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 Claude E.
Last Name Whitney
Title Judge
Inquiry No. 117
Court Level Municipal Court
County/Appellate District Orange
Discipline/Determination Censure
Decision By Supreme Court
Date of Decision 10/03/1996
Method of Resolution Decision
Types of Misconduct Failure to ensure rights
Petition For Review
Summary

Judge Whitney, as a matter of routine practice in the conduct of the in-custody misdemeanor arraignment calendar, failed to exercise his judicial discretion to consider releasing defendants on their own recognizance or to consider grants of probation or concurrent sentencing for defendants pleading guilty or no contest. He failed to inform defendants pleading guilty or no contest of the negative consequences a conviction could have on a noncitizen with regard to immigration, as required by law. He also refused to appoint counsel to assist defendants at arraignment.

Documents

[ NOTICE ]     [ ANSWER ]     [ DECISION ]