'Marie Crumbie		12/1/03
Norman W. VanCor		12/1/03
Vacancy		12/1/03

The staff of the Council consists of Barbara J. Elgan, full-time Executive Secretary, and Peter A. Clark, part-time Executive Director.

When the services of an investigator are required, they are contracted out.

The Council regularly meets at its office on the third Wednesday of each month (subject to change due to conflicts). During this reporting period, the Council held eleven regular meetings.