PETITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF CONDUCT FOR JUDGES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court responded to the Committee on Standards of Conduct for Judges' petition to amend its operating order by declining to rename the Committee to a Commission, clarifying that the Committee may not advise the Judicial Qualifications Commission, authorizing the Committee to recommend Code of Judicial Conduct changes, and permitting Committee officers to serve two successive one-year terms.
The Court declined to rename the Committee; prohibited the Committee from rendering opinions to the Judicial Qualifications Commission; authorized the Committee to submit formal proposals and recommendations regarding the Code of Judicial Conduct; and allowed Committee officers to serve two successive one-year terms but no more.
[1] A committee established to render advisory opinions to judges concerning contemplated conduct cannot issue opinions to the Judicial Qualifications Commission.
[2] A committee interpreting a code of conduct may recommend changes to that code to the court.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The scope of the Committee's authority was carefully confined to advisory opinions to judges concerning "contemplated" conduct.”
Establishes the narrow jurisdictional limit of the Committee's authority and the rationale for denying it authority to advise the Judicial Qualifications Commission.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Florida Supreme Court created the Committee on Standards of Conduct Governing Judges in February 1973 to render written advisory opinions to judge…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Judicial Qualifications Commission cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Pursuant to our supervisory authority over the state judiciary,1 this Court created a Committee on Standards of Conduct Governing Judges in February 1973 to “render written advisory opinions to inquiring judges concerning the propriety of contemplated judicial and non-judicial conduct.”2 Through its chairman, that Committee has now asked the Court to amend or clarify four specific aspects of the order under which it was established and presently functions. We have carefully considered each of the subject areas presented.
1. Name Change. The Committee proposes that it be designated as a “Commission” rather than Committee. The functions of the Committee were designed to parallel those of The Florida Bar’s Professional Ethics Committee, which provides advisory opinions to members of the Bar on the propriety of proposed conduct. In light of our disinclination to expand the Committee’s authority (see paragraph 2(a) below), and to avoid any confusion that might result if the name of the committee were similar to that of the Judicial Qualifications Commission, we decline to alter the name of the Committee at this time.
2. Powers, (a) The Committee asks whether it has the authority to render advisory opinions to the Judicial Qualifications Commission. We respond in the negative. The scope of the Committee’s authority was carefully confined to advisory opinions to judges concerning “contemplated” conduct. We can conceive of no way in which the Commission, or any of its members, could be legitimately concerned with proposed acts of the members of the judiciary, and advice on any other subject to the Commission would exceed the Committee’s authority-
(b) The Committee asks whether its power includes the authority to recommend changes in the Code of Judicial Conduct to this Court, in light of the experience it has developed interpreting the Code of Judicial Conduct. Just as committees of the Bar develop expertise and discern problems with our rules of procedure which lead to recommendations for changes, so too would the Committee be a natural body to make Code change recommendations to the Court. The Committee may, therefore, from time to time submit formal proposals and recommendations to the Court regarding the Code of Judicial Conduct. Recommendations for Code changes is not, however, the principal or primary purpose of the Committee.
3. Succession. Our original order provides that the chairman and vice-chairman “shall serve for a term of one calendar year,” without addressing succession. The Committee is in doubt as to whether these officers are eligible to succeed themselves. We hold that they may succeed themselves one time, so that any officer of the Committee may serve two successive one-year terms.
Accordingly, paragraphs 2 and 5 of the Court’s order establishing the Committee are amended to read (underlining signifies additions):
2. The members of the Committee shall elect a chairman and a vice-chairman, and each shall serve for a term of one calendar year. No officer shall serve more than two successive terms. A majority vote of all of the members of the Committee shall be required to elect the chairman and vice-chairman.
5. The Committee shall render advisory opinions to inquiring judges relating to the propriety of contemplated judicial and non-judicial conduct, but all opinions shall be advisory in nature only. No opinion shall bind the Judicial Qualifications Commission in any proceeding properly before that body. An opinion of the Committee may, however, in the discretion of the Commission, be considered as evidence of a good faith effort to comply with the Code of Judicial Conduct; provided that no opinion issued to one judge or justice shall be authority for the conduct, or evidence of good faith, of another judge or justice unless the underlying facts are identical. All opinions rendered by the Committee shall be in writing, and a copy of each opinion, together with the request therefor, shall be filed with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and with the chairman of the Judicial Qualifications Commission. All references to the name of the requesting judge shall be deleted. In addition, the Committee may from time to time submit to the Supreme Court formal proposals and recommendations relating to the Code of Judicial Conduct.
ENGLAND, C. J., and BOYD, OVER-TON, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur. . Art. V, §§ 2(b), 15, Fla.Const. . Petition of the Committee on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 327 So. 2d 5, 5 (Fla.1976).
ADKINS, Justice,
concurs in part and dissents in part:
I would change the name from “Committee” to “Commission.” Otherwise, I concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Petition of the Comm. on Standards of Conduct Governing Judges, 698 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 1997)…g Judges (Committee) has requested certain amendments to the Committee’s enabling authority as established in Petition of Committee on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 327 So. 2d 5 (Fla.1976), and amended in Petition of Committee on Standards, etc., 367 So. 2d 625 (Fla.1979). The Committee requests that its name be changed to Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee, which is more descriptive of the Committee’s duties. The Committee also requests that the enabling authority be amended to authorize three county jud…
-
Code of Judicial Conduct, 816 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 2002)…tee further petitions the Court to amend the committee’s enabling authority as established in Petition of Committee on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 327 So. 2d 5 (Fla.1976), and amended in Petition of Committee on Standards for Conduct of Judges, 367 So. 2d 625 (Fla.1979), and Petition of Committee on Standards of Conduct Governing Judges, 698 So. 2d 834 (Fla.1997). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. In response to our request that the committee consider whether canons 5D(5)(h) and 6B(2…
-
Code OF Judicial Conduct. Amendments to the Code of Judicial Conduct and Rules Regulating The Florida Bar Re Pro Bono Activities by Judges and Judicial Staff, 840 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2003)…conduct. See Petition of Committee on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 327 So. 2d at 5. In 1979, the Court held that the JEAC also could recommend changes to the Code of Judicial Conduct. See Petition of Committee on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 367 So. 2d 625, 626 (Fla.1979). On January 22, 2002, the JEAC filed a petition requesting that the Court adopt proposed revisions to Canons 4 and 5 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The JEAC proposes amendments to the heading, the substance, and the comment to Can…
Authorities Cited
- Petition of the Comm. ON Standards OF Conduct FOR Judges, 327 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1976)