N.M. Code. Jud. Cond. 21-103
A judge shall not abuse the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests of the judge or others, or allow others to do so.
N.M. Code. Jud. Cond. 21-103
Committee commentary. -
[1] It is improper for a judge to use or attempt to use his or her position to gain personal advantage or deferential treatment of any kind. For example, it would be improper for a judge to allude to his or her judicial status to gain favorable treatment in encounters with traffic officials. A judge must not use judicial letterhead in conducting his or her personal business.
[2] A judge may provide a reference or recommendation for an individual based on the judge's personal knowledge. The judge may use official letterhead if the judge indicates that the reference is personal and if there is no likelihood that the use of the letterhead would reasonably be perceived as an attempt to exert pressure by reason of the judicial office.
[3] Judges may participate in the process of judicial selection by cooperating with appointing authorities and screening committees and by responding to inquiries from such entities concerning the professional qualifications of a person being considered for judicial office. A judge may write letters of recommendation for any candidate for judicial appointment.
[4] Special considerations arise when judges write or contribute to publications of for-profit entities, whether related or unrelated to the law. A judge should not permit anyone associated with the publication of such materials to exploit the judge's office in a manner that violates this rule or other applicable law. In contracts for the publication of a judge's writing, the judge should retain sufficient control over the advertising to avoid such exploitation. A judge who publishes may include the judge's title and include a biographical statement in the publication.
[Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 11-8300-045, effective January 1, 2012.]
ANNOTATIONS Recompilations. - Pursuant to Supreme Court Order No. 11-8300-045, the former Judicial Code of Conduct was recompiled, effective January 1, 2012. See the table of corresponding rules for former rule numbers and the corresponding new rule numbers. JUDICIAL REPRIMANDS Fund-raising activities. - Where a magistrate judge personally participated in the solicitation of funds for a baseball tournament for the benefit of municipal and high school baseball programs and used the prestige of the judge's judicial office for the fund-raising and created the appearance that the judge had done so, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Wingenroth, S.Ct. No. 33,228 (Filed October 19, 2011), Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 2011-020 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Unlawfully accepting per diem expenses. - Where the judge wanted to attend training in another municipality; the judge certified and submitted a travel voucher claiming reimbursement for per diem expenses; the training was cancelled; the judge arranged to pick up the training material in the other municipality, drove to the other municipality and then drove to another municipality out-of-state; and the judge told the treasurer of the municipality that the training had been cancelled because of bad weather, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Lozano, S.Ct. No. 29,264 (Filed June 8, 2010) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Abuse of the prestige of judicial office. - Where a municipal judge had private conversations with a contractor about the contractor's personal financial dispute with landowners who allegedly owed the contractor money for cleaning up the landowners' property; the judge called the landowners and left a message on the landowners' answering machine in which the judge identified himself as a judge and stated that the judge was calling about the financial dispute between them and the contractor and that the judge wanted the matter cleared up; the judge subsequently wrote the landowners a letter on municipal stationery, using the judge's title and court name discussing the contractor's claim and indicating that a lawsuit would be filed if the contractor was not paid; two weeks later, the judge was assigned to preside over a nuisance action by the municipality concerning the land that the contractor had supposedly cleaned; and the judge accepted the case and issued a summons to the landowners that did not conform with the rules of procedure, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Ramirez, S.Ct. No. 31,664 (Filed June 26, 2009) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Attempt to influence a judge for the benefit of a relative. - Where, after the stepchild of a magistrate judge was jailed by the district court for nonpayment of child support, the magistrate judge telephoned the district court judge, told the district court judge that the step-child was not a flight risk, and asked the district court judge to reduce the step-child's bond or let the step-child out of jail, the magistrate judge's telephone call to the district court judge was an attempt to gain favorable treatment for the step-child and constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Naranjo, 2013-NMSC-026. Endorsement of political candidate. - Where a magistrate court judge authorized the use of the judge's name for an endorsement of a candidate for reelection as mayor of a municipality, and the endorsement, which was published in a local newspaper, did not explicitly identify the judge as a magistrate court judge, the judge violated the Code of Judicial Conduct. In re Vincent, 2007-NMSC-056, 143 N.M. 56, 172 P.3d 605 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Interference in friend's criminal case. - Where a judge developed a personal relationship with the defendant in a DUI case; the judge told the presiding judge at the defendant's bond hearing to make special concessions with