Inquiry Concerning Broadman

Good Law
1999 Cal. Comm. Jud. Perform. LEXIS 2·48 Cal. 4th CJP Supp. 67
State of California Commission on Judicial PerformanceFebruary 26, 1999No. 145California4,099 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bonnerchairperson, J.

*CJP Supp. 69 Opinion

This disciplinary matter concerns Judge Howard R. Broadman, a judge of the Tulare County Superior Court.

APPEARANCES

Trial Counsel for the Commission on Judicial Performance are Jack Coyle, William E. Smith and Valerie Marchant. Counsel for Judge Broadman are James E. Friedhofer, Douglas R. Reynolds and Eric D. Weitz of Lewis, D’Amato, Brisbois & Bisgaard.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Judge Broadman became a municipal court judge in 1986 and was appointed to the superior court in 1988. The events which are the subject of this matter took place between August 1996 and July 1997.

Formal proceedings in this matter were commenced with the filing on January 22, 1998, of a notice of formal proceedings which set forth four counts. On February 4, 1998, Judge Broadman filed a verified answer denying the allegations in the notice of formal proceedings.

As provided for by rule 121(b) of the Rules of the Commission on Judicial Performance (Commission), the Supreme Court appointed three special masters to conduct an evidentiary hearing and to prepare a written report. The evidentiary hearing was held on September 28, 29, and 30, 1998, before Justice Rodney Davis, presiding,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.