Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 15-530 Re: Jerri Collins , 195 So. 3d 1129 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •           Supreme Court of Florida
    ____________
    No. SC16-548
    ____________
    INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE, NO. 15-530
    RE: JERRI COLLINS.
    [July 7, 2016]
    PER CURIAM.
    In this case, we review the revised consent judgment entered into by the
    Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) and Seminole County Judge
    Jerri Collins. The revised consent judgment imposed the following sanctions on
    Judge Collins: a public reprimand before this Court, completion of an anger
    management course, and attendance at the domestic violence course offered during
    Phase II of the Florida Judicial College. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 12,
    Fla. Const. For the following reasons, we approve the revised consent judgment.
    BACKGROUND
    On March 30, 2016, the JQC filed in this Court a Notice of Formal Charges
    against Judge Jerri Collins for conduct in violation of Canons 1, 2A, and 3B(4) of
    the Code of Judicial Conduct. Judge Collins violated these canons in the course of
    presiding over the case of State v. Myles Brennan (Seminole County Case No.
    2015MM4751A) when she berated and belittled a victim of domestic violence for
    failing to respond to a subpoena issued by the State Attorney to testify in the trial
    against her abuser, who is the father of her child. As a result of the victim’s failure
    to appear, the State was unable to proceed with the trial. Consequently, the State
    dismissed a charge against the defendant for dangerous exhibition of a weapon and
    the defendant accepted a plea to a reduced charge of simple battery.
    Judge Collins issued an order to show cause why the victim should not be
    held in contempt of court for violating the trial subpoena by failing to appear for
    trial. When the victim appeared before Judge Collins, the judge instituted direct
    criminal contempt proceedings in which the victim was not represented by counsel
    nor advised of her right to present evidence or testimony on her own behalf.
    During the contempt proceedings, Judge Collins was discourteous and impatient
    toward the distraught victim. The victim apologized for failing to appear, citing
    anxiety, depression, and a desire to move on from contact with her abuser as
    reasons why she did not appear for trial. Meanwhile, Judge Collins raised her
    voice, used sarcasm, spoke harshly, and interrupted the victim. Judge Collins
    found the victim in contempt of court and sentenced her to spend three days in jail
    even though the victim pleaded with the court that she needed to take care of her
    one-year-old child.
    -2-
    Furthermore, Judge Collins’ behavior created the appearance of partiality
    toward the State. After pressing the victim about the veracity of her statements to
    police, Judge Collins rebuked her for failing to appear to testify, declaring “You
    disobeyed a court order knowing that this was not going to turn out well for the
    State.” Judge Collins noted that the victim previously indicated to the State
    Attorney that she was not going to show up. The victim further disclosed that at a
    domestic abuse class she asked them to drop the charges because she was trying to
    move on with her life. Moreover, the victim declared that she was “not in a good
    place,” a remark to which Judge Collins responded, “and violating a court order
    did not do anything for you.”
    Following this incident, Judge Collins entered into a Stipulation with the
    JQC admitting her misconduct and stipulating to a public reprimand. Judge
    Collins explained her good faith belief that she was exercising appropriate legal
    authority in holding the victim in direct criminal contempt for failing to appear in
    response to a subpoena.1 However, the judge acknowledged that she should have
    been more patient, used less inflammatory and sarcastic language, and used a less
    aggressive tone during the proceedings. Judge Collins accepted full responsibility
    1. After the incident at issue, this Court released its opinion in State v. Diaz
    de la Portilla, 
    177 So. 3d 965
    (Fla. 2015), clarifying that a failure to appear in court
    should be treated as indirect criminal contempt.
    -3-
    for her conduct and expressed remorse that her intemperate conduct brought
    unnecessary criticism upon her court and the entire judiciary, and could impair the
    public’s perception of the fairness and impartiality of Florida’s justice system.
    However, upon review of the charges and the terms of the Stipulation, this
    Court concluded that the terms of the Stipulation were inadequate to address the
    violation. Consequently, this Court issued an order on April 25, 2016, rejecting the
    terms of the Stipulation and disapproving the proposed sanction. The order
    declared that this Court would require successful completion of an anger
    management course and attendance at the domestic violence course offered during
    Phase II of the Florida Judicial College in addition to the public reprimand. On
    May 5, 2016, Judge Collins and the JQC filed a revised consent judgment agreeing
    to the terms outlined in this Court’s order.
