N.M. Code. Jud. Cond. 21-206
N.M. Code. Jud. Cond. 21-206
Committee commentary. -
[1] The right to be heard is an essential component of a fair and impartial system of justice. Substantive rights of litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the right to be heard are observed.
[2] The judge should be careful that efforts to further settlement do not undermine any party's right to be heard according to law. The judge should keep in mind the effect that the judge's participation in settlement discussions may have, not only on the judge's own views of the case, but also on the perceptions of the lawyers and the parties if the case remains with the judge after settlement efforts are unsuccessful.
[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. Establishing record of impropriety. - It is improper for a trial judge to refuse defense counsel an opportunity to establish on the record defense counsel's objections to comments defense counsel claimed the trial judge had made during a recess. State v. Martin, 1984-NMSC-077, 101 N.M. 595, 686 P.2d 937 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). JUDICIAL REPRIMANDS Improper demeanor and abuse of contempt power. - Where a judge referred to the presiding judge in a condescending matter to court staff and the court manager; refused to listen to a litigant, raised the judge's voice, and banged on the bench when the litigant tried to explain why the litigant failed to appear at a pre-trial conference and then held the litigant in direct contempt; and in another case, held a litigant in contempt during a pre-trial conference and then released the contempt order an hour later, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Guillory, S.Ct. No. 31,920 (Filed December 7, 2010) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Ex parte communications. - Where a judge engaged in ex parte communications with litigants, parties, officers and bail bondsmen in which the judge told defendants in cases not pending before the judge that the judge would help them out and to ask for the judge when they came to court, which resulted in the judge converting a juvenile bench warrant to an adult bench warrant and dismissing a case, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Guillory, S.Ct. No. 31,920 (Filed December 7, 2010) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Napping. - Where a judge took naps during the noon hour in view of the public and court staff and on one occasion, the judge fell asleep while defendants were waiting for paperwork from the judge's secretary, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Guillory, S.Ct. No. 31,920 (Filed December 7, 2010) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Involvement in the trial of a case pending before the judge. - Where in a DWI trial, the judge stepped off the bench to assist an officer in presenting the officer's case and in sight and earshot of the jury, told the court manager that the defendant "blew a .3", the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Guillory, S.Ct. No. 31,920 (Filed December 7, 2010) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Alcoholism. - Where a judge recessed a criminal jury trial for a long holiday weekend; the judge did not return to court on the date set for the completion of the trial; the judge told an administrative assistant that the judge was ill, but would be in court in the afternoon; the judge did not return that day and the judge's staff rescheduled the trial for two days later; on the day the trial was to resume, the judge told the assistant that the judge was hospitalized for heart-related tests; after the trial was twice reset due to the judge's unavailability, a stipulated mistrial order was entered; the judge was absent for two weeks during which the judge was hospitalized for six days; the judge's heart ailment and the hospitalization were due to alcohol withdrawal; and to justify the judge's absence, the judge told a reporter that the judge was being treated for and was recovering from a mild heart attack, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Pope, S.Ct. No. 29,778 (Filed June 13, 2007) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Adoption of procedural rules. - Where a judge implemented the judge's own rule that precluded any individual from appearing before the judge unless the individual presented photographic identification; a defendant, who appeared ten minutes before the defendant's trial was refused admittance into the courtroom; the defendant left to obtain a new driver's license; staff advised the judge that the defendant had arrived, but had left to obtain a new driver's license to comply with the photo-identification rule; the defendant returned to the courthouse within one hour, but was told that the judge had left and would return the next day; and when the defendant appeared the next day, the defendant was arrested on a bench warrant issued by the judge, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Pineda, S.Ct. No. 29,479 (Filed July 31, 2007) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Interference in a 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, 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). Directing secretary to handle traffic docket. - Where a judge took a vacation knowing that the judge would not return in time to handle the judge's traffic docket; the judge called the judge's secretary, told the secretary that the judge's return had been delayed, and instructed the secretary to handle the judge's traffic docket; the secretary handled the traffic docket and used the judge's signature stamp to process the docket; and when the other judges, court personnel, and the media learned about what had occurred, the judge reviewed and signed the cases that the judge's secretary had handled in the judge's absence, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Griego, S.Ct. No. 30,203 (Filed June 13, 2007) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Director of a DWI school. - Where, as permitted by a municipal ordinance, a municipal judge was the owner and director of a DWI school and had a pecuniary interest in having individuals initially appear before the judge in court and then attend the DWI school, the judge's conduct violated the Code of Judicial Conduct. In re Rainaldi, 1986-NMSC-079, 104 N.M. 762, 727 P.2d 70 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Intentional denial of right to appeal. - Where a judge ruled in favor of the defendant, refused to enter a judgment in the case to prevent the plaintiff from appealing in order to force the plaintiff to settle with the defendant; when the Supreme Court ordered the judge to enter a judgment, the judge expanded the issues litigated in the case; and after being reversed, the judge refused to award costs to the plaintiff, precipitating another appeal, 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).