regard to the defendant's bond, talked to the presiding judge at the defendant's probation violation hearing to influence the disposition of the case, instructed the court clerks to issue a clearance of the defendant's driver's license, and attempted to influence a police officer when the defendant was stopped for speeding, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Garza, 2007-NMSC-028, 141 N.M. 831, 161 P.3d 876 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Interference in child's criminal case. - Where the adult child and friends of the child of a district court judge were cited for drinking in public in violation of a municipal ordinance; as the police officers were issuing the citations, the judge identified the judge to one of the officers as the child's parent by showing the officer the judge's court identification card and driver's license; the judge asked the officer if the officer remembered who the judge was; the judge collected all of the citations from the recipients and later instructed the judge's bailiff to assist the child and the child's friends in responding to the citations in municipal court; the bailiff prepared and filed written waivers of arraignment and not guilty pleas on municipal court forms; when pretrial conferences were scheduled, the judge contacted a municipal judge who was not the assigned judge to advise the municipal judge the judge was sending the judge's child and some of the friends to the municipal judge to change their pleas before the pretrial conference set by the assigned judge was scheduled to occur; and the judge's child and some of the friends appeared before the municipal judge and pled no contest and received more lenient sentences than the child's friends who appeared before the assigned municipal judge, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Ramirez, 2006-NMSC-021, 139 N.M. 529, 135 P.3d 230 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Use of judicial position to advance private interest in pending case. - A metropolitan court judge who initiated ex parte communications with a special commissioner and a district court judge to influence a child placement in a case involving a family member within the third degree of relationship committed willful misconduct in office. In re Gentry, S.Ct. No. 28,986 (Filed June 29, 2005) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Involvement in a pending criminal case involving the judge's child. - Where the judge's child was cited for speeding and no proof of insurance and the judge contacted the sheriff to complain that the child had been mistreated and held for an excessive time by the deputy sheriff at the traffic stop; accessed the court's file on the child's case by a private request to the clerk's office to obtain the file from the presiding judge; called the presiding judge to reschedule the child's hearing due to car trouble; provided the presiding judge with a memorandum that the district attorney's office would not appear in the case; and attended hearings with the child where members of the public were present, the judge committed willful misconduct in office. In re Chaparro, S.Ct. No. 27,923 (Filed June 22, 2005) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Abusing prestige of judicial office. - Where a judge directly or indirectly solicited, commanded, requested, induced, employed, or otherwise attempted to promote, facilitate, or obtain favored treatment or avoidance of due process of the law from law enforcement officers for the judge's friend, the judge committed willful misconduct in office. In re Maestas, S.Ct. No. 27,348 (Filed 5, March 2002) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Where a judge had de facto control over a non-profit organization that regularly engaged in proceedings before the judge; the judge personally selected the majority of the board of directors and caused the hiring and firing of directors; the judge's spouse served as executive director of the organization; and the judge allowed the judge's spouse to use the judge's chambers and telephone to solicit funds for the organization and the judge's name, title, official stationery, and photograph to be used in solicitation of funds, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Castellano, 1995-NMSC-007, 119 N.M. 140, 889 P.2d 175 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Countermanding presiding judge's orders. - Where, in a case that was assigned to the presiding judge, the presiding judge ordered that a commitment be issued to transport the defendants to the penitentiary upon receipt of the appellant court mandate; while the presiding judge was hearing cases in another district, the judge who was not assigned to the case and who was a friend of the parent of one of the defendants stopped the sheriff from transporting the defendants; without a motion by the counsel for the defendants, notice to the district attorney, or a hearing, the judge prepared an order delaying the transportation; when consulted by the sheriff, the presiding judge ordered the sheriff to proceed with the transportation of the defendants; the judge again stopped the sheriff, served the sheriff with a writ of habeas corpus, and ordered the sheriff to return the defendants to jail; and the presiding judge directed the state police to assist the sheriff with transporting the defendants, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Martinez, 1982-NMSC-115, 99 N.M. 198, 656 P.2d 861 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Denying district attorney the right to perform statutory duties. - Where the judge issued an order removing the district attorney as juvenile attorney and appointed private attorneys to act as juvenile attorneys with compensation to be paid from the district attorney's budget, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Martinez, 1982-NMSC-115, 99 N.M. 198, 656 P. 2d 861 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation).