Vermont Judges Criticized in Review Process
|
February 24, 2011
MONTPELIER, Vermont: Lawmakers are reviewing five Supreme Court justices and five other judges to conclude if they shall keep their jobs. Two judges have come under fire for their courtroom demeanor, with one of the two judges drawing criticism for his handling of a child abuse case, in addition to an official sanction for a conflict of interest.
Superior Court Judges Michael Kupersmith and Mark Keller have won praise from some of the attorneys who have appeared before them in the court room and by the court employees who have worked under them. However, they have also drawn anonymous complaints that were submitted to a legislative committee, with Judge Kupersmith described as, "blatantly biased against defendant," and that he "interrupted and cut off defense witnesses" and even argued with them.[1]
Similar complaints were ratified against Keller by the Vermont Judicial Conduct Board. It was found in one case that Judge Keller was "excessively confrontational" with a couple and their lawyer. As a result, Judge Keller struck an agreement with the Judicial Conduct Board to work with a mentor judge and work on anger management with a private counselor.[1]
With a total of seven complaints against him, the Judicial Conduct Board issued a public reprimand against Keller. Three of the violations concerned his one-third ownership of a Burlington building that rented offices to lawyers who have frequently appeared in Judge Keller's courtroom. It is state law for judges that they shall not "engage in financial and business dealings that ... involve the judge in frequent transactions or continuing business relationships with those lawyers or other persons likely to come before the court on which the judge serves."[1]
In Vermont, judges come up for review in the Legislature's judicial retention process once every six years after they have been appointed, with a special legislative committee surveying lawyers and taking public testimony about judge's strengths and weaknesses.
Lawmakers, voting in joint session, have the option of declining to give the judges a new term on the bench, but this hasn't happened to a judge in about twenty years. This process gives members of the public a chance to give complaints about judges and to allow judges to hear on how they might improve.
For this year, eight of the ten judges are expected to win reappointment without too much controversy. A public hearing will be set for 7:00 p.m. on February 24, 2011 in which the Judicial Retention Committee will hear testimonies from the public on the five Supreme Court justices and three lower court judges.[1]
Footnotes
| |||||
