Comm. R. VI Conduct of Preliminary Inquiries and Investigations.

A. The preliminary inquiry shall ordinarily consist of Special Counsel sending the respondent judge a copy of the written complaint, and inviting the respondent judge to provide a written response to the allegations in the complaint. However, the Commission may cause the preliminary inquiry to be made in any manner it deems proper under the circumstances. It may be made by the Chief Executive Officer, by Special Counsel, or by any other person designated by the Commission who is not a member of the Commission, such as a Special Counsel Ad Hoc.

B. Instead of inviting the respondent judge to respond to the allegations in the complaint with a written response, Special Counsel may invite the respondent judge at his/her option to provide a “documentary response,” if Special Counsel believes that the matter may be readily resolved by such a response. A “documentary response” shall consist of only records relevant to the allegations, such as minute entries, pleadings, transcripts, audio recordings, or any other public records, accompanied by only an index referencing the page, line, time code, date, or other identifying information to which the respondent wishes to draw Special Counsel’s attention. A “documentary response” is intended to afford respondents an expedited manner of addressing complaints that may be clearly resolved by the presentation of such records. A “documentary response” shall not contain any argument or mitigation.

If after review of the judge’s documentary response, Special Counsel believes that the file should be simply closed, Special Counsel may recommend such to the Commission without further response from the respondent.

A judge’s acceptance of the invitation to provide only a documentary response shall not limit the right of the judge to provide a written response later in addition to the documentary response. No time limit for the judge’s written response shall be set until Special Counsel has notified the judge that the documentary response has been received but did not result in the simple closure of the file. An invitation for a documentary response shall not be a substitute for an investigation and does not permit Special Counsel to subpoena witnesses or documents.

If Special Counsel believes that a judge’s documentary response does not provide sufficient information to recommend to the Commission the simple closure of the file, Special Counsel may request that the judge provide a written response without seeking the approval of the Commission or its Chair.

C. After receiving a judge’s written response (regardless of whether or not a documentary response is requested or submitted), and with the approval of the Chair, Special Counsel may invite the judge, through a supplemental inquiry letter, to provide voluntarily further limited and discrete information and/or documents, which should be available to the judge, if Special Counsel needs such information and/or documents to determine whether to recommend any further action. A supplemental inquiry shall not be a substitute for an investigation and does not permit Special Counsel to subpoena witnesses or documents.

D. Once the respondent judge has provided a written response to the inquiry letter(s) or the time for providing a written response has passed without a response, the matter will be submitted to the full Commission for its decision concerning further action, if any.

E. With respect to an investigation for the purpose of determining whether a notice of hearing concerning allegations of misconduct or disability should be authorized, the Commission may cause such investigation to be made in any manner it deems proper. It may be made by Special Counsel or by any other person designated by the Commission who is not a member of the Commission, such as a Special Counsel Ad Hoc.

When the Commission becomes aware of possible disabilities, impairments, criminal conduct, or other serious conduct (such as conduct addressed in Louisiana Supreme Court Rule XXIII, Section 27(a)), the Commission may authorize an expedited investigation, in any manner it deems proper, for the purpose of determining whether there is substantial, credible evidence that establishes probable cause that the judge (1) may have violated the Louisiana Constitution or the Code of Judicial Conduct and (2) may pose a substantial threat of serious harm to the public or the administration of justice. If an investigation is expedited, the Commission may require a status report prior to the completion of the investigation regarding whether a basis for a recommendation for interim disqualification exists. [Amended effective January 29, 2021]