NCJ Number
63316
Journal
Judicature Volume: 63 Issue: 5 Dated: (NOVEMBER 1979) Pages: 244-248
Date Published
1979
Length
7 pages
Annotation
COMPARISONS OF THE VARIOUS SYSTEMS OF JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE INDICATE THAT THE UNITARY SYSTEM OPERATING IN MOST STATES AND THE TWO-TIERED SYSTEM OF SEVEN STATES HAVE BOTH VIRTUES AND FAULTS.
Abstract
THE USE BY MOST STATES OF A UNITARY SYSTEM OF JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE DOES NOT NECESSARILY INDICATE THE SUPERIORITY OF ASSIGNING THE INVESTIGATION AND DETERMINATION FUNCTIONS TO A SINGLE DISCIPLINARY BOARD. TO THE CONTRARY, THE REJECTION OF THE UNITARY SYSTEM BY SEVEN STATES AND THEIR ADOPTION OF A TWO-TIERED APPROACH PROVIDES SOME SUPPORT FOR USING ONE BOARD TO FIND THE PROBABLE CAUSE FOR A CHARGE AND A SECOND AND INDEPENDENT BODY TO DETERMINE THE CHARGES AND IMPOSE DISCIPLINE. ALTHOUGH THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HAS SUSTAINED THE GENERAL USE OF THE UNITARY SYSTEM, SUCH A METHOD CAN RESULT IN BIAS WHICH MAY DISQUALIFY THE TRIBUNAL. ARGUABLY, THE TWO-TIERED SYSTEM, IN ITS COMPLETE SEPARATION OF THE INVESTIGATIVE AND PROSECUTING FUNCTIONS FROM THE JUDGING FUNCTION, IS PREFERABLE TO THE UNITARY SYSTEM. EXAMINATION OF CASE LAW REVEALS THAT ILLINOIS'S TWO-TIERED SYSTEM HAS BEEN CRITICIZED BY THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT FOR ATTEMPTING TO IMPOSE DISCIPLINARY PENALTIES WITHOUT CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY. BOTH DISCIPLINARY SYSTEMS ALLOW FOR INFORMAL REPRIMANDING OF JUDGES, AND BOTH ATTEMPT TO RECONCILE CONFLICTING VALUES OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST. ABERRATIONS IN THE CALIFORNIA UNITARY SYSTEM DO NOT PROVE THAT DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS SHOULD ONLY OPERATE OUTSIDE A STATE'S JUDICIAL SYSTEM, RATHER THE DIFFICULTIES WITH DISCIPLINARY SYSTEMS MAY REQUIRE A SYNTHESIS OF THE VARIOUS TECHNIQUES. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (TWK)