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 | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Kings |
| Discipline/Determination | Public admonishment |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 05/09/2006 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Abuse of contempt/sanctions Demeanor/decorum |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | Judge Maciel abused his authority in sanctioning an attorney without prior notice or an opportunity to be heard. The judge also made gratuitous remarks about malpractice to the attorney in open court in the presence of the attorney's client. The judge had been the subject of prior discipline. |
| Documents |