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 | Christopher J. |
| Last Name | Sheldon |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | 186 |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Riverside |
| Discipline/Determination | Censure |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 04/15/2009 |
| Method of Resolution | Stipulation |
| Types of Misconduct | Administrative malfeasance/improper comments, treatment of colleagues and staff Non-performance of judicial functions/attendance/sleeping |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | From early 2007 through late 2008, Judge Sheldon routinely left the courthouse after the completion of his dependency calendar which regularly ended before noon, without receiving authorization for his half-day absences and without notifying his supervising judges. The commission concluded that the judge’s conduct violated the Code of Judicial Ethics and constituted prejudicial misconduct. In its decision, the commission stated, “By regularly absenting himself from the courtroom before noon without the approval of his supervising judges for a period of almost two years, Judge Sheldon has demonstrated a flagrant disregard for his obligations to his fellow judges, the public, and the reputation of the judiciary.” |
| Documents |