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 | Stephen |
| Last Name | Drew |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | |
| Court Level | Municipal Court |
| County/Appellate District | Tulare |
| Discipline/Determination | Public admonishment |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 07/29/1996 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Abuse of contempt/sanctions Bias/appearance of bias not directed toward a particular class Disqualification/disclosure/post-disqualification conduct Failure to ensure rights |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | Judge Drew denied a defendant his right to appointed counsel after using improper criteria for determining whether he was indigent. The judge acted unjudicially in handling peremptory challenges, deliberately caused delays for attorneys who had filed challenges by departing from his usual practice of calling cases handled by private counsel at the beginning of calendar, displayed bias against attorneys who filed peremptory challenges against him and appeared to retaliate against those attorneys by barring them from areas of the courthouse near his chambers open to other attorneys. The judge also appeared to exhibit animosity toward the public defender's office. Additionally, the judge acted in excess of his authority in a matter involving sanctions. |
| Documents |