N.M. Code. Jud. Cond. 21-301
A judge may engage in extrajudicial activities, except as prohibited by law or this Code. However, when engaging in extrajudicial activities, a judge shall not:
N.M. Code. Jud. Cond. 21-301
Committee commentary. -
[1] To the extent that time permits, and judicial independence and impartiality are not compromised, judges are encouraged to engage in appropriate extrajudicial activities. Judges are uniquely qualified to engage in extrajudicial activities that concern the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice, such as by speaking, writing, teaching, or participating in scholarly research projects. They may also speak, write, lecture, teach, and engage in other extrajudicial activities concerning non-legal subjects, subject to the requirements of this Code. In addition, judges are permitted and encouraged to engage in educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic extrajudicial activities not conducted for profit, even when the activities do not involve the law. See Rule 21-307 NMRA.
[2] Participation in both law-related and other extrajudicial activities helps integrate judges into their communities, and furthers public understanding of and respect for courts and the judicial system.
[3] Discriminatory actions and expressions of bias or prejudice by a judge, even outside the judge's official or judicial actions, are likely to appear to a reasonable person to call into question the judge's integrity and impartiality. Examples include jokes or other remarks that demean individuals based upon race, religion, color, national origin, ethnicity, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, spousal affiliation, socioeconomic status, political affiliation, age, physical or mental handicap or serious medical condition, or undermine the public's confidence in or perception of the judicial process. For the same reason, a judge's extrajudicial activities must not be conducted in connection or affiliation with an organization that practices invidious discrimination. See Rule 21-306 NMRA.
[4] While engaged in permitted extrajudicial activities, judges must not coerce others or take action that would reasonably be perceived as coercive. For example, depending upon the circumstances, a judge's solicitation of contributions or memberships for an organization, even as permitted by Rule 21-307(A) NMRA, might create the risk that the person solicited would feel obligated to respond favorably, or would do so to curry favor with the judge.
[Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 11-8300-045, effective January 1, 2012; as amended by Supreme Court Order No. 15-8300-013, effective December 31, 2015.]
ANNOTATIONS The 2015 amendment, approved by Supreme Court Order No. 15-8300-013, effective December 31, 2015, in Paragraph [1] of the committee commentary, after "scholarly research projects", added "They may also speak, write, lecture, teach, and engage in other extrajudicial activities concerning non-legal subjects, subject to the requirements of this Code.". Recompilations. - Pursuant to Supreme Court Order No. 11-8300-045, the former Judicial Code of Conduct was recompiled, effective January 1, 2012. See the table of corresponding rules for former rule numbers and the corresponding new rule numbers. JUDICIAL REPRIMANDS Failure to recuse after appearance of impropriety occurs. - Where a district judge developed a romantic relationship with an attorney who had cases pending before the judge; the judge told the attorney that the judge would enter a blanket recusal in the attorney's cases, but failed to do so; and when the attorney's cases came before the judge, the judge entered a recusal, made dishonest statements from the bench concerning the judge's reasons for entering a recusal, and notwithstanding the entry of a recusal, entered rulings in the cases, the judge committed willful misconduct in office. In re Schwartz, 2011-NMSC-019, 149 N.M. 721, 255 P.3d 299 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Napping. - Where a judge took naps during the noon hour in view of the public and court staff and on one occasion fell asleep while defendants were waiting for paperwork from the judge's secretary, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Guillory, S.Ct. No. 31,920 (Filed December 7, 2010) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Unlawfully accepting per diem expenses. - Where the judge wanted to attend training in another municipality; the judge certified and submitted a travel voucher claiming reimbursement for per diem expenses; the training was cancelled; the judge arranged to pick up the training material in the other municipality, drove to the other municipality, and then drove to another municipality out-of-state; and the judge told the treasurer of the municipality that the training had been cancelled because of bad weather, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Lozano, S.Ct. No. 29,264 (Filed June 8, 2010) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Abusing prestige of judicial office. - Where a municipal judge had private conversations with a contractor about the contractor's personal financial dispute with landowners who allegedly owed the contractor money for cleaning up the landowners' property; the judge called the landowners and left a message on the landowners' answering machine in which the judge identified himself as a judge and stated that the judge was calling about the financial dispute between them and the contractor, and that the judge wanted the matter cleared up; the judge subsequently wrote the landowners