BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2116
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 2116 (Evans)
As Amended June 29, 2010
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |74-0 |(May 6, 2010) |SENATE: |33-0 |(August 5, |
| | | | | |2010) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: JUD.
SUMMARY : Seeks to extend the gift limitations that are
applicable to judges of the superior courts, as well as to
justices of the courts of appeal and the Supreme Court, to
subordinate judicial officers (SJOs). Specifically, this bill
simply expands the definition of "judge" in the pertinent
section of the Code of Civil Procedure regulating gifts and
honoraria to judges to include "subordinate judicial officers"
(SJOs) so that such gift and honoraria limits apply to SJOs as
well as all other judicial officers.
The Senate amendments clarify that the court employing the
subordinate judicial officer shall exercise initial jurisdiction
and the Commission on Judicial Performance shall exercise
discretionary jurisdiction to enforce those prohibitions.
EXISTING LAW generally treats judges in the same manner as other
elected state officials with respect to gift limits and
prohibitions on acceptance of honoraria. The following
distinctions apply to judges:
1)No judge shall accept gifts from any single source in any
calendar year with a total value of more than $250, excluding
wedding gifts, and gifts exchanged between individuals on
birthdays and holidays.
2)No judge shall accept an "honorarium" but the term honorarium
does not include earned income for personal services which are
customarily provided in connection with the practice of a bona
fide business, trade, or profession, such as teaching or
writing for a legal publisher, and does not include fees or
other things of value received for performance of a marriage.
3)The Commission on Judicial Performance, rather than the Fair
AB 2116
Page 2
Political Practices Commission (FPPC), has oversight and the
authority to enforce the prohibitions on gifts and honorarium,
and the Code of Judicial Ethics. The State Bar also has
authority to disbar judges removed from the bench.
4)The Canons in the Code of Judicial Conduct have had an
indirect effect. While not having the force of law or
regulation, they reflect a judicial consensus regarding
appropriate behavior; failure of judges to comply with these
Canons suggests performance below the standard necessary to
maintain public confidence.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar
to the version approved by the Senate.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS : This non-controversial bill seeks to extend the gift
limitations that currently affect judges of the superior courts,
as well as justices of the courts of appeal and the Supreme
Court, to subordinate judicial officers (SJOs). Historically,
SJO positions were created and funded at the county level to
address courts' needs for judicial-like resources when new
judgeships were pending or not yet authorized by the
Legislature. SJOs currently perform some of the most complex
and sensitive judicial duties that all judges conduct.
According to the author, the goal of the measure is to help
eliminate actual bias, and the appearance of bias, in all state
courtrooms by extending the gift limitations to all those with
adjudicative power within the California courts including SJOs,
in an effort to promote justice and the integrity of the
judicial system.
The Canons in the Code of Judicial Ethics, issued by the
California Supreme Court, provides mandatory rules and guidance
on appropriate behavior by judicial officers. In addition, the
Code of Civil Procedure imposes specific statutory limits on the
amount of gifts that a judge of the superior court or a justice
of the courts of appeal or Supreme Court may receive. The law
provides limited exemptions - for certain travel and lodging,
wedding gifts, gifts of similar value, gifts exchanged on
special occasion, and gifts from persons with whom the judge is
prohibited under the Code of Judicial Ethics from hearing a
case. These judicial officers are also prohibited from
AB 2116
Page 3
accepting any honorarium.
The Commission on Judicial Performance is charged with enforcing
the provisions of this law.
The purpose of this law is to eliminate both actual and the
appearance of bias when a person appears before the court. This
law also assists a judge in determining what gifts the judge may
or should be able to receive; and, provides clear guidance on
what he or she may not receive or accept. Recognizing the need
to prevent actual bias and the appearance of improper influence
or bias in the courts when it comes to subordinate judicial
officers, this measure extends the scope of existing judicial
gift limits to SJOs, including court commissioners, probate
commissioners, referees, traffic referees, and juvenile
referees.
Analysis Prepared by : Drew Liebert / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
FN: 0005371