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	Howard H.
Last Name	Shore
Title	Judge
Inquiry No.	N/A
Court Level	Superior Court
County/Appellate District	San Diego
Discipline/Determination	Censure
Decision By	Commission
Date of Decision	12/13/2023
Method of Resolution	Stipulation
Types of Misconduct	Non-performance of judicial functions/attendance/sleeping
Petition For Review
Summary	Judge Shore engaged in a serious dereliction of duty. Over a two-year period in 2021 and 2022, Judge Shore was absent from court, without approval or authorization, on at least 155 court days. He was not present in the courthouse on a single Friday between May 28, 2021, and November 18, 2022. Judge Shore’s absences exceeded his available vacation time by 87 days. Judge Shore’s numerous unauthorized and undocumented absences from the courthouse constituted a dereliction of duty, a persistent failure to perform his judicial duties, and a failure to follow the directives of the presiding judge in matters of court management and administration.The commission determined that Judge Shore’s misconduct demonstrated a flagrant disregard for his obligations to his fellow judges, the public, and the reputation of the judiciary and that Judge Shore’s misconduct seriously undermined public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary and cast disrepute on the judicial office.
Documents	[ DECISION ]