a letter on municipal stationery, using the judge's title and court name discussing the contractor's claim and indicating that a lawsuit would be filed if the contractor was not paid; two weeks later, the judge was assigned to preside over a nuisance action by the municipality concerning the land that the contractor had supposedly cleaned; and the judge accepted the case and issued a summons to the landowners that did not conform with the rules of procedure, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Ramirez, S.Ct. No. 31,664 (Filed June 26, 2009) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Interference in a friend's criminal case. - Where a judge developed a personal relationship with the defendant in a DUI case, told the presiding judge at the defendant's bond hearing to make special concessions with regard to the defendant's bond, talked to the presiding judge at the defendant's probation violation hearing to influence the disposition of the case, instructed the court clerks to issue a clearance of the defendant's driver's license, and attempted to influence a police officer when the defendant was stopped for speeding, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Garza, 2007-NMSC-028, 141 N.M. 831, 161 P.3d 876 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Drug abuse. - Where a judge knowingly evaded the service of an order of the Judicial Standards Commission to submit to drug testing; the judge did not appear for drug testing for more than seventy-two hours after the judge learned of the commission's order and refused to submit to the collection of a sample; ordered the judge's own tests to obtain results that would be available only to the judge; and when the judge finally submitted to the drug testing as ordered by the commission, the judge tested positive for cocaine, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Garza, 2007-NMSC-028, 141 N.M. 831, 161 P.3d 876 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Alcoholism. - Where a judge recessed a criminal jury trial for a long holiday weekend; the judge did not return to court on the date set for the completion of the trial; the judge told an administrative assistant that the judge was ill, but would be in court in the afternoon; the judge did not return that day and the judge's staff rescheduled the trial for two days later; on the day the trial was to resume, the judge told the assistant that the judge was hospitalized for heart-related tests; after the trial was twice reset due to the judge's unavailability, a stipulated mistrial order was entered; the judge was absent for two weeks during which the judge was hospitalized for six days; the judge's heart ailment and the hospitalization were due to alcohol withdrawal; and to justify the judge's absence, the judge told a reporter that the judge was being treated for and was recovering from a mild heart attack, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Pope, S.Ct. No. 29,778 (Filed June 13, 2007) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Directing secretary to handle traffic docket. - Where a judge took a vacation knowing that the judge would not return in time to handle the judge's traffic docket; the judge called the judge's secretary, told the secretary that the judge's return had been delayed, and instructed the secretary to handle the judge's traffic docket; the secretary handled the traffic docket and used the judge's signature stamp to process the docket; and when the other judges, court personnel, and the media learned about what had occurred, the judge reviewed and signed the cases that the judge's secretary had handled in the judge's absence, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Griego, S.Ct. No. 30,203 (Filed June 13, 2007) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Use of judicial position to advance private interest in pending case. - A metropolitan judge who initiated ex parte communications with a special commissioner and a district court judge to influence a child placement in a case involving a family member within the third degree of relationship committed willful misconduct in office. In re Gentry, S.Ct. No. 28,986 (Filed June 29, 2005) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Outside employment. - A full-time magistrate court judge, who was paid a salary as a full-time magistrate and who served as a tribal judge pro tempore for a tribal court at times when the judge was being paid by the state to serve as a magistrate court judge committed willful misconduct in office. In re Martinez, S.Ct. 29,309 (Filed October 19, 2005) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). False statements about judicial disciplinary complaints. - Where, during a radio broadcast debate, a judge made false or misleading statements that no judicial disciplinary complaints had been filed against the judge with the Judicial Standards Commission, the judge committed willful misconduct in office. In re Miller-Byrnes, S.Ct. No. 28,716 (Filed August 31, 2004) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Personal involvement with and harassment of trial counsel. - Where a judge presided over and took judicial action in cases in which the assistant district attorney appeared on behalf of the state during the time the judge was engaged in a personal relationship with the assistant district attorney; the judge failed to inform all counsel or parties of record of the judge's relationship with the assistant district attorney in cases where the assistant district attorney appeared before the judge; the judge failed to be