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 | Vance W. |
| Last Name | Raye |
| Title | Justice |
| Inquiry No. | N/A |
| Court Level | Court of Appeal |
| County/Appellate District | Third Appellate District |
| Discipline/Determination | Public Admonishment |
| Decision By | Stipulation |
| Date of Decision | 06/01/2022 |
| Method of Resolution | Commission |
| Types of Misconduct | Administrative malfeasance/improper comments, treatment of colleagues and staff Decisional delay/false salary affidavits |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | Based on a stipulation, the commission issued a public admonishment of Justice Raye for engaging in a pattern of delay in deciding approximately 200 appellate matters over a ten-year period (2011-2021). Pursuant to the stipulation, Justice Raye retired and agreed not to serve as a judicial officer. Also, over the ten-year period, Justice Raye failed to properly exercise his administrative and supervisory authority, as Presiding Justice of the Third District, to provide a forum for the expeditious resolution of appellate disputes. Both with respect to the court as a whole (in his role as Presiding Justice) and as to cases assigned to him personally, Justice Raye failed to encourage and adopt reasonable procedures to ensure that priority and older cases were decided first. In some cases assigned to him, Justice Raye’s conduct caused prejudice to the parties to the actions. Justice Raye failed (contrary to law) to prioritize cases involving juveniles and criminal matters. |
| Documents |