Skip to content

Bills · 2013-2014 Regular Session

AJR 18

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: temporary service by a court of appeals judge in the supreme court in judicial disciplinary proceedings (first consideration).

Constitutional amendments — First consideration Judge Judge — Appellate court Supreme court Swanson, robert s

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Assembly, not reached
  3. Passes Senate, not reached
  4. Adopted, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

Article VII, section 11, of the Wisconsin Constitution, provides that justices and

judges are subject to reprimand, censure, suspension, or removal for cause or for

disability by the supreme court pursuant to procedures established by the

legislature. Article VII, section 4 (3), of the Wisconsin Constitution, prohibits the

temporary appointment of a court of appeals judge or circuit court judge to the

supreme court.

This constitutional amendment, proposed to the 2013 legislature on first

consideration, requires that the supreme court assign on a temporary basis a court

of appeals judge to aid in the proper disposition of judicial disciplinary proceedings

in the supreme court to provide an odd number of justices for the consideration of the

proceedings. The person assigned must be the most senior court of appeals judge

eligible to be assigned.

Under current statutory law, the judicial commission is charged with

investigating the alleged misconduct or permanent disability of a judge. If the

judicial commission finds probable cause that a judge is engaging or has engaged in

misconduct, it files a formal complaint with the supreme court. If the judicial

commission finds probable cause that a judge has a permanent disability, it files a

petition with the supreme court [s. 757.85, stats.].

After the judicial commission finds probable cause of misconduct or permanent

disability and before it files a complaint or petition, the matter is heard by a panel

consisting of either three court of appeals judges or two court of appeals judges and

one reserve judge or by a jury. The supreme court reviews the findings of fact,

conclusions of law, and recommendations submitted following the hearing and

determines appropriate discipline or action [ss. 757.87 and 757.91, stats.].

This amendment was prepared for the Joint Legislative Council's 2010 Special

Committee on Judicial Discipline and Recusal.

A constitutional amendment requires adoption by two successive legislatures,

and ratification by the people, before it becomes effective.

Sponsors

Introduced by: Berceau (D) , Billings (D) , C. Taylor (D) , Hebl (D) , Mason (D) , Ohnstad (D) , Pasch (D) , Richards (D) , Wachs (D) , Wright (D) , Zepnick (D)

2 cosponsors

Lehman (D) , T. Cullen (D)

Full history

  1. Apr 15, 2013 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Hebl, Richards, Pasch, Wachs, Zepnick, Mason, Billings, Berceau, C. Taylor, Wright and Ohnstad; cosponsored by Senators Lehman and T. Cullen

  2. Apr 15, 2013 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Judiciary

  3. Jun 14, 2013 · Assembly

    Withdrawn from committee on Judiciary and referred to committee on Government Operations and State Licensing pursuant to Assembly Rule 42 (3)(c)

  4. Oct 17, 2013 · Assembly

    Withdrawn from committee on Government Operations and State Licensing and referred to committee on State Affairs and Government Operations pursuant to Assembly Resolution 19

  5. Apr 8, 2014 · Assembly

    Failed to adopt pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1