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 | Ronald |
| Last Name | Maciel |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | |
| Court Level | Municipal Court |
| County/Appellate District | Kings |
| Discipline/Determination | Public admonishment |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 12/01/1997 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Bias/appearance of bias not directed toward a particular class Ex parte communications |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | Judge Maciel engaged in multiple improper communications with an attorney in a criminal case pending before another judge that included discussing filing a peremptory challenge against the assigned judge, the statutory period for filing a challenge, and suggestions about defense strategy. None of the communications was disclosed to the district attorney's office. After the case was reassigned to Judge Maciel, he was disqualified from the case based on the undisclosed communications. |
| Documents |