N.M. Code. Jud. Cond. 21-201

As amended through February 27, 2024
Rule 21-201 - Giving precedence to the duties of judicial office

The duties of judicial office, as prescribed by law, shall take precedence over all of a judge's personal and extrajudicial activities.

N.M. Code. Jud. Cond. 21-201

Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 11-8300-045, effective 1/1/2012.

Committee commentary. -

[1] To ensure that judges are available to fulfill their judicial duties, judges must conduct their personal and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflicts that would result in frequent disqualification. See Canon 3.

[2] Although it is not a duty of judicial office unless prescribed by law, judges are encouraged to participate in activities that promote public understanding of and confidence in the justice system.

[Adopted by Supreme Court Order No. 11-8300-045, effective January 1, 2012.]

ANNOTATIONS 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 Potential witness in a criminal case. - Where a magistrate judge released the defendant on the defendant's own recognizance; the defendant had been arrested for driving while intoxicated after a baseball tournament; the judge was not the designated on-call judge on the day the defendant was arrested; the judge knew the defendant and had been at the tournament with the defendant earlier in the day; and the judge knew that there were people drinking alcoholic beverages at the tournament, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office because the judge was a potential witness in the defendant's criminal case. In re Wingenroth, S.Ct. No. 33,228 (Filed October 19, 2011), Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 2011-020 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Personal acquaintance with the defendant in a criminal case. - Where the defendant had been arrested for driving while intoxicated after a baseball tournament; the defendant's spouse telephoned the magistrate judge's spouse at the judge's home to discuss the defendant's arrest; the defendant and the defendant's spouse knew the judge's family well enough to call the judge's spouse in an attempt to influence the judge; and the judge agreed to release the defendant on the defendant's own recognizance even though the judge was not on-call or assigned to handle the matter, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office because the judge took judicial action based on the telephone calls from the defendant's family to the judge's home. In re Wingenroth, S.Ct. No. 33,228 (Filed October 19, 2011), Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 2011-020 (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 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). Failure to perform judicial duties. - Where a magistrate judge delayed in signing and filing written judgments and sentences, the judge's conduct constituted willful misconduct in office. In re Perea, S.Ct. No. 25,822 (Filed August 17, 1999) (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation). Delegation of judicial power. - A magistrate court judge who delegated the duty to perform marriages to a municipal clerk committed willful misconduct in office. In re Perea, 1986-NMSC-001, 103 N.M. 617, 711 P.2d 894 (decided prior to the 2011 recompilation).