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	John D.
Last Name	Harris
Title	Judge
Inquiry No.	173
Court Level	Superior Court
County/Appellate District	Los Angeles
Discipline/Determination	Public admonishment
Decision By	Commission
Date of Decision	03/23/2005
Method of Resolution	Decision
Types of Misconduct	Demeanor/decorum Disqualification/disclosure/post-disqualification conduct Ex parte communications Sexual harassment/inappropriate workplace gender comments
Petition For Review
Summary	Judge Harris met ex parte in chambers with the female victims in two separate sexual assault cases while the cases were still pending before him. The judge also engaged in a pattern of misconduct by making inappropriate comments to female attorneys, jurors and court staff. The judge failed to disqualify himself or to disclose his relationship with an attorney appearing before him for whom the judge had arranged contacts with several women as potential dates. The judge also reacted improperly to the filing of a peremptory challenge. At the time of the commission's decision, the judge had retired from office.
Documents	[ NOTICE ]     [ ANSWER ]     [ PUBLIC ADMONISHMENT ]