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 | Emily |
| Last Name | Cole |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | N/A |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Los Angeles |
| Discipline/Determination | Severe Public Censure |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 05/28/2024 |
| Method of Resolution | Stipulation |
| Types of Misconduct | Disqualification/disclosure/post-disqualification conduct Ex parte communications Failure to cooperate/lack of candor with regulatory authorities |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | During the pendency of a murder trial, Judge Cole improperly initiated an ex parte communication with a prosecutor in order to influence the trial prosecutor’s decision to call a rebuttal witness. Judge Cole also made a misleading disclosure to the parties and a misleading report to the commission about the ex parte communication. The commission affirmed that it is a basic requirement of judicial office to be a neutral and impartial. Judge Cole’s misconduct was mitigated because she had no prior discipline; she disclosed her misconduct to the parties, her supervising judge, and the commission; and stipulated to a severe public censure, bringing the matter to a conclusion and accepting responsibility for her misconduct. |
| Documents | [ DECISION ] |