State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Question

May a judicial officer permit a court employee to engage in outside employment as a dispatcher/jailer at the county jail?

A court clerk, in addition to those duties, is occasionally engaged in outside employment as a dispatcher/jailer at the county jail, which holds prisoners who will be appearing or have been sentenced by the court where the clerk is employed. This would involve occasional part-time work during the clerk’s weekends off from court assignments.

The dispatcher/jailer does not, except very rarely testify in the court in which he/she works. In the past ten years on only one or two occasions would there be a violation of the criminal code processed in the court that involved the appearance of a dispatcher/jailer as a prosecution witness. In the rare event that the dispatcher/jailer/court employee would have to testify, the court would request a pro tem judge to hear the case.

Answer

CJC Canon 1 provides in part that judges should participate in maintaining high standards of conduct so that the integrity of the judiciary will be preserved. Canon 2(B) provides in part that judges should not permit others to convey the impression they are in a position to influence the judge. Canon 3(B)(2) provides that judges should require their staff and court officials subject to their direction and control to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to them.

A court employee may be permitted to engage in outside employment as a dispatcher/jailer at the county jail. Because this employment would not require the court employee to testify as a witness in the court in which he/she works, except on rare occasions, it does not create the appearance of partiality or impropriety or the impression the dispatcher/jailer/court employee is in a special position to influence the judicial officer and is therefore distinguishable from Opinion 00-4. On the rare occasions when the court employee is required to testify in his or her role as dispatcher or jailer, the judicial officer should recuse and appoint another judicial officer to preside over the proceeding.

The judicial officer should continue to monitor the effect the court employee’s outside employment has on the operation of the court. If it causes the judicial officer to have to recuse from hearing cases on more than rare occasions or in other ways affects the efficiency of the court, the judicial officer should take appropriate action which may include advising the employee he or she should terminate the outside employment at the county jail.

Opinion 02-04

2/25/2002