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 | Joan |
| Last Name | Comparet-Cassani |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Los Angeles |
| Discipline/Determination | Public Admonishment |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 08/16/2011 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Failure to ensure rights Demeanor/decorum On-bench abuse of authority in performance of judicial duties |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | The judge interrogated a pro per defendant about the preparation of a motion and accused him of lying when he denied having help. The judge revoked his pro per status and appointed counsel to represent him. The Court of Appeal granted defendant's writ, vacated judge's order and restored pro per status on ground that the judge had abused her discretion. Judge admitted she had violated defendant's Sixth Amendment right to self-representation. In addition to abuse of authority, disregard for defendant's rights and intentional disregard of the law, the judge's demeanor toward the defendant during hearing was improper. |
| Documents |