The California Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) has adopted a formal advisory opinion providing guidance to judges and judicial candidates to assist them in determining the types of activities they may engage in...
Can a presiding judge disqualify an entire bench? The answer is a decisive “no”, according to the Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions, the ethical rule is that no judge may decide if another judge is disqualified. But they also gave...
Youth court leaders, judges, youth court staff, volunteers, education and youth-focused organizations, and community service leaders will gather in Santa Cruz this June to exchange information on best practices for youth courts.
Roughly 206 drug courts serve residents in 53 of California’s 58 counties. By helping people with substance abuse issues repair their lives, drug courts divert those who could otherwise cycle repeatedly through the criminal justice system.
Public comment helps the Supreme Court of California’s Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions draft advisory opinions on ethics issues of importance to California’s judges—it also helps them decide whether to publish an opinion or redraft based on the comments received.
Recent U.S. Supreme Court's Williams v. Pennsylvania case applies a disqualification standard for former prosecutors similar to earlier California Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) advice—CJEO extends its advice to service in a prior conviction.
SAN FRANCISCO--The California Supreme Court today announced the reappointment of Justice Judith L. Haller of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District and Judge Michael T. Garcia (Ret.) of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, and the appointment of Judge Samantha P. Jessner of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County to fill a vacancy, to four-year terms on the Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions.
The Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) issued oral advice that a judge may administer the oath of office to a newly elected district attorney. CJEO Oral Advice Summary 2016-018 concludes that because judges are authorized by law to administer the oath of office that all public office holders are required to take under the California Constitution, doing so is an official function of judicial office.
The Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) issued oral advice that judges must follow a new law prohibiting compensation for solemnizing a marriage--legislation effective January 1, 2017, changes the law.
SAN FRANCISCO—The California Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) has adopted a formal advisory opinion advising judges that maintaining any interest in an enterprise that involves medical or recreational marijuana is incompatible with the obligation to follow the law under California Code of Judicial Ethics.
SAN FRANCISCO—The California Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions (CJEO) has adopted a formal advisory opinion advising judges against serving on a charter school board.
California’s 75 teen courts let youth face a jury of their peers—and steer cases away from the juvenile justice system.