State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Opinion 93-18

Question

May a full-time district court commissioner serve as a volunteer in the county's juvenile court conference committee diversion program?

Answer

Service as a volunteer in the county's juvenile court conference committee diversion program does not appear to be a per se violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Nevertheless, there are potential problems if a judicial officer serves on such a committee. The consequences of this participation should be considered in light of the following provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
CJC Canon 5 imposes certain restrictions on extrajudicial activities in order to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial duties. Specifically, Canon 5(E) provides that judicial officers should not act as arbitrators or mediators. Canon 5(G) provides that judicial officers may not accept appointment to positions that are concerned with issues of fact or policy on matters other than the improvement of the law, the legal system or the administration of justice.

The presence of a judicial officer on a citizen panel would tend to interfere with the purpose of the committee; that is, to permit the citizen panel and the juvenile to work toward resolution of the juvenile's problem outside of the judicial system. The judicial officer's presence on the committee may cause confusion as to the role the judicial officer plays on the citizen panel since the other panel members may have difficulty distinguishing between the panel member's position as a judicial officer on the one hand and a panel member on the other.

The Supreme Court adopted a new Code of Judicial Conduct effective January 1, 2011. In addition to reviewing the ethics advisory opinions, the following should be noted:

CJC 3.1
CJC 3.7
CJC 3.4
CJC 3.9

Opinion 93-18

06/21/1993

 

Privacy and Disclaimer NoticesSitemap

© Copyright 2024. Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts.

S3