Oregon Supreme Court - February 7, 2013
From OCDLA Library of Defense
< Blog:Case Reviews(Difference between revisions)
by: Jwestover and Abassos • February 7, 2013 • no comments
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
* “JR 1-101(C) (judge shall not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on the judge’s character, competence, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge).” | * “JR 1-101(C) (judge shall not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on the judge’s character, competence, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge).” | ||
− | ''In re Barnack'', ___ Or ___ (Feb. 7, 2013) (per curiam). | + | ''[http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/S060976.pdf In re Barnack]'', ___ Or ___ (Feb. 7, 2013) (per curiam). |
{{wl-publish: 2013-02-07 13:59:18 -0800 | Jwestover }} | {{wl-publish: 2013-02-07 13:59:18 -0800 | Jwestover }} | ||
+ | {{wl-publish: 2013-02-07 13:59:18 -0800 | abassos }} |
Latest revision as of 14:38, August 19, 2013
Judicial Censure for Hostility Toward Defendant
It is a violation of the Oregon Code of Judicial Conduct for a judge to call the defendant a “piece of shit” and say that he “personally hopes that [Defendant] rots in prison.” Specifically, it is a violation of:
- “JR1-101(A) (judge shall observe high standards of conduct so that integrity, impartiality, and independence of the judiciary are preserved)”, and
- “JR 1-101(C) (judge shall not engage in conduct that reflects adversely on the judge’s character, competence, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge).”
In re Barnack, ___ Or ___ (Feb. 7, 2013) (per curiam).