Judicial Qualifications Commission
JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE INFORMATION
Four things belong
to a judge: to hear courteously;
To answer wisely; to
consider soberly;
And to decide
impartially.
~Socrates~
General Information
South Dakota judges are governed by high standards of conduct which define
proper and improper conduct for judges in both their professional and personal
capacities. These standards are set forth in the
South Dakota Code of Judicial Conduct, SDCL ch. 16-2, Appx.
Under these standards of conduct, judges must:
1.
uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary;
2.
avoid impropriety and appearance of impropriety in all of their
activities;
3.
perform the duties of judicial office impartially and diligently;
4.
conduct their extra-judicial activities as to minimize the risk of
conflict with judicial obligations; and
5.
refrain from inappropriate political activity.
Discipline of judges in South Dakota is conducted by the Judicial Qualifications
Commission pursuant to
South Dakota Constitution, Article V, section 9
and
SDCL ch. 16-1A. The rules governing
judicial disciplinary proceedings are provided in the
Appendix to SDCL ch. 16-1A at section III.
The Judicial Qualifications Commission receives, investigates and evaluates
allegations of judicial misconduct. Although the Judicial Qualifications
Commission reviews complaints about judges, it is an independent entity,
separate from the South Dakota Judicial Branch.
The Commission is composed of two judges elected by the Judicial Conference,
three members of the bar, no more than two of whom may be from the same
political party and two members of the public who are not judges or retired
judges or lawyers. The public members, appointed by the Governor, must not
be of the same political party.
Filing a Complaint
The procedure for filing a complaint for misconduct against a judge in South
Dakota is described in
SDCL ch. 16-1A, Appx.III(2).
Please use the complaint form which may be downloaded from this site. Any
person wishing to file a complaint against a judge should state the facts of his
or her particular situation as clearly and as specifically as possible.
Under the rules, the complaint must allege facts which would demonstrate:
1.
a violation of the
Judicial Code of Conduct (Appendix to SDCL ch.16-2) (see above);
2.
willful misconduct in office;
3.
habitual intemperance;
4.
disability that seriously interferes with the performance of the judge’s
duties; or
5.
violation of any constitutional provisions or statutes or conduct that is
prejudicial to the administration of justice and brings a judicial office into
dispute.
Complaints filed against judges must be written and may be directed to:
Secretary
Judicial
Qualifications Commission
P O Box 1238
Pierre, SD
57501-1238
At this time E-mail complaints are not allowed.
If you choose to submit an anonymous complaint, your complaint may not be able
to be investigated by the Judicial Qualifications Commission if the complaint is
incomplete or if more information is needed from you in order to proceed.
Investigation and Hearings
The Secretary of the Judicial Qualifications Commission will distribute the
written complaint to all members of the Commission. You will receive
notice from the Secretary that your complaint was received. Review and
investigation of the complaint will be conducted according to the rules
governing judicial disciplinary proceedings.
Under these rules, the complaint may be forwarded to the judge complained
against. You will receive notice from the Secretary if this happens.
The judge is given ten days to respond, and you will receive a copy of the
judge’s response and be given an opportunity to reply. The response and
your reply will be provided to all Commission members.
If the Commission decides to issue a private reprimand, you will receive notice
that no formal disciplinary action will be taken. A private reprimand is a
written reprimand of the judge by the Commission. However, the Commission
may proceed to formal disciplinary proceedings which may include a hearing.
You will be notified by the Secretary of the final outcome of any formal
disciplinary proceeding.
The Commission dismisses unfounded complaints.
Purpose for Judicial Discipline
The purpose of a disciplinary action involving a judge is, first and foremost,
to protect the public. Under the rules, disciplinary proceedings are
confidential until they reach the point of the Commission’s filing its
recommendation with the Supreme Court or the accused judge requests that the
matter be made public. The matter is also public if the disciplinary
investigation is based upon conviction of a judge for commission of a crime that
is a felony under state or federal law, or is one involving moral turpitude.
An honest disagreement about the outcome of a case is not cause for discipline.
A mistake or error of judgment is also not cause for discipline. In those
matters, the litigants may file an appeal of their case in the appropriate
court.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Will my identity
be revealed to the judge?
Generally, yes. The Judicial Qualifications Commission notifies judges
about complaints unless there is an overriding reason to withhold this
information.
2. Will my
complaint be made public?
Usually, no, although a complaint may become public if the Judicial
Qualifications Commission files formal charges against the judge with the
Supreme Court or if the judge requests the matter be made public.
3. Will filing a
complaint with the Judicial Qualifications Commission change the decision in my
lawsuit?
No. Judicial Qualifications Commission proceedings have no effect on
decision or appeals.
4. Will my
complaint automatically disqualify the judge from further involvement in my
case?
No. The Judicial Qualifications Commission will only review your
complaint to determine whether or not misconduct has occurred.
Disqualification is determined in court proceedings by a judge.
5. Does the
Judicial Qualifications Commission act
on all
complaints?
Yes. Every complaint is reviewed by the staff and the Judicial
Qualifications Commission.
6. Should I delay
any appeal until this request for disciplinary action is concluded?
No. The Commission reviews only questions of ethical conduct. It
does not have authority to review the merits of a judicial decision. If
the substance of your complaint is about the merits or outcome of your case or a
particular ruling, you should talk with your attorney about the proper course of
action, including whether or not to file an appeal. If you seek to
change the outcome of your case, discuss this with a lawyer without delay.
7. If my complaint
is justified, will the Judicial Qualifications Commission tell me how the judge
was disciplined?
Yes. At the
close of the case you will receive a letter describing the action taken.
8. What are some
examples of judicial misconduct?
Some examples are:
● Improper
courtroom demeanor or improper treatment of parties, counsel, witnesses,
jurors, court staff and others.
● Failing
to promptly dispose of judicial business.
● Conflict
of interest.
● Chemical
abuse.
● Engaging
in improper election campaign activities.
● Receipt
of information about a case outside the presence of a party.
● Failure
to be impartial.
9. What if I think
the judge’s ruling was wrong?
A judge’s error in
a decision or ruling – by itself – is not misconduct. Appeal may be the
only remedy for such an error, or there may be no remedy. Orders as to
custody, visitation and setting child support, as well as fines and sentences in
traffic or criminal cases – if not outside the parameters set by law – are
generally within the discretion of the trial court and are not usually matters
for the Commission.
The
Commission does not have the authority to direct a judge to take legal action,
or to review a case for judicial error, mistake or other legal grounds.
These functions are for the State’s appellate courts.
Allegations stemming from a judge’s rulings or exercise of discretion do not
provide a basis for the Commission’s action, and personal dissatisfaction alone
cannot be grounds for judicial investigation.
10. What can’t the Commission
do?
The Commission is
not an appellate court. The Commission’s authority is limited by law to
investigating the complaint and, if appropriate, disciplining the judge.
The Commission does not have the authority to issue orders in any case,
including ordering anyone to be released from jail, granting a new trial,
disqualifying a judge from hearing a case, assigning a new judge to a case or
granting or changing custody, visitation or child support orders. Neither
the Commission nor its staff is authorized to give legal advice or respond to
requests for assistance with individual legal matters.
Members of the Judicial Qualifications Commission and the South Dakota Supreme
Court appreciate your interest in our state judges and the high standards of
professional conduct set forth for them by the South Dakota Code of Judicial
Conduct.