Opinion
No. 96-O-1866
February 3, 1997
Steven R. Scheckman, Esq. Timothy J. Palmatier, Esq. Hon. Graydon K. Kitchens, Jr. Esq. Counsel for Applicant.
Camille F. Gravel, Jr., Esq. Gregory B. Upton, Esq., Charles D. Elliott, Esq., Hon. Michael J. Johnson Keith W. Manuel, Esq., Counsel for Respondent.
Louis Berry, Esq. Counsel for Louis Berry (Amicus Curiae).
Bridgett B. DeJean, Esq. Counsel for Bridgett Brown, Esq. (Amicus Curiae).
Charles E. Johnson, Esq. Counsel for Charles E. Johnson (Amicus Curiae).
This matter arises from a joint motion for reconsideration and clarification raising the issue of whether this court's judgment of November 25, 1996 removing Judge Michael Johnson from office prevents him from assuming a new term of office commencing January 1, 1997. For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that it does.
Respondent initially assumed the office of Judge of the Twelfth Judicial District Court on January 1, 1991. A formal charge of misconduct was filed against him by the Judiciary Commission on December 12, 1995. On July 19, 1996, the commission rendered its findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommendations, in which it recommended respondent be removed from office. While the case was pending before this court, respondent was reelected in September, 1996 for a second term commencing January 1, 1997. On November 25, 1996, this court rendered judgment removing Judge Johnson from office. In Re: Judge Michael Johnson, 96-1866 (La. 11/25/96), ___ So.2d ___. Our decree stated:
Accordingly, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that respondent, Judge Michael Johnson, of the Twelfth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Avoyelles, State of Louisiana, be, and is hereby, removed from office; and that his office be, and is hereby, declared vacant. Respondent is cast with all stipulated costs and any other costs incurred in the investigation and prosecution of his case pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XXIII, § 22.
REMOVAL FROM JUDICIAL OFFICE ORDERED.
That judgment became final on December 13, 1996, when this court denied rehearing.
Respondent now contends that the effect of this court's judgment of November 25, 1996 was simply to remove him from his first term of office, but did not prevent him from assuming a second term of office. We find this argument to be without merit.
In our November 25, 1996 opinion, we concluded that respondent's conduct warranted "the most severe discipline," since respondent repeatedly abused his position as judge for personal gain. Clearly, such language would be at odds with respondent's interpretation that he should be removed from office for the approximate one month period remaining on his first term. Likewise, in our decree, we stated that respondent was removed from office and that his office "be, and is hereby, declaredvacant." We did not limit this language in any way. Therefore, the effect of our holding is that respondent was removed from office both from the term he was serving and any subsequent term to which he was elected. DECREE
Further supporting our reasoning is the fact that on December 12, 1996, this court signed an order appointing Retired Judge Guy Humphries, Jr. as judge pro tempore of the Twelfth Judicial District Court for the dates of December 13, 1997 through June 12, 1997, or until further orders of the court.
Judge Johnson's eligibility to be a candidate for future judicial election will be governed by court rule adopted this day.
For the reasons assigned, our judgment of November 25, 1996 removes respondent from office for the term he was serving at the time the judgment was rendered and any subsequent term to which he was elected while the case was pending in this court. The office of Judge of the Twelfth Judicial District Court is hereby declared vacant pursuant to La. Const. Art. V, § 22(B).
ORDER
Acting under the authority of Article V, Sections 1, 5, and 25(C) of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974, and the inherent power of this Court, and considering the necessity of promulgating a rule to govern the certification of eligibility to seek judicial office of judges who have been removed from office,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
Part D, Rule XXIII, Section 26 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Louisiana is hereby enacted, to read as follows:
Section 26. Any former judge who has been removed from office by the Supreme Court pursuant to La. Const. Art. V, § 25(C) is not eligible to become a candidate for judicial office until certified by this court. After five years from the date of removal, a former judge may file a petition for reinstatement of eligibility to seek judicial office with the judiciary commission. The commission shall promptly review the petition and may hold a hearing and take evidence if necessary. Within thirty days of the filing of the petition, the commission shall file a written recommendation with this court as to whether the former judge's eligibility to seek judicial office should be reinstated. The court shall review the recommendation of the commission and issue an order granting or denying the former judge certification of eligibility to seek judicial office.
This Rule shall become effective upon signing, and shall remain in full force and effect thereafter until amended or changed under the authority of future orders of this Court.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 3rd (day February, 1997.)
CALOGERO, CJ.J, AND KIMBALL, J., — concur in the result reached by the majority and in the adoption of proposed Supreme Court Rule XXIII § 26.
CALOGERO, C.J., AND KIMBALL, J., — concur in the result reached by the majority and in the adoption of proposed Supreme Court Rule XXIII § 26.