South Florida Corruption

Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are

Hover Over Items In Main Menu To View Sub-Menus

Like us on Facebook
Our YouTube Channel
Follow us on Twitter

NOTICE! To better comply with EU standards, and to protect the privacy of our visitors: As of May 01, 2019, South Florida Corruption no longer keeps or stores the ip addresses of commenters or visitors to our site. All ip addresses before that date have been deleted and new comment ips will no longer be kept for more than 12 hours to combat hackers and spam. Ip’s are automatically deleted after 12 hours . See plugin remove-comment-ips, By Geeky Software. We re-wrote the code to make the 60 days hold on ips to 12 hours.

Go Back Hand
What is the JQC

      What is the JQC



The Following has been reformatted and has been modified.

Copyright (c) 2016 South Florida Corruption. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.

"GNU Free Documentation License".

Original Source



Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission


The Florida Judicial Qualifications  Commission  (JQC) is a judicial disciplinary  agency in Florida, created by a 1968 amendment  to the Florida Constitution  for the purpose of investigating  allegations  of judicial misconduct  by the state's judges.[1]  It is not a part of the Florida Supreme  Court or the state court system.

The commission may investigate a judge for misconduct if a complaint is filed at any time while the judge is in office and for one year afterward. The commission has no authority over federal judges, judges in other states, magistrates, lawyers, law enforcement personnel, court employees or state attorneys. A majority of the misconduct complaints received by the commission ask for a review or reversal of a judge's rulings or decisions. [1] However, the commission also has no authority to reverse, review or change any decision or ruling made by a judge or court. [2][3]


The commission is not authorized to take action against a judge. If the commission finds a judge has committed misconduct, a recommendation is made to the Florida Supreme Court. However, it is the court's responsibility to decide if the commission’s recommendation is legally correct. Before the court makes a final decision, the parties have the right to file briefs and request oral argument before the court. Judges accused of misconduct may waive their right to do so. The Florida House of Representatives is also authorized to impeach judges. After impeachments, misconduct trials take place before the Florida Senate. While awaiting trial by the senate, a judge who was impeached by the house is required to be suspended from the bench. If found guilty, a judge may be removed from office. [2]


The commission can also recommend judges be required to retire involuntarily if serious illness prevents them from performing their duties. This is not considered misconduct, and this finding requires a confirming vote from two-thirds of the hearing panel. Involuntary retirement filings remain confidential, in accordance with state laws protecting the medical records of state employees. [2]




Pursuant to the Florida Constitution, Article V, section 12, the commission is made up of 15 members: Two district court of appeals judges chosen by all the judges of the five district courts

Two circuit court judges chosen by all the judges of the 20 judicial circuits

Two county court judges chosen by all the judges of the 67 county courts

Four registered voters who also are lawyers, chosen by the board of governors of the Florida Bar. Five non-lawyers, who are registered voters, chosen by the governor. [4]

A list of the current members on the commission can be accessed here    . [5]




The members of the commission elect a chair and vice -chair who serve two-year terms. The commission has responsibility for appointing an executive director and general counsel to carry out the agency's duties. The executive director may also direct the work of other administrative staff required to carry out the commission’s administrative responsibilities.  The commission administers its own budget.

The commission is divided into two panels. An "investigative panel" has responsibilities similar to that of a prosecutor.  The other is a "hearing panel" that acts similarly to a panel of judges to review the case. The hearing panel may appoint a hearing panel counsel to offer legal advice to the panel, as required.  Judges accused of misconduct may be represented by a private attorney. [6]


Complaint procedure



Filing a complaint


Complaints against state judges must be filed in writing with the commission.  Judicial misconduct complaints may not be filed with the Supreme Court, other state courts or judges. Neither the Supreme Court nor the chief justice of the court has any authority to investigate alleged misconduct by state judges or to investigate the commission.

