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 | Robert F. |
| Last Name | Cochran |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Del Norte |
| Discipline/Determination | Public Admonishment |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 02/19/2025 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Bias/appearance of bias toward a particular class Demeanor/decorum Failure to ensure rights |
| Petition For Review | N/A |
| Summary | Judge Cochran conveyed the appearance of embroilment and bias, and exhibiting discourtesy, toward a victim of domestic violence by his conduct at a Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DVRO) hearing and a change of plea hearing in a criminal matter. At the DVRO hearing, Judge Cochran faulted the victim for staying in an abusive relationship, called her “manipulative” on a number of occasions, and told the respondent that he had fallen into her “trap.” Many of Judge Cochran’s comments at the DVRO hearing were gratuitous, not relevant to a determination of whether to grant the DVRO, and also reflected offensive and outdated stereotypes regarding victims of domestic violence. At the change of plea hearing in the criminal matter, the judge denied the victim an opportunity to be heard and made demeaning comments to her, in violation of Marsy’s Law. Judge Cochran’s misconduct negatively affected a victim of domestic violence. His misconduct was further aggravated by his failure to fully appreciate his misconduct. |
| Documents | [ DECISION ] |