Yet another example of black robed hooliganism! But, no removal.

Why wasn't this man removed? He was rigging cases for his friends? Doesn't this strike at the heart of Due Process? Yet, Judge Wasilenko gets to keep his retirement and his title? See, Justice McConnell was not on this panel, lucky for Judge Wasilenko!


See below:


Public Censure Censure and Bar of Judge David E. Wasilenko March 2, 2005

Judge David E. Wasilenko (Retired), formerly a judge of the Yuba County Superior Court, was ordered censured and barred from any assignment, appointment or reference of work from any California state court on March 2, 2005, for willful misconduct in office. The Commission’s action concluded formal proceedings, during which there was a hearing before special masters; the judge waived argument before the Commission.

The Commission found that Judge Wasilenko improperly transferred nine infraction and misdemeanor matters to his court and then gave procedural and substantive benefits to the defendants in those cases, establishing “a two-track system of justice, with special handling available for relatives, friends and others with special connections.” The Commission determined that the judge’s actions were contrary to canon 2A (requiring judges to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary), 2B(1) (prohibiting a judge from conveying or permitting others to convey the impression that any individual is in a special position to influence the judge), and, in some instances, canons 3E(1) (requiring disqualification in certain circumstances), 3E(2) (requiring disclosure in certain circumstances) and 3B(7) (prohibiting ex parte communications in a pending proceeding). The Commission concluded that the judge engaged in nine instances of willful misconduct.

The Commission noted that while situations in which a judge “knows” a party, and must therefore be particularly vigilant to ensure the appearance and reality of independence and impartiality, may arise more frequently in a small town like Marysville than in a major metropolitan area, “the judge’s ethical duties are the same irrespective of population statistics.” The Commission further noted that the demographics of Marysville and Yuba County were irrelevant to Judge Wasilenko’s misconduct, and stated, “Repeatedly diverting non-assigned cases so as to be in a position to afford preferential judicial treatment to family, friends, and others specially situated is improper under the canons and intolerable in every county in this state.”

In deciding discipline, the Commission pointed out that Judge Wasilenko was privately admonished by the Commission in 1993 for similar conduct, which included transferring to his own court two cases in which the judge’s friends were the defendants; presiding in a matter in which his courtroom clerk was the defendant, without disclosure of the relationship on the record; and engaging in ex parte communications. The Commission concluded that the judge had displayed failure or inability to change his conduct, and was thus unsuitable for judicial office. Since the judge already had retired, the Commission determined that the appropriate discipline was censure and a bar from any assignment, appointment or reference of work from any California state court.

Commission members Justice Vance W. Raye, Mr. Marshall B. Grossman, Judge Frederick P. Horn, Mr. Michael A. Kahn, Mrs. Crystal Lui, Ms. Patricia Miller, Mr. Jose C. Miramontes, Mrs. Penny Perez, Judge Risë Jones Pichon, and Ms. Barbara Schraeger voted to impose a censure and bar. There was one public member vacancy on the Commission at the time of the decision.