Colo. Code. Jud. Cond. 1.2
A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence,* integrity,* and impartiality* of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
Colo. Code. Jud. Cond. 1.2
COMMENT
[1] Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by improper conduct and conduct that creates the appearance of impropriety. This principle applies to both the professional and personal conduct of a judge and includes harassment and other inappropriate workplace behavior.
[2] A judge should expect to be the subject of public scrutiny that might be viewed as burdensome if applied to other citizens, and must accept the restrictions imposed by the Code.
[3] Conduct that compromises or appears to compromise the independence, integrity, and impartiality of a judge undermines public confidence in the judiciary. Because it is not practicable to list all such conduct, the Rule is necessarily cast in general terms.
[4] Judges should participate in activities that promote ethical conduct among judges and lawyers, support professionalism within the judiciary and the legal profession, and promote access to justice for all.
[5] Impropriety occurs when the conduct compromises the ability of the judge to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence. Actual improprieties include violations of law, court rules or provisions of this Code. The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge violated this Code or engaged in other conduct that reflects adversely on the judge's honesty, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge.
[6] A judge should initiate and participate in community outreach activities for the purpose of promoting public understanding of and confidence in the administration of justice. In conducting such activities, the judge must act in a manner consistent with this Code.
ANNOTATION Law reviews. For article, "From the Cloister to the Street: Judicial Ethics and Public Expression", see 64 Den. U. L. Rev. 549 (1988). One meaning of impartiality in the judicial context is lack of bias for or against any party to a proceeding. Impartiality may also involve open-mindedness, not in the sense that judges should have no preconceptions on legal issues, but rather that judges should be willing to consider views that oppose those preconceptions and remain open to persuasion when those issues arise in a pending case. Republican Party of Minn. v. White, 536 U.S. 765, 775, 779(2002). Role of judiciary is one of impartiality. The role of the judiciary, if its integrity is to be maintained, is one of impartiality. People v. Martinez, 185 Colo. 187, 523 P.2d 120, aff'd, 186 Colo. 225, 526 P.2d 1325 (1974). Courts must meticulously avoid any appearance of partiality, not merely to secure the confidence of the litigants immediately involved, but to retain public respect and secure willing and ready obedience to their judgments. Wood Bros. Homes v. City of Fort Collins, 670 P.2d 9 (Colo. App. 1983). The duty to be impartial cannot be fulfilled where, by his active role in the presentation of the prosecution's case, a trial judge calls witnesses, presents evidence, and cross-examines defense witnesses, because these are the acts of an advocate and not a judge. People v. Martinez, 185 Colo. 187, 523 P.2d 120, aff'd, 186 Colo. 225, 526 P.2d 1325 (1974). Such conduct constitutes reversible error. The assumption by the court of the role of advocate for the prosecution is inconsistent with the proper function of the judiciary and constitutes reversible error. People v. Martinez, 185 Colo. 187, 523 P.2d 120, aff'd, 186 Colo. 225, 526 P.2d 1325 (1974). Judge's advice to prosecution not error unless defendant denied fair trial. While it may be ill-advised for a trial judge to point out a possible deficiency in the prosecution's case, such conduct is not reversible error where it does not so depart from the required standard of impartiality as to deny the defendant a fair trial. People v. Adler, 629 P.2d 569 (Colo. 1981). Judge is ill-advised to be expert witness and judge on same issue in two proceedings. The actions of a retired judge in becoming an expert witness in a case concerning the same issue -- size of attorney fees in an estate proceeding -- as in another dispute raises the specter of an appearance of impropriety. The judge is ill-advised to place himself in this position and then preside at the trial of the latter case. However, when the judge does not actually testify in the former case, and the record contains no indication that the judge acted with prejudice, the judge does not have such an interest as to require disqualification. Colo. State Bd. of Agriculture v. First Nat'l Bank, 671 P.2d 1331 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). Actual bias arises where a prejudice in all probability prevents a judge from dealing fairly with a party. People v. Julien, 47 P.3d 1194 (Colo. 2002). Disqualification requires more than mere relationship. Determining factors are closeness of the relationship and its bearing on the underlying case. Schupper v. People, 157 P.3d 516 (Colo. 2007). Existence of a marriage relationship between a judge and a deputy district attorney in the same county is sufficient to establish grounds for disqualification even though no other facts call into question the judge's impartiality. Smith v. Beckman, 683 P.2d 1214 (Colo. App. 1984). While a dissent may be written in a succeeding case or two, the code of judicial conduct should bury the idea of a judge dissenting on the same issue ad infinitum. People v. Steed, 189 Colo. 212, 540 P.2d 323 (1975). Public reprimand ordered based upon appearance of impropriety arising from judge's conduct hiring the judicial district's coroner. Appointee did not apply during application period, selection was made on basis of criteria not stated in official announcement, including known friendship with the Chief Justice, and on terms significantly different from those advertised to general public. In re Johnstone, 2 P.3d 1226 (Alaska 2000). ETHICS OPINIONS A judge whose spouse is running for city council, which exercises supervisory responsibility over the chief of police and city manager, would not be required to disqualify himself in all cases charged by the police department. The existence of this relationship would not, in the usual case, cause the judge's impartiality to be questioned. