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 | Robert George |
| Last Name | Spitzer |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | 182 |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Riverside |
| Discipline/Determination | Removal from office |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 10/02/2007 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Administrative malfeasance/improper comments, treatment of colleagues and staff Bias/appearance of bias not directed toward a particular class Non-performance of judicial functions/attendance/sleeping Decisional delay/false salary affidavits Ex parte communications Failure to cooperate/lack of candor with regulatory authorities |
| Petition For Review | Denied 3/19/2008 |
| Summary | Judge Spitzer engaged in a persistent failure to perform judicial duties by inexcusable delays in decision-making, failing to act and demonstrating gross neglect of court orders. The judge signed false salary affidavits with disregard for the truth. In two criminal cases, the judge engaged in ex parte communications and displayed embroilment. The judge also failed to cooperate with his presiding judge and failed to abide by his obligation to cooperate with the commission. |
| Documents |