Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hoague

We adopt the findings of the board. Respondent misused the authority of his judicial office in an attempt to achieve his personal goal of reprimanding persons he believed were guilty of reckless driving.

A judge who observes a crime outside the courtroom has only the power of an ordinary citizen. Respondent’s proper course would have been to file charges against Panescu and Brown. Instead, respondent used the power of his office to achieve his personal ends. On court letterhead he made false statements to intimidate Panescu and Brown into appearing before him so that he could personally…