The commission cannot begin an investigation until a written complaint is received, and the commission cannot accept complaints via email. After the form is completed, it must be signed and mailed to the commission at:

Judicial Qualifications Commission

Post Office Box 14106

 Tallahassee, FL 32317

Phone (850) 488 -1581

Complaint forms can be accessed here. [3]

For further information, or to check on the status of a complaint, the commission can be contacted at: Judicial Discipline & Disability Commission

Judicial Qualifications Commission

1110 Thomasville Road

Tallahassee, FL 32303 -6224

Phone: (850) 488 -1581

Fax: (850) 922 -6781




Misconduct complaints and initial investigations are required to remain confidential, per the state constitution.  Once formal charges are filed with the Supreme Court, the matter ceases to be confidential.  The notice of formal charges will be the first public record in a case. However, although the documents are filed with the supreme court, the court only serves as a custodian of the records, unless and until a judge is found guilty of misconduct by the commission and a recommendation is made to the court. [2]


Suspension during investigation


While the commission conducts an investigation for misconduct,  a judge may be temporarily  suspended from office. However, the commission’s investigative panel make the request, for either a paid or unpaid suspension, to the supreme court. [7]


Complaint investigation and resolution process


The commission’s investigative panel receives and/or initiates complaints.  When warranted, the panel conducts investigations into allegations of misconduct to determine if formal charges should be filed. Following the investigation, the panel will either dismiss the complaint or, after a simple majority vote, forward formal charges to the hearing panel. The commission’s chair serves as the chair of the investigative panel. [8]

If formal charges are filed regarding allegations of misconduct, the judge who has been accused of the misconduct has 20 days to submit a response to the commission.  A judge may also request any hearing be held in the county where they reside. After the answer is filed, the hearing panel schedules a hearing date. [8]

The commission’s hearing panel is responsible for reviewing the case against a judge and will hear arguments from both sides. The time a misconduct hearing takes varies substantially, depending on the matter being investigated.  In some misconduct matters, the judge will agree or "stipulate" to the discipline to be imposed, and the case then goes to the Supreme Court for final approval.  If a judge does not agree with the commission’s findings, the commission’s hearing panel sets a hearing. The hearings are not televised or broadcast, but they are open to the public. The commission holds hearings around the state, although most often these take place near the judge's place of residence.

The Supreme Court may reject a stipulated agreement between the commission and the judge who commits the misconduct.  This has happened in the past. A judge may contest the charges, which tends to take longer and lead to more hearings.

The hearing panel can, by majority vote, elect to impose discipline upon a judge found guilty of committing misconduct.  A two-thirds vote of the panel is required to remove a judge from office for misconduct.  The commission then forwards the recommendation to the Supreme Court. The court must then decide if the commission’s findings are legally correct. The parties have the right to present their side to the court. This is done by way of written briefs which are filed with the court, and a request for oral argument may also be made. The judge may waive his or her right to present their case to the Supreme Court.


Unlike judicial qualification commission hearings, the Supreme Court’s arguments regarding judicial misconduct are broadcast on the court's website, as well as on the Florida Channel. Past arguments can be found through the Supreme Court’s webcasts and video archives page. Videotapes are also available.


Possible sanctions


The commission may recommend that a judge found guilty of misconduct be subject to any of the following:

No discipline

Public reprimand

A fine

Suspension from office

Removal from office


In some instances, the court has handed down other types of sanctions such as counseling, requiring judges to write letters of apology and mental health treatment. [7]


Historical information regarding judicial misconduct



Resolved misconduct cases, by type of sanction, year and judge


Between 2001 (the earliest date records became available) and 2013, a total of 52 judicial misconduct complaints were resolved by a public disposition.


Judges removed from office



Matthew McMillan - McMillan was also ordered to pay costs of $14,015.


James E. Henson


John Renke III - He was also ordered to repay the JQC $8,210 in costs.


John Sloop


N. James Turner


Judges suspended



Richard H. Albritton, Jr. - He was also fined and ordered to repay costs to the JQC of $1204.


Timothy Shea - Shea was also ordered to write letters of apology and participate in mental health treatment and counseling. Some judges were suspended, in addition to being reprimanded  and/or fined.

Judges reprimanded or censured


Cynthia Holloway - She also received a 30 -day unpaid suspension.

Rosa Rodriguez - She also received a suspension and was fined $40,000.


Charles W. Cope

Patricia Kinsey - She was also fined $50,000. Sheldon Schapiro


Robert Lance Andrews

Carven D. Angel


Meryl L. Allawas

Robert Diaz - He was also fined $15,000 and suspended for 14 days. David M. Gooding

Ana Marie Pando - She was also fined $25,000.


