Name: John G. Ritchie
Title: Judge
Court: Seattle District Court
County: King
Discipline: Censure & Removal
Method of Resolution: Supreme Court affirmed
Discipline Date: 08/06/1993
Summary: The Commission censured a judge for making improper claims for travel reimbursement and improperly using county phones for personal long distance calls and recommended to the Washington Supreme Court that the judge be removed. There were five trips, one each year from 1987 through 1991, four to Florida, one to Arizona. The judge was reimbursed approximately $2,750. The Commission found that travel vouchers submitted by the judge in connection with the trips contained false and misleading statements concerning the nature, purpose, duration, and benefit of the court-related business allegedly conducted during the trips. The Commission also found that the judicial business that the judge contended that he conducted on the trips was incidental and insignificant to the main purpose of the trips, which was personal, and that the evidence most favorable to the judge suggested that he would occasionally meet for lunch or dinner with a Florida judge who was a close personal friend and business associate. The Commission also concluded that judge's length of service and purported competence were minimized as mitigating conditions given the duration and nature of his misconduct; that the misconduct was extremely serious, involving dishonesty and conversion of public funds; and that, although none of the judge's misconduct was manifested through courtroom activities, all of it occurred in his official capacity. Noting that the high performance ratings garnered by the judge underscored the insidiousness of the misconduct, the Commission stated that sustained and relatively furtive misconduct, once discovered, not only taints the reputation of the offending judge, but also the system that had neglected to identify and rectify the situation in a timely fashion. Noting that only through much searching and effort was the Commission able to ascertain the facts, the Commission also concluded that there was nothing to indicate that the judge had acknowledged or recognized anything wrongful and that, other than the judge's reimbursement for phone calls after initiation of the proceedings, there was little to indicate whether the judge would refrain from similar conduct in the future. The Commission also ordered as corrective action that the judge make full restitution to the county within 30 days for the travel expenses and the personal long distance telephone charges. Two members of the Commission would have recommended censure with a 60 to 90 day suspension rather than removal from office. One member would have limited the sanction to censure with corrective action. The State Supreme Court affirmed the Commission's decision and removed Judge Ritchie from office.
Case Documents Available:
Supreme Court Opinion In re John G. Ritchie 123 Wn.2d 725, 870 P.2d 967 filed 4/6/1994.
Commission Decision filed 8/6/1993.
Concurrence and Dissent 1 filed 8/6/1993.
Concurrence and Dissent 2 filed 8/6/1993.
Answer to Statement of Charges filed 10/7/1992.
Statement of Charges filed 9/18/1992.
SOC Exhibit A filed 9/18/1992.
SOC Exhibit B filed 9/18/1992.
SOC Exhibit C filed 9/18/1992.
SOC Exhibit D filed 9/18/1992.
SOC Exhibit E filed 9/18/1992.
SOC Exhibit F filed 9/18/1992.
SOC Exhibit G filed 9/18/1992.
SOC Exhibit H filed 9/18/1992.