Assembly Committee on the Judiciary, State of California, dated July 30, 2018, dismissing Judge Christine Carringer's impeachment and insisting that the complaint be taken up with the California Commission on Judicial Performance. Letter written and signed by Mark Stone.
Assembly Committee on the Judiciary, State of California, dated July 30, 2018, dismissing Judge Christine Carringer's impeachment and insisting that the complaint be taken up with the California Commission on Judicial Performance. Letter written and signed by Mark Stone.
Assembly Committee on the Judiciary, State of California, dated July 30, 2018, dismissing Judge Christine Carringer's impeachment and insisting that the complaint be taken up with the California Commission on Judicial Performance. Letter written and signed by Mark Stone.
weusene ner coun
EEE yuu veccun Assembly HER
eo Goalifosni Q ogPury cg counset.
enor aaron fifornia Legislature Eom censnnco
cee oe course
xevwauey Eric ena.
St ehecren, Seto
Felon cause tere
STATE CAPITOL, ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY Pato
Suc WARK STONE CHAIN oamasare"
SACRAMENTO, CA 240.0108
(ois) srozs3e
July 30, 2018
California Protective Mother's of Solano County
Jaclyn Qirreh,
P.O. Box 1198 # 1352
Sacramento, CA 95812
Dear California Protective Mother's of Solano County and Ms. Qirreh:
‘Thank you for submitting your petition to impeach Solano Court Superior Court Judge
Christine Carringer to the Assembly Committee on Judiciary, We understand that Judge
Carringer’s rulings have caused a number of families a great deal of anger and pai
However, for the reasons set forth below, our Committee is unable to recommend that the
full Assembly initiate impeachment proceedings against Judge Carringer.
Under the California Constitution, the Assembly holds the "sole power of impeachment.”
(California Constitution, Article IV, Section 18(a).) The Assembly's impeachment power
extends to "State officers elected on a statewide basis, members of the State Board of
Equalization, and judges of state courts." (California Constitution, Article IV, Section
18(b).). However, this power has only been used twice in state history. The first instance
was in 1862, involving Judge James Hardy, who was accused of fixing the trial of a
former chief justice of the California Supreme Court who was on trial for the murder of
United States Senator, as well as making inflammatory statements in favor of slavery
during the Civil War. After a 14-day trial, he was acquitted on all charges, except
disloyalty to country, and removed from office. The second, and last, impeachment was
in 1929 against Judge Carlos S. Hardy, who was charged with practicing law while sitting
as a judge and essentially obstructing justice, After a 22-day trial, he was acquitted of all
charges.
With just these two usages, the impeachment process has not proven to be a very
effective method for disciplining judges in California. A law review note best explains
the limitations of impeachment for removing unfit judges
Notwithstanding the prevalence of impeachment provisions in state constitutions
throughout the country, research and experience have shown that as a method of
effectively removing unfit judges itis little used and of no real value.
Impeachment is both cumbersome and wastefully expensive in that it demands the
time and energies of some or all members of both houses of a legislature for
extended periods. A legislature's time is ill-spent in having to charge, try, and
ultimately judge members of the bench who are believed unqualified for further
~