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 Daniel J.
Last Name Healy
Title Judge
Inquiry No.
Court Level Superior Court
County/Appellate District Solano
Discipline/Determination Public admonishment
Decision By Commission
Date of Decision 05/23/2024
Method of Resolution Decision
Types of Misconduct Bias/appearance of bias not directed toward a particular class
Demeanor/decorum
Petition For Review
Summary The commission issued a public admonishment to Judge Healy for misconduct in two criminal matters. During a jury trial, Judge Healy usurped the role of the prosecutor, exhibited poor demeanor, engaged in conduct giving the appearance of bias, and interfered with the attorney-client relationship. During another jury trial, Judge Healy exhibited poor demeanor towards the attorneys, engaged in conduct giving the appearance of bias, and interfered with the attorney-client relationship. The commission considered Judge Healy’s prior discipline—a public admonishment and an advisory letter—to be a significantly aggravating factor. The commission also determined that the judge’s misconduct was significantly aggravated by the fact that it occurred while he participated in the commission’s mentoring program to address demeanor issues. The commission considered Judge Healy’s failure to fully appreciate his misconduct as an additional aggravating factor.
Documents

[ PUBLIC ADMONISHMENT ]