James R. Adams Brandt Downey III Dennis P. Maloney

Wayne Woodard - He was also ordered to attend counseling.


Cheryl Aleman- She was also ordered to repay the JQC $8,677 in costs.

Michael Allen

Cliff Barnes - He was also ordered to pay costs of $4,596.

Peter A. Bell

Mary Jane Henderson

George W. Maxwell,  III


Angela Dempsey

Ralph E. Eriksson - He was also ordered to pay costs of $9,179.


Michelle V. Baker - She was also required to pay a $25,000 fine. Yvonne Colodny - She also paid a fine of $5,000.


Dale C. Cohen

Kathryn Nelson

William J. Singbush - He was also ordered to keep weekly logs for one year and provide a signed letter of public apology to the JQC.


Judges admonished




Joseph P. Baker


Judges who resigned or retired after being charged with misconduct


Howard C. Berman - In exchange for his resignation, the misconduct charges against Berman were dismissed. Robert H. Bonanno


Misconduct cases dismissed voluntarily, at the request of the Judicial Qualifications Commission


Gregory Holder

Scott A. Kenney


Joyce A. Julian


Steven deLaroche James C. Hauser Alan C. Todd


Terri-Ann Miller

Thomas Stringer, Sr.


Ana Gardiner


Paul Hawkes


Ana M. Pando


Judges who were forced to retire involuntarily


This type of action is not taken in cases involving misconduct.  Involuntary retirement is used in cases where a judge can no longer perform his or her judicial duties due to a mental or physical impairment or limitation.


David A. Glant

Joseph A. Simpson


Summaries of the documents filed in these matters are available in the Florida Supreme Court’s Judicial Qualifications Commission Archives    .[9]


Unusual results in misconduct cases


In 2009, Gregory P. Holder petitioned the Supreme Court to ask that he be compensated for the attorney’s fees he incurred in defending himself against misconduct charges brought by the JQC. The court awarded Holder $70,000.[9]


Law, procedures and regulations



The commission’s activities are governed by the Article V, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution.

The ethical standards for judges are contained in the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct. The code applies to all sitting judges in the state.


Canon 1: A judge shall uphold the integrity and independence  of the judiciary.

Canon 2: A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance  of impropriety in all of the judge's activities.

Canon 3: A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially  and diligently.

Canon 4: A judge is encouraged to engage in activities to improve the law, the legal system and the administration of justice.

Canon 5: A judge shall regulate extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial duties.

Canon 6: Fiscal matters of a judge shall be conducted in a manner that does not give the appearance of influence or impropriety.

Canon 7: A judge or candidate for judicial office shall refrain from inappropriate political activity.

Canon 7 of the code also applies to any person who is a candidate for a judicial office. (A complete copy of the code is available on the Supreme Court’s website.)


See also


Florida Supreme Court   (

State judge disciplinary agencies   (


External links


Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission

Florida Supreme Court, "Judicial Qualifications Commission Cases Pending in the Florida Supreme Court"




1.  1.0 1.1 Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, "Annual Report 2012," accessed June 16, 2014

2.  2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Florida Supreme Court, "Judicial Qualifications Commission Cases Pending in the Florida Supreme Court, How JudgesAre Disciplined for Misconduct,” accessed June 16, 2014

3.  3.0 3.1 Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, "Complaint Form," accessed June 16, 2014

4.  See Florida Constitution, Article V, section 12

5.  Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, "Judicial Qualifications Commission Members,” June 16, 2014

6.  Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, June 16, 2014

7.  7.0 7.1 Florida Supreme Court, "Judicial Qualifications Commission Cases Pending in the Florida Supreme  Court, FAQ," accessed June21, 2014

8.  8.0 8.1 Florida Judicial Qualification's Commission, "Judicial Qualifications Commission Rules," accessed June 16, 2014

9.  9.0 9.1 9.2 Florida Supreme Court, "Judicial Qualifications Commission Case Archive," accessed June 21, 2014

10.  Florida Supreme Court, "Code of Judicial Conduct for the State of Florida," accessed June 16, 2014