BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2729
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2729 (Leno)
As Amended May 11, 2004
Majority vote
JUDICIARY 9-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Corbett, Harman, Laird, | | |
| |Lieber, Longville, | | |
| |Montanez, Maddox, | | |
| |Steinberg, Levine | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Seeks to allow judges facing investigations by the
Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) the same ability to
issue subpoenas and depose witnesses as CJP itself currently
has. Specifically, this bill :
1)Amends provisions in the Government Code to authorize CJP to
"take testimony" in the conduct of investigations and formal
proceedings involving potential judicial misconduct.
2)Permits deposition orders issued by CJP upon a showing by the
judicial officer being investigated by CJP that the proposed
deponent is a material witness, and there is standard "good
cause" for the taking of the requested deposition.
3)States the intent of the Legislature to encourage CJP to adopt
rules pursuant to this bill's provisions.
4)Contains a severability clause.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Vests, constitutionally, CJP with the authority to make rules
regarding CJP procedures including, but not limited to, rules
and procedures for the investigation of judges, for handling
the confidentiality of complaints to, and investigations by,
CJP. Vests CJP with the duty to make rules regarding formal
proceedings against judges when there is cause to believe
either the judge has a serious disability that interferes with
the performance of the judge's duties or the judge has engaged
in wrongdoing.
AB 2729
Page 2
2)Permits CJP to publicly or privately admonish a judge or
former judge found to have engaged in an improper action or
dereliction of duty (California Constitution Article 6,
section 18(d)) and provides that when CJP institutes formal
proceedings, the notice of charges, the answer, and all
subsequent papers and proceedings shall be open to the public.
3)Gives, effectively, CJP the ability to obtain sworn discovery
of witnesses in investigating alleged judicial misconduct
while denying judges this right.
4)Provides, in CJP's "Rule 122" regarding discovery procedures,
that, amongst other things, "discovery may be obtained only
after a written notice of formal proceedings is issued" and
that discovery requests may be made in writing at any time
only after the filing of the notice of formal proceedings.
Depositions may be taken only after initiation of formal
charges against the judge, and "the commission or the masters
shall order the taking of the deposition of any person upon a
showing by the side requesting the deposition that the
proposed deponent is a material witness who is unable or
cannot be compelled to attend the hearing. If a deposition is
ordered, the procedures stated in Government Code section
68753 shall be followed. The side requesting the deposition
shall bear all costs of the deposition."
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : This bill raises important legal and policy issues
about the powers of CJP and about how much "process should be
due" judges facing investigations by CJP for possible
misconduct. In support of this bill, the author writes that the
purpose of this bill is to assure that judges facing
investigations by CJP are accorded sufficient due process, by
providing judges the same ability to issue subpoenas and depose
witnesses as has CJP itself.
Analysis Prepared by : Drew Liebert / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
FN: 0005290