Report 2016-137 Recommendation 8 Responses

Report 2016-137: Commission on Judicial Performance: Weaknesses in Its Oversight Have Created Opportunities for Judicial Misconduct to Persist (Release Date: April 2019)

Recommendation #8 To: Commission on Judicial Performance

To allow it to detect potential judicial misconduct associated with legal errors, CJP should immediately direct its staff to use more appropriate allegation codes when closing complaints at intake. By October 2019, CJP should determine what data it will need to begin tracking so it can trend information—voluntarily provided by complainants—that could indicate complaints about legal error should be investigated because there is a risk that legal error is the result of underlying misconduct, such as bias. By October 2019, CJP should also develop procedures that indicate how often it will evaluate its data for such trends and establish guidelines for when trends warrant CJP staff recommending that the commission open an investigation. CJP should begin tracking that information and implement these procedures as soon as possible.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From April 2021

CJP completed the "immediate" part of this recommendation by instructing CJP staff, as recommended. CJP has implemented a procedure to review information on an annual basis to determine whether complaints, closed for legal error, are indicative of a trend of misconduct, such as bias or abuse of authority. In conjunction with the implementation of its new case management system, CJP has also implemented enhanced procedures for tracking legal error to see if there are additional factors, associated with legal error, that might constitute judicial misconduct.

Completion Date: April 2021

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

We are assessing this recommendation as fully implemented because CJP's adoption of a new case management system will reduce many of our concerns about its past data issues related to observing trends of legal error. CJP has established new procedures for monitoring legal error trends through its new case management system, which will allow it to detect potential judicial misconduct associated with legal errors.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

CJP completed the "immediate" part of this recommendation by instructing CJP staff, as recommended. CJP has implemented a procedure to review information on an annual basis to determine whether complaints, closed for legal error, are indicative of a trend of misconduct, such as bias or abuse of authority. Also, the problems with CJP's historical data that the Auditor's office perceived should not exist with data entered after CJP's new case management system (CMS) is available for use with its cases in January 2021. CJP was not able to acquire a new CMS until funding for the position was included in its budget. That funding was included in CJP's budget for fiscal year 2020-2021.

Estimated Completion Date: January 2021

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

We are assessing this recommendation as partially implemented because the concerns we identified in the audit related to CJP's imprecise data on legal error hindered its review of possible trends associated with complaints closed for legal error. Although the Director Chief-Counsel instructed CJP staff to improve coding for legal error allegations, poor historical data limits CJP's ability to perform an analysis of trends because CJP cannot identify all complaints related to legal error.

1-Year Agency Response

Completion Date: April 2020
Response Date: April 2020

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

Completion Date: October 2019
Response Date: October 2019

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

This recommendation is partially implemented because CJP has not addressed what additional data it will need to begin tracking so it can trend information that could indicate complaints about legal error that should be investigated because there is a risk that legal error is the result of underlying misconduct. For example, in our report we point out that analyzing complaints could reveal whether a judge consistently commits legal error in cases involving litigants of a certain protected class of people, which could indicate bias. Tracking and trending information voluntarily provided by complainants—such as their race and gender— could indicate that a judge may commit acts that lead to violations of the ethics code through repeated legal error.

Auditee did not address all aspects of the recommendation

60-Day Agency Response

The commission has completed the "immediate" part of this recommendation by instructing commission staff as recommended. The efforts to implement the remaining parts of this recommendation are ongoing.

Estimated Completion Date: October 2019
Response Date: June 2019

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

CJP sent us the guidance that it provided to its staff regarding the use of legal error allegation codes at intake. We believe this guidance sufficiently addresses the first portion of our recommendation. To reach full implementation, CJP will need to determine what data it will need to begin tracking so it can trend information that could indicate complaints about legal error should be investigated, develop procedures that describe how often it will evaluate its data for legal error trends, and establish guidelines for when trends warrant recommending that the commission open an investigation.

All Recommendations in 2016-137

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.