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 07-09. A part-time county judge who maintains a part-time civil practice may not exercise discretionary authority to sit as a district judge in criminal matters and also continue to appear in the same district court as a lawyer on civil matters. To allow a judge to preside over cases while practicing in the same court would erode confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 07-06. A judge may not advertise her ability to perform wedding ceremonies by sending fliers to wedding planners and may not otherwise solicit business as a wedding officiant. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 07-05. A judge is not required to automatically disqualify himself when the parent of his estranged godchild or the parent's colleagues appear before the judge. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 07-04. A judge need not automatically disqualify herself where an attorney who represented the judge's adult child, the costs of which were paid by the judge but reimbursed by the adult child, appears before the judge. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 07-01. An active judge planning to retire in the near future should refrain from setting or hearing private mediations until the judge actually retires. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 06-09. A judge may serve on the board of an organization devoted to seeking funds to assist defendants in obtaining court-ordered substance abuse treatment, and the judge may make recommendations to a private foundation that it should fund programs to the same end, but it would be inappropriate for the judge to assist in determining which particular defendants receive the scholarship funds. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 06-06. A judge should disqualify himself sua sponte if an attorney or firm currently representing the judge, or the judge's adversary in a current matter, appears before the judge. A judge should also disqualify himself sua sponte for a reasonable period, typically for one year, after the representation has ended, when the judge's attorney, other members of that firm, the judge's adversary's attorneys, or members of that attorney's firm appear before the judge in order to avoid an appearance of impropriety. After the expiration of a reasonable period of time, disqualification is not required but may be appropriate under the circumstances. Disclosure should continue until the passage of time or circumstances make the prior representation irrelevant. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 06-05. To avoid an appearance of impropriety, when a judge's spouse contributes to a political candidate, the contribution should be made in the spouse's name alone and from the spouse's separate bank account, with no reference to the judge or the judge's position. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 06-04. A judge may recommend a lawyer only in circumstances where the judge has a sufficiently close relationship with the requesting party that he would automatically recuse himself from the case due to the closeness of the relationship regardless of whether the judge had been asked to make the recommendation. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 06-01. Service on the judge's homeowners' association board of directors would be inappropriate where the association is large and substantial, maintains sizable cash reserves and operates under a large budget, and engages in outside transactions likely to result in litigation. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 05-3. A judge should disqualify himself from cases in which a partner or associate in his brother-in-law's firm acts as counsel. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 05-02. A judge need not recuse in every case involving a law enforcement agency for which the judge's spouse occasionally performs arson investigations. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 05-01. A mentee judge may discuss pending or impending matters with his or her mentor judge but the mentee judge alone is responsible for making decisions in the matter. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 04-02. A judge's report of an attorney's misconduct in a case pending before the judge requires the judge to disqualify himself or herself. Colo. J.E.A.B. Op. 04-01. A judge who, immediately following a hearing, had lunch with one of the attorneys in the proceeding, violated Canon 2A by creating an appearance of impropriety. The closeness in time between the hearing and the social lunch could suggest to a reasonable observer that the attorney had influence over the judge based upon their social relationship. Alaska Formal Op. 021. A judge engages in improper political activity by moderating a partisan political debate. Despite all candidates being represented and no sponsorship by any political party, political debates by their nature engage the moderator in political discourse inappropriate to judicial office. Such a debate improperly lends the prestige of judicial office to the event in a state with a non-elected judiciary. Alaska Formal Op. 023. While a judge may "speak, write, lecture, and teach on both legal and non-legal subjects" and may accept compensation so long as the compensation does not exceed a reasonable amount nor exceed that which would be received by a person who is not a judge, it is not permissible for a judge to write a regular column in a for-profit publication in which the placement of the article, not within the judge's control, could be construed as endorsing other articles or advertisements that might demean the office. Md. Ethics Op. 2001-01. A judge should not participate on the advisory board of an arbitration association where it is likely that the judge's opinions on matters before the board could be construed as the giving of legal advice. Md. Ethics Op. 1995-06. A judge's introduction of keynote speaker at event that is primarily commemorative but which also is used to raise funds would create appearance of impropriety. Neb. Ad. Op. 07-01. No appearance of impropriety for judge who serves on board of directors of charitable organization to allow his name to appear on the organization's stationery provided judge's position is not identified and his name not selectively emphasized. U.S. Conf. Ad. Op. No. 35. No appearance of impropriety for judge to participate in a seminar in another country designed to improve relations with that country where judge's expenses are paid by organization unlikely to come before Utah courts. Utah Ad. Op. 88-10. No appearance of impropriety for judge to teach a course involving only one component of the bar. Utah Ad. Op. 99-6.