Where applicable, the following public cases may include Commission decisions, statements of charges, answers to statements of charges, exhibits, and/or supreme court decisions. These documents are available for download as Adobe Acrobat PDF files.

In re the Honorable James J. Helbling

From an agreed statement of facts, the Commission determined that Bonney Lake Municipal Court Judge James Helbling violated Canons 1, 2(A), and 3(A)(1) of the Code of Judicial Conduct by routinely failing to advise unrepresented criminal defendants appearing before him of their basic due process and constitutional rights and also by routinely failing to determine whether individual defendants understood their constitutional rights at arraignment prior to entering a plea or prior to probation violation hearings. He was reprimanded by the Commission and required to promptly read and familiarize himself with the Code of Judicial Conduct, the Criminal Rules for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction and the Criminal Procedure Benchbook for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction in their entirety. He was also required to complete a course on judicial ethics with an emphasis on criminal procedure at his expense, and provide proof of completion of the course within one year of the date the stipulation was entered.

Certificate of Completion and Order filed 3/1/2008.

Stipulation, Agreement and Order of Reprimand filed 12/1/2006.

In re the Honorable Kenneth L. Jorgensen

From an agreed statement of facts, the Commission determined that Grant County Superior Court Judge Kenneth Jorgensen violated Canons 1, 2(A), and 3(A)(4) of the Code of Judicial Conduct by commencing a court proceeding ahead of the scheduled time and questioning a party whom he knew to be represented about the subject matter at issue in the proceeding in the absence of counsel for that party. By doing so, respondent interfered with that party’s right to counsel and denied her the right to be fully heard according to law. He was reprimanded by the Commission and required to promptly read and familiarize himself with the Code of Judicial Conduct, and to complete a course in judicial ethics approved in advance by the Chair of the Commission within a year.

Certificate of Completion and Order filed 12/7/2007.

Stipulation, Agreement and Order of Reprimand filed 10/3/2006.

Answer to Statement of Charges filed 5/16/2006.

Statement of Charges filed 5/3/2006.

In re the Honorable Beverly G. Grant

From an agreed statement of facts, the Commission determined that Pierce County Superior Court Judge Beverly Grant violated Canons 1, 2(A),3(A)(2) and 3(A)(3) of the Code of Judicial Conduct by her actions immediately preceding a sentencing hearing in a manslaughter case. The sentencing hearing occurred on the Friday before Super Bowl Sunday. Perceiving a high level of tension among those present in the crowded courtroom, the judge opened the hearing by inviting those present to join her in cheering: “Go, Seahawks.” Dissatisfied with the low volume of the response, she repeated the request. The judge later publicly apologized and noted that her “invitation to salute the Seahawks was misplaced and under the circumstances made [her] appear insensitive to the victim’s family, friends and supporters.” The Commission admonished Judge Grant.

Stipulation, Agreement and Order of Admonishment filed 8/4/2006.

In re the Honorable David B. Ladenburg

From an agreed statement of facts, the Commission determined that Tacoma Municipal Court Judge David Ladenburg violated Canons 1, 2(A), and 3(A)(1) of the Code of Judicial Conduct by requiring a woman wearing a religious head covering to remove it or leave his courtroom. Respondent’s conduct contravened well-settled principles of First Amendment law and infringed upon an individual’s fundamental right to religious freedom. Respondent required all persons in his court to remove their head covering, not just Muslims, but his actions in this instance created an appearance that he was biased against people of the Muslim religion. As soon as the matter was brought to the judge’s attention and he reviewed the law, Respondent acknowledged his legal error, changed his practice, and publicly apologized for any embarrassment he caused to the woman. He was admonished by the Commission and required to complete a course in cultural competency.

Certificate of Completion and Order filed 2/1/2007.

Stipulation, Agreement and Order of Admonishment filed 8/4/2006.

In re the Honorable Robert D. Austin

From an agreed statement of facts, the Commission determined that Spokane County Superior Court Judge Robert Austin violated Canons 1, 2(A), and 3(A)(8) of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Immediately following the conclusion of a jury trial in November of 2005, Judge Austin made comments to the jury that reasonably created the impression in the minds of the jurors that they reached the wrong verdict and had failed the system and/or disappointed the judge. As explained in the comment to the Canon: “Commending or criticizing jurors for their verdict may imply a judicial expectation in future cases and may impair a juror’s ability to be fair and impartial in a subsequent case.” The Commission admonished Judge Austin.

Stipulation, Agreement and Order of Admonishment filed 8/4/2006.

In re the Honorable Jonathan Martin

On June 2, 2006, the Commission approved a stipulated order of censure against former Yakima Municipal Court Judge Jonathan Martin, finding he had violated Canons 1, 2(A), 2(B), 3(A)(2), 3(A)(3), 3(A)(4), 3(A)(5), 3(A)(6) and 3(B) of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Those violations included statements and conduct that manifested either bias or insensitivity, including the use of the word “Chinaman” and referring to a domestic violence victim as a “heifer.” Former Judge Martin contested a range of additional allegations, for example, that he improperly used the prestige of judicial office by writing to the police department on behalf of a railway company and signing his name as “Judge Martin;” failed to maintain order in his court; failed to follow courthouse protocols and legal procedures in criminal matters; failed to attend timely to important paperwork; and improperly conducted a contested infraction hearing outside the presence of a prosecutor.

While the matter was pending in preliminary, confidential proceedings, former Judge Martin lost a reelection bid for his position. He and the Commission recognized that this created an unusual situation where the respondent judge was no longer sitting as a judge, and in lieu of litigating the matter, former Judge Martin and the Commission entered the stipulation. Former Judge Martin agreed that if the matter were to go to hearing, there was a substantial likelihood that the Commission could prove the violations, and he agreed to the sanction of censure and to comply with corrective actions required by the Commission. These corrective actions require that, prior to resuming any form of judicial office, he will complete training at his own expense, approved in advance by the Commission Chair, in judicial ethics, basic criminal procedure, and court management, and will again read and familiarize himself with the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Certificate of Completion and Order filed 6/12/2007.

Stipulation, Agreement and Order of Censure filed 6/2/2006.

In re the Honorable Mary Ann Ottinger

The Commission conducted a public hearing on allegations that Judge Mary Ann Ottinger of the King County District Court violated Canons 1, 2(A), and 3(A)(1) by routinely failing to adequately advise unrepresented criminal defendants of their constitutional due process rights. The Commission found that the misconduct occurred and was compounded by the fact that Respondent was previously censured by the Commission for similar behavior (CJC 3811-F-110). The Commission censured Judge Ottinger and recommended to the Washington State Supreme Court that she be suspended from office for thirty days without pay.

Supreme Court Order In re Ottinger, No. 200,389-3 (July 20, 2006)

Commission Decision filed 5/5/2006.

Answer to Statement of Charges filed 6/30/2005.

Statement of Charges filed 6/14/2005.

 

In re the Honorable Stephen E. Moore

From an agreed statement of facts, the Commission admonished Judge Stephen Moore of the Lynnwood Municipal Court for violating Canons 1, 2(A), and 3(A)(3) of the Code of Judicial Conduct by displaying an impatient, undignified and/or discourteous demeanor towards litigants in four separate court hearings over the course of two and one-half years. The judge agreed that his demeanor was inappropriate in those cases, and further agreed to a corrective course of action including training in demeanor and communication.

Certificate of Completion and Order filed 6/8/2007.

Stipulation, Agreement and Order of Admonishment filed 4/7/2006.

n re Name