Stop! In the Name Of Law
A non-attorney justice was censured by the New York Commission on Judicial Conduct for his attempt to use his office to get a traffic ticket dismissed for a friend
On April 20, 2015, respondent went to the window of the Fulton City Court clerk’s office and spoke to a court office assistant, Shelly Fantom. Ms. Fantom knew respondent as a Town Justice from various interactions over the years in connection with respondent’s role as a judge. The Town of Volney adjoins the City of Fulton, and respondent occasionally dropped off court papers in connection with arraignments he had performed.
Respondent gestured to Ms. Fantom to come out, and when she opened the security door, he attempted to hand Mr. S.’s ticket to her and said, “Give this to Judge Hawthorne and have him dismiss it for me.” In doing so, respondent understood that he was using his judicial status to help Mr. S. get his traffic ticket dismissed.
Ms. Fantom raised her hands in a “stop” motion and said to respondent, “We don’t do that here. If you want that ticket reduced or dismissed, you have to go through the DA’s office.” Ms. Fantom’s statements were consistent with both court policy and the policy of the District Attorney’s office, as she understood it.
Respondent continued holding out the ticket toward Ms. Fantom and stated, “Just take it, and just give it to him.” Ms. Fantom did not take the ticket because she understood that “[t]he court is not allowed to do that.”
Respondent put the ticket on the counter. Pointing to the ticket, respondent told Ms. Fantom to write his name and telephone number on it and to have Judge Hawthorne call him about the ticket.
Judge Hawthorne contacted the DA’s office.
It is undisputed that respondent used the prestige of his judicial office in an attempt to obtain special consideration for an acquaintance who had received a traffic ticket. With knowledge that such conduct was prohibited by the ethical standards required of judges, he violated those standards by agreeing to help D. S. get his ticket dismissed, taking the ticket to the Fulton City Court, and, with an explicit directive that unmistakably conveyed his request for favoritism, asking a court assistant to give it to the judge handling the matter and “[h]ave him dismiss it for me.” Even after the clerk rebuffed him (“We don’t do that here”), he persisted in his efforts (“Just take it, and just give it to him”), and when the clerk refused again to take the ticket, he placed it on the counter and directed her to write his name and telephone number on it. Feeling pressured because of respondent’s judicial status, the clerk reluctantly complied with his directive and took the ticket although she knew that doing so was contrary to the proper procedures and feared she would get into trouble. Three days later, on the return date of the ticket, respondent returned to the court and asked about the ticket to make sure it did not get.
The Commission considered both mitigating factors and the sanctions for ticket-fixing judges. (Mike Frisch)