    ANALYSIS
    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.” See, e.g., In re Sheehan, 
    139 So. 3d 290
    ,
    291-92 (Fla. 2014) (quoting art. V, § 12(c)(1), Fla. Const.). “This Court reviews
    the findings of the JQC to determine whether the alleged violations are supported
    by clear and convincing evidence, and reviews the recommended discipline to
    determine whether it should be approved.” In re Flood, 
    150 So. 3d 1097
    , 1098
    -4-
    (Fla. 2014) (quoting In re Woodard, 
    919 So. 2d 389
    , 390 (Fla. 2006)). “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.” 
    Id. (quoting In
    re Renke, 
    933 So. 2d 482
    , 493 (Fla. 2006)).
    The JQC alleged that Judge Collins’ conduct violated Canons 1, 2A, and
    3B(4) of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Canon 1 states: “An independent and
    honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. 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.” Fla. Code of Jud. Conduct, Canon 1. 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.” Fla. Code of Jud. Conduct, Canon 2A. Canon 3B(4) states: “A judge
    shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers,
    and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and shall require
    similar conduct of lawyers, and of staff, court officials, and others subject to the
    judge’s direction and control.” Fla. Code of Jud. Conduct, Canon 3B(4).
    We have held that “where a judge admits to wrongdoing and the JQC’s
    findings are undisputed, this Court will ordinarily conclude that the JQC’s findings
    are supported by clear and convincing evidence.” In re 
    Flood, 150 So. 3d at 1098
    -5-
    (quoting In re Diaz, 
    908 So. 2d 334
    , 337 (Fla. 2005)). In the Stipulation filed with
    this Court, Judge Collins accepted full responsibility for her wrongful conduct.
    She acknowledged and expressed regret that her conduct was not patient,
    courteous, or dignified, and resulted in multiple violations of the Code of Judicial
    Conduct. Moreover, Judge Collins was remorseful that the manner in which she
    carried out her judicial duties placed the judiciary in a negative light. Thus, we
    conclude that the JQC’s findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence.
    However, upon reviewing the findings of the JQC, we determined that a
    public reprimand was insufficient to address Judge Collins’ violations. This Court
    has repeatedly concluded that a public reprimand is the appropriate form of
    discipline for a “judge’s rude or intemperate behavior in open court.” See In re
    Wood, 
    720 So. 2d 506
    , 509 (Fla. 1998). However, Judge Collins’ aggressive tone
    with a victim of domestic violence and the interjection of comments exhibiting
    partiality toward the State warranted additional sanctions. See In re 
    Woodard, 919 So. 2d at 392
    (approving public reprimand and completion of anger management
    counseling for judge’s repeated tardiness, rudeness, and impatience in dealing with
    attorneys, litigants, and witnesses appearing before him).
    The revised consent judgment subsequently entered into by the JQC and
    Judge Collins includes terms more appropriate to address the acts of misconduct in
    this case. Thus, we approve the terms of the revised consent judgment requiring
    -6-
    Judge Collins’ appearance before this Court for a public reprimand, completion of
    an anger management course, and attendance at the domestic violence course
    offered during Phase II of the Florida Judicial College. We recognize that Judge
    Collins completed an anger management course on April 29, 2016, satisfying the
    sanction imposed by the revised consent judgment.
    CONCLUSION
    We accept the revised consent judgment entered into by Judge Jerri Collins
    and the JQC. Accordingly, we hereby command Judge Jerri Collins to appear
    before this Court for the administration of a public reprimand at a time to be
    established by the Clerk of this Court. We recognize Judge Collins’ completion of
    the anger management course. Furthermore, we approve the condition that Judge
    Collins attend the domestic violence course offered during Phase II of the Florida
    Judicial College.
    It is so ordered.
    LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, and
    POLSTON, JJ., concur.
    PERRY, J., recused.
    NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND
    IF FILED, DETERMINED.
    Original Proceeding – Judicial Qualifications Commission
    Judge Kerry I. Evander, Chair, Judge James A. Ruth, Vice-Chair, Michael Louis
    Schneider, Executive Director and General Counsel, and Alexander John Williams,
    Assistant General Counsel, Tallahassee, Florida,
    -7-
    for Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, Petitioner
    Warren William Lindsey of Lindsey & Ferry, P.A., Winter Park, Florida,
    for Judge Jerri Collins, Respondent
    -8-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: SC16-548

Citation Numbers: 195 So. 3d 1129

Filed Date: 7/7/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023