The following terms have specific meanings within the context of these rules:

“Censure” is a formal public sanction based on a finding that a judge has clearly committed misconduct but the conduct is not so egregious as to warrant suspension, removal or retirement.

“Code” means the Code of Judicial Conduct adopted by the supreme court.

“Complaint” means information in any form from any source received by the commission that alleges or implies judicial misconduct or incapacity.

“Complainant” means a person or organization that initially files a complaint regarding the conduct of a judge. The complainant is not a party to the proceeding.

“Constitution” means the Arizona Constitution.

“Disciplinary counsel” means an attorney responsible for investigating complaints, presenting information to an investigative panel, and prosecuting charges in a formal disciplinary proceeding before a hearing panel, a hearing officer, or the supreme court.

“Executive director” denotes the chief administrator for the commission.

“Formal charges” denotes the document setting forth specific acts of judicial misconduct or incapacity, including any amendment thereto, authorized by the commission or an investigative panel upon a determination of reasonable cause.

“Hearing” means a public proceeding at which issues of fact and law raised in the formal charges are tried before a hearing panel or a hearing officer.

“Hearing officer” denotes a person appointed by the commission to perform the functions of a hearing panel, including making proposed recommendations, when circumstances dictate that an appropriate hearing panel cannot be constituted, or when the hearing panel is unable to complete this process within the intent of the rules.

“Hearing panel” denotes the commission members appointed by the chairperson to conduct a hearing.

“Incapacity” is a mental or physical condition that adversely affects a judge's ability to perform judicial functions. Incapacity is distinguished from a disability in that a disability does not necessarily adversely affect a judge's performance of judicial functions.

“Investigative panel” denotes three commission members appointed by the chairperson to review the complaint and evidence to determine if reasonable cause exists to file formal charges against a judge.

“Judge” refers to anyone, whether or not a lawyer, who is or was an officer of the judicial branch of government subject to the code, including judges pro tempore, court commissioners, hearing officers, special masters, and referees.

“Misconduct” means any conduct by a judge constituting grounds for discipline.

“Presiding member” is the person designated by the chairperson to perform the duties of a presiding officer on a commission panel.

“Proceedings” denotes all steps in the discipline and incapacity system set forth in these rules.

“Reasonable cause” is the equivalent of probable cause and means a reasonable ground for belief in the existence of facts warranting the filing of formal charges.

“Recommendations” denotes the written findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations filed with the commission or the supreme court at the conclusion of a formal hearing.

“Record” means the complaint, the judge's response, the commission's findings, if any and the final dispositional order (including any attachments and exhibits to these documents) in a case involving informal proceedings, and all documents filed with the commission in a case involving formal proceedings beginning with the notice and statement of formal charges, including the digital recording of the hearing if recommendations are filed with the supreme court.

“Reprimand” is an informal public sanction imposed for minor misconduct that does not warrant censure, suspension, removal, or retirement.

“Supreme court” is the Supreme Court of Arizona.