Post by KC on Jun 16, 2006 22:27:06 GMT -5
The 5-2 ruling marked a rare and possibly unprecedented case where the court decided that a judge who had no prior disciplinary record, and had committed misconduct that did not involve personal profit, venality, a breach of trust or moral turpitude, is unfit for the bench.
Tuesday's ruling in Matter of Blackburne, 70, made clear that judicial misconduct cases require case-by-case analysis, and that the court retains the discretion to fashion an appropriate sanction to unique cases, no matter what it has decided in other matters.
Here, Blackburne claimed that the court had never removed a judge for a single, seemingly aberrational act of misconduct where there was no personal gain or evidence of venality. But the majority, in a per curiam opinion, essentially responded that it did not matter.
"[W]e have never implied that removal is limited to those categories of cases that have formerly come before us," the court said. "Judicial misconduct cases are, by their very nature, sui generis. That until now no judge has thought to prevent the lawful arrest of a suspected felon cannot shield petitioner from the necessary consequences of her actions."
A two-judge dissent led by Judge George Bundy Smith and joined by Judge Robert S. Smith argued that Blackburne -- who was ridiculed by the New York City tabloids and condemned by public figures such as Governor George E. Pataki and Mayor Michael Bloomberg -- is being treated much more harshly than other jurists.
They referred to the "glaring" disparity in sanctions and expressed concern that the court was breaking with its precedents and determinations of the Commission on Judicial Conduct by removing a judge for a single incident of poor judgment.
"No good reason exists to remove from the bench an outstanding jurist who has made one error in judgment," Bundy Smith wrote. "While it is true that judges should set high standards, it is also true that judges are human and may err. An error in judgment by this judge, approximately two years from retirement, should not lead to dismissal."
The dissent referred to the lengthy list of amici supporting Blackburne. On that list are appellate justices, political leaders and several organizations, including the Association of Justices of the Supreme Court, the Association of Black Women Attorneys and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The NAACP had claimed that Blackburne was the target of right-wing extremists and that her removal would perpetuate the perception that blacks are held to a different standard than whites.
Blackburne's removal is rooted in an incident two years ago, when she was presiding over the Queens Treatment Court where defendant Derek Sterling appeared. Sterling was undergoing court-ordered treatment at a residential drug treatment program.
That June morning, New York City Detective Leonard Devlin appeared at Blackburne's court and advised the court officer that he wanted to question Sterling in connection with a robbery. Devlin waited outside the courtroom and made no attempt to accost the suspect in the courtroom. He waited for the proceeding before Blackburne to conclude.
Meanwhile, the court officer, Sergeant Richard Peterson, informed the judge that Devlin was present and wanted to question Sterling. Blackburne later realized that the detective sought not only to question Sterling, but to arrest him.
Outraged at what she viewed as a "ruse," Blackburne directed Peterson to show Sterling out a secure rear exit to evade the police officer.
Peterson, worried that he would get in trouble if he disregarded Blackburne's directive and fearing that he would be guilty of obstructing justice if he did what she told him, consulted with an assistant district attorney. The prosecutor, Sharon Scott Brooking, agreed it would be inappropriate to help the suspect evade arrest, and so advised both Peterson and Blackburne.
But Blackburne insisted and said that if Peterson did not take Sterling out the back stairwell, she would do so herself.
The court officer, concerned at that point for the judge's safety, reluctantly showed Sterling out.
Sterling was arrested the next day at his drug treatment program and charged with assault and robbery, charges that were ultimately dismissed.
The New York City tabloids had a field day with the incident, denouncing Blackburne as "Let -'Em-Go-Laura" and "Loony Laura" and describing her as a "judicial jerk."
She also was harshly criticized by local and state political leaders.
The Police Benevolent Association, the Detectives Endowment Association and Mayor Bloomberg, through Deputy Mayor for Legal Affairs Carol Robles-Roman, complained to the Commission on Judicial Conduct, which initiated an investigation.
GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT
Following that investigation and a hearing before a referee, former Appellate Division Justice Ernst H. Rosenberger, Blackburne was found guilty of misconduct. The commission then voted 8-2 for removal, with the dissenters contending that censure is a more appropriate penalty for a first-time offense.
On appeal, the sole issue was whether the misconduct in this case was so serious as to warrant the harshest available penalty. For the majority, it seemingly was not a close call.
The majority described Blackburne's conduct as "rash and reckless," and said the judge showed no concern and no respect for the public safety, or, for that matter, for the potential legal predicament in which she was placing Peterson. It said the fact that Sterling returned peacefully to the drug program and apparently did not commit the robbery/assault is of no relevance.
"Things might easily have turned out otherwise," the majority said. "In impeding the legitimate operation of law enforcement by helping a wanted robbery suspect avoid arrest, petitioner placed herself above the law she was sworn to administer, thereby bringing the judiciary into disrepute and undermining public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of her court.
etitioner's dangerous actions exceeded all measure of acceptable judicial conduct."
The majority said Blackburne "abandoned her role as a neutral arbiter, and instead became an adversary of the police," a position "completely incompatible with the proper role of an impartial judge."
Judges Bundy Smith and Robert Smith, in dissent, referred to a dozen commission cases in suggesting that Blackburne is being treated more harshly than other jurists who committed equally offensive and even more egregious misconduct, and as harshly as judges whose misconduct was considerably more serious than hers.
"Over the years, this Court and the Commission have removed a number of persons from the bench," the dissenters said. "Not until this case, however, has a judge been removed for one act of bad judgment."
Robert H. Tembeckjian, commission administrator and counsel, said Tuesday that while it is always an "unpleasant and difficult duty to remove a judge from office," he is gratified that the Court of Appeals agreed that removal is the proper sanction here.
'UNFAIR' RULING
Blackburne's attorney, David Godosky of Godosky & Gentile in Manhattan, said the ruling was "unfair and unduly harsh."
"The Court has chosen to ignore its precedents and impose the ultimate sanction on this jurist," Godosky said. "I do think it is unfair to Judge Blackburne because of what was demonstrated to be a rather exemplary 10-year, unblemished career. She did make an error, which she admitted to almost immediately, and has expressed her remorse. To impose this sanction given those factors, given her history, given her career and the character testimony at her hearing is an unfair and unduly harsh result."
In a statement Tuesday, police union president Patrick J. Lynch described Blackburne as a "notorious cop-hater" whose removal by the court amounts to a public service.
"The Patrolmen's Benevolent Association and its 50,000 active and retired members salute the ... Court of Appeals for this courageous decision," Lynch said. "As a judge, Laura Blackburne was a blemish on the outstanding record of service provided to this city by all those who serve on the bench with honor and dignity."
Michael Marr, a spokesman for the governor, said the administration "is pleased that the Court of Appeals has recognized that a judge who assists a suspected felon in avoiding a lawful arrest exceeds all bounds of acceptable judicial conduct and must be removed from office."
Tuesday's ruling has no impact on Blackburne's pension, except to the extent that she will have fewer years of service. She was within two years of retirement. She had been suspended with pay pending the court's consideration of her case.