A commission of the Arizona Supreme Court has voted to reprimand a longtime Cochise County judge for his conduct on the bench during a juvenile court hearing.
John F. Kelliher, Jr. was found by the Commission on Judicial Conduct (CJC) to have violated Rule 2.8(B) of the Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct for engaging in “insulting, demeaning, and unnecessary dialogue” with a young father who appeared in the judge’s courtroom for a hearing in a Department of Child Safety (DCS) case.
The Reprimand Order issued March 30 also cites a violation of Rule 1.2 for “eroding public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary.” Reprimands are considered public sanctions, according to the Arizona Supreme Court.
The Commission has jurisdiction over the conduct of Arizona’s judges, court commissioners, hearing officers, referees and other judicial officers who perform judicial functions. It cannot review the substance of a judge’s decision or overturn a judge’s rulings.
The CJC order shows Kelliher’s unprofessional comments were made after the judge had already finished what needed to be done at the family law hearing – setting a trial date. The order further notes the father did not speak during the hearing, which would be expected for someone whose attorney was not present.
After the trial date was announced, Kelliher continued addressing the various parties for about 15 minutes This included “commentary about non-verbal communication, brain development, and the attachment process for infants,” the order notes.
“The Commission found there was no discernable reason for the judge to address the father without his attorney present,” the order notes, adding that the father reported feeling “incredibly disrespected” by the comments and eventually asked to leave the courtroom.
Judge Christopher Staring of the Arizona Court of Appeals signed the order in his role as the CJC. Kelliher declined on Monday to comment on the matter.
Kelliher was elected in November 2010 as a Republican to Division 2 of the six divisions within the Cochise County Superior Court. He was reelected in 2014 with no primary nor general election opponent.
Voters then returned Kelliher to the bench in 2018 in a closer than expected race against the county’s legal defender, a Democrat. He was reelected in 2022, again with no primary nor general election opponent.
The recent vote for a public reprimand is not the first time the CJC reviewed Kelliher’s conduct. In 2012, a complaint alleged Kelliher exhibited “habitual intemperance or conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brought his judicial office into disrepute.”
The complaint was dismissed a short time later after the Commission found no evidence of ethical misconduct. But the public is only aware of the 2012 complaint and its outcome because the document was circulated during one of the election cycle.
According to the CJC’s website, every complaint is reviewed by the Commission’s professional staff and its members. Yet it is CJC’s policy to redact the name of the judge and the judge’s court from the disposition order of complaints which end in dismissal or dismissal with comment, which accounts for 97 percent of all complaints.
The redaction process, meant to protect the privacy of judicial officers, makes it impossible for the public -especially voters- to track complaints involving judges, even when there is a self-reported violation.
The public only gets significant access to complaint records if the Commission issues a reprimand. And if the commissioners believe a judge’s misconduct warrants more than a public reprimand, the matter is referred to the Arizona Supreme Court for consideration of a censure, suspension, or removal from office.
The CJC’s members include several judges representing various types of courts in Arizona, as well as lawyers and the public.