In re Collins

Decision Date07 July 2016
Docket NumberNo. SC16–548.,SC16–548.
Citation195 So.3d 1129
Parties Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 15–530 re Jerri COLLINS.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

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, FL, for Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, Petitioner.

Warren William Lindsey of Lindsey & Ferry, P.A., Winter Park, FL, for Judge Jerri Collins, Respondent.

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.

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 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 (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...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • In re Norris
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 22 d3 Junho d3 2022
  • In re Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 15-200 re Contini, SC15–2148.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 1 d4 Dezembro d4 2016
    ...undisputed, this Court will ordinarily conclude that the JQC's findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence." In re Collins, 195 So.3d 1129, 1132 (Fla.2016) ; In re Diaz, 908 So.2d 334, 337 (Fla.2005). Judge Contini acknowledged that his conduct constituted the following violatio......
  • Gaulden v. State
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 7 d4 Julho d4 2016
  • In re Contini, SC15-2148
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 10 d4 Novembro d4 2016
    ...undisputed, this Court will ordinarily conclude that the JQC's findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence." In re Collins, 195 So. 3d 1129, 1132 (Fla. 2016); In re Diaz, 908 So. 2d 334, 337 (Fla. 2005). Judge Contini acknowledged that his conduct constituted the following viola......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT