RULE 18-423. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE BOARD; REVIEW BY COMMISSION
West's Annotated Code of MarylandMaryland RulesEffective: January 1, 2024
Effective: January 1, 2024
MD Rules Judges, Rule 18-423
RULE 18-423. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE BOARD; REVIEW BY COMMISSION
Cross reference: See Rule 18-425 (a).
(A) As part of or in furtherance of that meeting, the Chair of the Board, with the consent of the judge, may convene a peer review panel consisting of not more than two judges who serve or have served on the same level of court upon which the judge sits to confer with the judge about the complaint and suggest options for the judge to consider. The judges may be incumbent judges or senior judges.
(B) The discussion may occur in person or by telephone or other electronic conferencing but shall remain informal and confidential. The peer review panel (i) shall have no authority to make any findings or recommendations, other than to the judge; (ii) shall make no report to Investigative Counsel, the Board, or the Commission; and (iii) may not testify regarding the conference with the judge before the Commission or in any court proceeding.
Committee note: The peer review panel is not intended as either an arbitrator or a mediator but, as judicial colleagues, simply to provide an honest and neutral appraisal for the judge to consider.
(A) After considering Investigative Counsel's report and recommendation, the Board shall submit a report to the Commission. The Board shall include in its report the recommendation made to the Board by Investigative Counsel. Subject to subsection (d)(2) of this Rule, the report shall include one of the following recommendations:
(B) The information transmitted by the Board to the Commission shall be limited to a proffer of evidence that the Board has determined would likely be admitted at a plenary hearing before the Commission. The Chair of the Board may consult with the Chair of the Commission in determining the information to be transmitted to the Commission.
(C) Failure to Submit Timely Report. If the Board fails to submit a report within the time allowed, the Chair of the Commission shall direct Investigative Counsel to create and submit a report that conforms to the requirements of subsections (d)(1) and (2) of this Rule, subject to Rule 18-422 (b)(2), and refer the matter to the Commission, which may proceed, using the report as submitted by Investigative Counsel in accordance with this provision.
(e) Filing of Response. Investigative Counsel and the judge may file with the Commission a written response to the Board's report and recommendation. Unless the Chair of the Commission, Investigative Counsel, and the judge agree to an extension, any response shall be filed within 15 days after the date the Commission transmitted copies of the report and recommendation to Investigative Counsel and the judge if the recommendation is a dismissal, with or without a letter of cautionary advice, and within 30 days after that date in all other cases.
Committee note: This review and any appearance by the judge is not an evidentiary hearing. That is provided for in Rule 18-434 after charges have been filed. It is only for the Commission to determine whether to direct that charges be filed against the judge or some other action set forth in subsection (f)(3) should be taken.
Source: This Rule is derived in part from former Rule 18-404 (h) through (l) (2018) and is in part new.
Credits
[Adopted May 15, 2019, eff. July 1, 2019. Amended Nov. 28, 2023, eff. Jan. 1, 2024.]
MD Judges, Rule 18-423, MD R JUDGES Rule 18-423
Current with amendments received through May 1, 2024. Some sections may be more current, see credits for details.
End of Document |