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 | Marc A. |
| Last Name | Garcia |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | 195 |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Merced |
| Discipline/Determination | Censure and bar |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 05/18/2015 |
| Method of Resolution | Stipulation |
| Types of Misconduct | Disqualification/disclosure/post-disqualification conduct Failure to cooperate/lack of candor with regulatory authorities |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | After taking the bench, judge received $250,000 in payments over four years from his former partner in the entity Merced Defense Associates (MDA), which held the Merced County alternate indigent defense contract. The payments were made from funds received under the MDA contract, pursuant to an agreement between then-attorney Garcia and his then partner. Judge failed to report the payments on his Statements of Economic Interests (he filed amended Statements in 2014), and failed to disqualify or disclose when his former partner or MDA attorneys appeared before him. |
| Documents |