Could a judge send a character letter for someone to the presiding federal judge?

Plain-English summary

A judge asked whether to send a letter about an individual’s character to the presiding federal judge.

The Commission applied former Canon 2B, which prohibited voluntary character testimony and lending judicial prestige to another’s private interests. It reasoned that a character letter raised the same concern and said the judge should not submit it. The PDF’s header mistakenly prints “1998-04,” although the official index labels the file 1989-04 and the letter is dated November 13, 1989.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989 under the earlier Judicial Code of Ethics, before West Virginia adopted its 1993 Code and its 2015 Code of Judicial Conduct, effective December 1, 2015. Subsequent rule changes or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Code before relying on the letter's conclusion.

Common questions

Q: Could the judge send the proposed character letter?

A: No. The Commission treated it like prohibited voluntary character testimony.

Q: Was the PDF number internally consistent?

A: No. The dated 1989 letter is indexed as 1989-04, but its printed header says 1998-04.

Background and rules framework

Former Canon 2B barred judges from lending office prestige to private interests and from voluntarily testifying as character witnesses; the Commission extended that reasoning to a character letter.

Citations and references

West Virginia Judicial Code of Ethics (former):

• Canon 2B, prestige of office and voluntary character testimony.
• Florida Commission on Standards of Conduct Governing Judges Opinion 75-6, cited as analogous.

See also

• WV JIC Advisory Opinion 1990-07: Sentencing reference letter

Source

• Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
• Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 1989-04, redacted
• Code adoption date: West Virginia JIC 2015 Annual Report

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
Room E~400, State Capitol

Charleston 25305

November 13, 1989
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 1998-04

Dear
Your letter to Chief Justice requesting an advisory opinion has been referred to the Judicial Investigation Commission for review. In that correspondence you seek an advisory opinion regarding whether or not it would be unethical for you to submit a letter to the nresiding Federal judge regarding the character of That request was reviewed by the Judicial Investigation Commission at its meeting on October 27, 1989.
As you indicate in your correspondence, Canon 2 of the Judicial Code'of Ethics is the controlling standard in this matter. That Canon says in pertinent part:
CANON 2
A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Bis Activities
B. A judge should not allow his family, social, or other relationships to influence his judicial conduct or judgment. He should not lend the prestige of his office to advance the private interest of others; nor should he convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence him. He should not testify voluntarily as a character witness.
The commentary following that section of Canon 2 indicates that the testimony of a judge as a character witness injects the prestige of his office into a proceeding in which he testifies and may be misunderstood to be an official testimonial. The Canon, however, does not afford a judge privilege against testifying in response to an official summons.

November 13, 1989
Page 2

After reviewing your letter and the Canon, the Judicial Investigation Commission feels that the language of Canon 2 prohibiting a judge from voluntarily testifying as a character witness would likewise prohibit the judge from sending a letter to the presiding Federal judge regarding the character of an individual. For that reason, the Judicial Investigation Commission responds to your inquiry by stating that it would not be appropriate under the language contained in Canon 2 for you to submit a letter regarding the character
of
to the presiding Federal judge.
This interpretation of Canon 2 has also been followed by other jurisdictions. For example the Florida Commission on Standards of Conduct Governing Judges has stated that "good character letters" signed by circuit judges sent on behalf of a Florida attorney convicted of income tax evasion "violated the spirit and intent of Canon 2B." Op. 75-6 Commission on Standards of Judicial Conduct (Fla. March 27, 1975). Judicial disciplinary commissions in other states have issued similar advisory opinions regarding situations similar to your inquiry.
It is hoped that this response will satisfactorily answer the questions· which you have raised in your correspondence. If there is any further question regarding this matter, do not hesitate to contact the Cormnission.
;;;:_truly yours,

Qtl)lt1,4/la, ta:J;;;I~
Thomas B. Canterbury J
Chairman

CRG/bl