May a judge consult probation officers without a hearing, and must attorney campaign committee roles be disclosed when those lawyers appear?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2007. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A judge asked whether conversations with probation officers about defendants before sentencing or during probation required a hearing or notice. The judge also planned reelection with local attorneys serving as campaign committee chair or treasurer and asked about disclosure when they appeared.
The Commission said the judge could confer with probation officers without a hearing or notice under the court-personnel exception in former Canon 3B(7)(c). It separately said the campaign committee relationship must be disclosed when those attorneys appeared in court.
In practice
The advice concerns consultation with probation officers in their court-aiding role and does not purport to authorize conversations outside the former Canon’s exception.
Common questions
Q: Could the judge confer with probation officers without a hearing or notice?
A: Yes, on the described facts.
Q: Must the attorney campaign relationship be disclosed?
A: Yes, when those attorneys appeared in court.
Q: Which exception did the Commission rely on?
A: Former Canon 3B(7)(c), allowing consultation with court personnel aiding adjudication.
Background and rules framework
Former Canon 3B(7) barred ex parte communications about pending or impending matters but subsection (c) allowed consultation with court personnel whose functions aided adjudication. The campaign-disclosure answer referred to an enclosed earlier JIC opinion.
Citations and references
West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct (former): Canon 3B(7)(c). Earlier JIC opinion referenced: enclosed but not identified by number in this PDF.
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 2007-29, redacted
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.
JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
Post Office Box 1629
Charleston, West Virginia 25326-1629
(304) 558-0169 ¢ FAX (304) 558-0831
December 21, 2007
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 2007-29
Dear _
You asked for an advisory opinion in a recent letter to the Judicial Investigation Commission. You stated in that letter that you had read in a newspaper that some judges in Georgia were being investigated by the Judicial Disciplinary Commission. One of the things the judge was being investigated for was “talking to his probation officer about defendants without holding a hearing or notifying the victims or the prosecutor.” This caused some concern because you talked to your probation officers before sentencing and frequently discuss how defendants on probation are doing, especially if they are not doing very well. In that letter you also stated that you have decided to seek reelection and one of the local attorneys has agreed to serve as your campaign committee chairman/treasurer and another attorney will serve on the committee. You asked whether you needed to disclose this information when they appear before you in court.
To address the first question which you have raised, the Commission has reviewed Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. That Canon states in relevant part:
Canon 3. A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and diligently.
B. Adjudicative responsibilities.
December 21, 2007
Page Two
(7) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person’s lawyer, the right to be heard according to law. A judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties concerning a pending or impending proceeding except that:
(c) A judge may consult with court personnel whose
functions include aiding the judge and carrying out
the judge’s adjudicative responsibilities or with other judges.
Based on this language contained in Canon 3, it is the opinion of the Commission that you may confer with your probation officers without holding a hearing or notifying the parties or the prosecuting attorney.
The second question, which you have raised, was discussed by the Judicial Investigation Commission in a prior advisory opinion. That opinion states that you must disclose the campaign committee chairman/treasurer relationship that you will have with the attorneys when they appear in your court. A copy of this advisory opinion is enclosed for your review.
It is hoped that this opinion fully addresses the questions which you have raised. If there is any further question regarding these matters do not hesitate to contact the
Commission.
Very truly yours,
[signature]
Judicial Investigation Commission
FLF,II:nb
Enclosure
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2007. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace