Public Decisions Database
This database contains decisions on all public judicial disciplinary cases since the inception of the commission in 1960. Cases not involving public charges or public discipline remain confidential under the California Constitution and the commission’s rules.
Pursuant to amendments to the Constitution, which took effect in March 1995, the commission is authorized to impose all disciplinary sanctions, subject to discretionary review by the Supreme Court. Prior to that, the Supreme Court had the authority to censure or remove judges from office upon recommendation by the commission.
Case Profile
New Search| First Name | Thomas R. |
| Last Name | Adams |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Santa Barbara |
| Discipline/Determination | Public Admonishment |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 12/10/2024 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Bias/appearance of bias not directed toward a particular class Demeanor/decorum Failure to cooperate/lack of candor with regulatory authorities |
| Petition For Review | N/A |
| Summary | The commission publicly admonished Judge Adams for poor demeanor at a hearing during an arraignment calendar. During this hearing, Judge Adams became angry, expressed impatience with counsel for the defendant, raised his voice and rose from the bench when addressing counsel, threw off his glasses and pointed at counsel, and flung the moving papers at counsel, causing them to land in front of the podium where counsel stood. Also, in a prior investigation, Judge Adams engaged in a lack of candor with the commission. During that investigation, Judge Adams falsely stated that he was retiring, that his last day on the bench had already passed, and that he would not be returning to the bench. Judge Adams returned to the bench before the commission issued discipline in the prior matter. Judge Adams’s misconduct was aggravated by two prior private admonishments. |
| Documents |