Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 13-309 Re Brenda Tracy SHEEHAN , 139 So. 3d 290 ( 2014 )

Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC14-136
____________
INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE, NO. 13-309
RE: BRENDA TRACY SHEEHAN.
[May 15, 2014]
PER CURIAM.
In this case, we review the Findings and Recommendation of Discipline of
the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) that recommends Judge
Brenda Tracy Sheehan of the Circuit Court for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit
receive the sanction of a public reprimand. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 12,
Fla. Const. For the reasons that follow, we approve the JQC’s findings and
recommendation of discipline.
I.
The JQC filed charges against Judge Sheehan, alleging that on the night of
July 5, 2013, Judge Sheehan was observed driving erratically. Upon being stopped
by law enforcement, Judge Sheehan was given field sobriety tests and was
transported to the Hillsborough County Jail. Two Breathalyzer tests administered
at the Hillsborough County Jail showed that Judge Sheehan had a breath-alcohol
level of .171 and .161. Both scores were more than double Florida’s legal limit for
breath-alcohol level of .08. See § 316.193(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2011). On August 23,
2013, Judge Sheehan pleaded guilty to the charge of driving under the influence.
The JQC alleged that Judge Sheehan’s conduct violated Canon 1 and Canon
2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Canon 1 states: “A judge should participate in
establishing, maintaining, and enforcing high standards of conduct, and shall
personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the
judiciary may be preserved.” Canon 2A states: “A judge shall respect and comply
with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence
in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.”
In January 2014, the JQC and Judge Sheehan entered into a stipulation and
filed it with this Court. The stipulation outlined the same facts alleged in the
JQC’s charges. The stipulation also noted that Judge Sheehan had never before
been charged with driving under the influence and that the driving under the
influence charge at issue in this case did not result in any personal injury or
property damage. In the stipulation, Judge Sheehan accepted full responsibility for
her wrongdoing. The stipulation also indicated that Judge Sheehan has taken steps
to ensure that there will be no recurrence of such misconduct.
-2-
The stipulation incorporated the JQC’s Findings and Recommendation of
Discipline. In its Findings and Recommendation, the JQC concluded that Judge
Sheehan violated Canons 1 and 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The JQC
recommended a public reprimand based on this Court’s acceptance of public
reprimands for similar misconduct in In re Nelson, 95 So. 3d 122 (Fla. 2012), In re
Esquiroz, 654 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 1995), and In re Gloeckner, 626 So. 2d 188 (Fla.
1993).
II.
Article V, section 12 of the Florida Constitution provides that in cases of
judicial misconduct, this Court “may accept, reject, or modify in whole or in part
the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the [JQC] and it may order that
the . . . judge be subjected to appropriate discipline.” Art. V, § 12(c)(1), Fla.
Const. “Although this Court gives the findings and recommendations of the JQC
great weight, the ultimate power and responsibility in making a determination to
discipline a judge rests with this Court.” In re Renke, 933 So. 2d 482, 493 (Fla.
2006) (citing In re Angel, 867 So. 2d 379, 382 (Fla. 2004)). In this case, the JQC
recommended that Judge Sheehan be publicly reprimanded. Because the JQC’s
recommended discipline is consistent with this Court’s precedent, we approve the
recommendation.
-3-
In Nelson, the JQC determined that Judge Nelson violated Canons 1 and 2A
of the Code of Judicial Conduct by driving under the influence. 95 So. 3d at 122-
23. After the JQC and Judge Nelson entered into a stipulation, which noted that
Judge Nelson’s driving under the influence arrest was an isolated incident and
Judge Nelson had accepted full responsibility for her actions, this Court accepted
the JQC’s recommendation of a public reprimand for Judge Nelson. Id. at 123,
126. Similarly, in Esquiroz, the Court accepted the JQC’s recommendation of a
public reprimand after the JQC and Judge Esquiroz entered into a stipulation
concerning Judge Esquiroz’s plea of nolo contendere to the charge of driving under
the influence. 654 So. 2d at 558-59. The stipulation noted that Judge Esquiroz’s
arrest for driving under the influence was an isolated incident and Judge Esquiroz
apologized for her actions. Id. at 558.
Judge Sheehan’s conduct at issue in this case—driving under the influence
of alcohol—is reprehensible. Judge Sheehan’s action of driving under the
influence not only violated Florida’s criminal law but also endangered the public.
Such disregard of criminal law and public safety undermines the public’s
confidence in the integrity of the judiciary and will not be tolerated.
III.
In summary, we accept the JQC’s recommendation of a public reprimand.
We order Judge Sheehan to appear before this Court for the administration of a
-4-
public reprimand at a time to be set by the Clerk of this Court. See In re Frank,
753 So. 2d 1228, 1242 (Fla. 2000).
It is so ordered.
POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA,
and PERRY, JJ., concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND
IF FILED, DETERMINED.
Original Proceeding – Judicial Qualifications Commission
Ricardo Morales, III, Chair, and Michael Louis Schneider, General Counsel,
Tallahassee, Florida,
for Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, Petitioner
Scott K. Tozian of Smith, Tozian & Daniel and Davis, Tampa, Florida
for Judge Brenda Tracy Sheehan, Respondent
-5-