patient, dignified and courteous to counsel by making inappropriate remarks to assistant district attorneys about the judge's rulings in front of defendants, defense counsel, and co-counsel; and in one case, the judge suppressed evidence of a breath test, refused to allow the assistant district attorney to call the officer who administered the breath test to testify, and then taunted the assistant district attorney about not being able to prove the state's case, the judge committed willful misconduct in office. In re Galvan, S.Ct. No. 28,609 (Filed May 17, 2004) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Maintaining residence outside judicial district. - A municipal judge who failed to maintain a continuous and significant physical presence at a residence within the municipal limits of the municipality as required by municipal ordinance committed willful misconduct in office. In re Gallegos, S.Ct. No. 27,906 (Filed April 15, 2003) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Violation of law. - A judge who pled nolo contendere to charges of DWI, no headlamps, and running a stop sign and who was convicted and sentenced for DWI and no headlamps committed willful misconduct in office. In re Cornish, S.Ct. No. 27,253 (Filed May 6, 2002) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Inappropriate demeanor, interference in pending case and illegal modification of sentence. - Where a judge made inappropriate, age and/or gender-based references to female attorneys who appeared before the judge; after the state lost a six-month rule hearing, the judge threatened the Public Defender's Office and its employees; the judge told a defendant in a criminal drug case that the defendant was covering up for the defendant's children and that the defendant could post a property bond with the intention that the State could get rid of the defendant's house if there were complaints by the defendant's neighbors; after filing a recusal in a case, the judge became involved in a pretrial conference in the case and testified against a motion filed by the Public Defender's Office; referred to a female magistrate court judge in an inappropriate, derogatory and gender-based manner; criticized a female attorney for being employed by the Public Defender's Office; and after the Public Defender's Office filed a notice of appeal from the judge's ruling, verbally modified a sentence and order of eligibility by ex parte communication with the monitoring agent, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Vincent, S.Ct. No. 27,266 (Filed March 22, 2002) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Involvement in friend's criminal case. - Where a judge became involved in the pending criminal case of a friend by speaking with the arresting state police officer by cellular telephone during the traffic stop and arrest; personally going to the adult detention center and ordered the friend's release and taking the friend to the judge's house, and speaking to a registered nurse and asking the nurse to draw an independent blood sample from the friend; and the judge had an alcoholic drink before going to the jail to release the friend and may have had the odor of alcohol on the judge's breath, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Sanchez, S.Ct. No. 25,821 (Filed March 14, 2001) (decided before the 2011 recompilation). Issuing insufficient funds checks. - Where a judge, on three separate occasions, issued checks in payment of the judge's debts knowing at the time the checks were issued that there were insufficient funds in or credit with the bank to pay the checks in full upon presentation, the judge's conduct was willful misconduct in office. In re Vigil, S.Ct. No. 26,328 (Filed May 7, 2001) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Failure to pay taxes and debts. - Where a judge failed to pay gross receipts taxes for the judge's private business activities for five consecutive years; failed to timely file state personal income tax returns for three consecutive years; used the facilities and equipment of the probate court for the judge's private business activities; and failed to pay the county for copying charges incurred at the county clerks' office for the judge's private business and gave the county clerk an insufficient funds check to pay for the copying, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Vigil, S.Ct. No. 26,328 (Filed June 13, 2000) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Control of organization that appeared before judge. - Where a judge had de facto control over a non-profit organization that regularly engaged in proceedings before the judge; the judge personally selected the majority of the board of directors and caused the hiring and firing of directors; the judge's spouse served as executive director; and the judge allowed the judge's spouse to use the judge's chambers and telephone and the judge's name, title, official stationery, and photograph to be used in solicitation of funds for the organization, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Castellano, 1995-NMSC-007, 119 N.M. 140, 889 P.2d 175 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Director of a DWI school. - Where, as permitted by a municipal ordinance, a municipal judge was the owner and director of a DWI school and had a pecuniary interest in having individuals initially appear before the judge in court and then attend the DWI school, the judge's conduct violated the Code of Judicial Conduct. In re Rainaldi, 1986-NMSC-079, 104 N.M. 762, 727 P.2d 70 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation).