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 | James Randal |
| Last Name | Ross |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | 141 |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Orange |
| Discipline/Determination | Censure and bar |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 04/30/1998 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Abuse of contempt/sanctions Bias/appearance of bias not directed toward a particular class Demeanor/decorum Failure to ensure rights Misuse of court resources Off-bench abuse of office/misuse of court information On-bench abuse of authority in performance of judicial duties |
| Petition For Review | Denied 11/18/98 |
| Summary | Judge Ross abused his authority by ordering the president of a corporate party to appear for a sanctions hearing and yelled at an attorney who refused to settle the case. During the sanctions hearing, the judge, and was angry, caustic and discourteous, abused his contempt authority, violated witnesses' due process rights, and displayed embroilment. In another matter, the judge slammed a legal pad onto the bench in court and yelled at one of the attorneys. The judge also told an offensive, undignified joke in court. In another case, the judge became embroiled and abused his authority by obtaining the parties' waiver of future complaints to the commission and threatening retaliation if a complaint was filed. The judge sold a book he wrote in court, lending the prestige of office to promote and sell the book. At the time of the commission’s decision, the judge was retired from office. |
| Documents |