State Judicial Panel Suspends Judge Bradley

Revealing two new incidents of suspected drunk driving, the state Commission on Judicial Performance announced Friday that it is suspending Superior Court Judge Robert Bradley and has filed misconduct charges that could lead to his permanent removal from the bench.

Bradley, 56, was charged with six counts of misconduct, including two drunk-driving convictions, showing up for work under the influence of alcohol, failure to do his job and habitual use of alcohol while a judge.

“You are charged with willful misconduct in office, persistent failure or inability to perform judicial duties, habitual intemperance in the use of intoxicants or drugs, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute, improper action and dereliction of duty,” read the charges filed Friday.

Bradley, a jurist since 1983, was unavailable for comment because he is in an alcohol treatment center following release Tuesday from the Pasadena City Jail, where he served 20 days for drunk driving.

Among the judicial commission’s charges is a new allegation that officers caught Bradley driving under the influence of alcohol in 1996 and 1997, but did not arrest him.

On those occasions, “police officers drove you home because you had been drinking and driving,” the charges maintain.

Ojai station Sheriff’s Capt. James Barrett confirmed Friday that Deputies Jesse Hicks and Mike Houlihan had pulled Bradley over for erratic driving in mid-1997, then took him home without testing him for drunkenness, despite signs that Bradley had been drinking.

“I was informed after the fact that one of our deputies had stopped the judge on Foothill Road, a very short distance from his home, and that they made a choice to take him home,” Barrett said. “We counseled the officers and told them that our policy is to arrest and book all these folks who are driving under the influence.”

Barrett said he had no information about the second incident cited by the commission. And commission officials refused to say which police agencies were involved with either incident.

The judicial commission also announced Friday its intention to suspend Bradley with pay until the case against him is resolved, the first such action by the commission under a 1995 law that allows the state to temporarily disqualify jurists if their continued service could harm the public.

In a letter to the judge, commission Chairman Robert C. Bonner said the suspension is justified not only because of Bradley’s misdemeanor drunk-driving convictions but also because he has “threatened violence toward others.”

The letter was not specific, but part of Bradley’s sentence Feb. 24 was to have no contact with Ventura County Deputy Dist. Atty. Miles Weiss. Weiss said he could not comment on the case.

Bonner wrote to Bradley: “The available evidence . . . is clear and convincing that you are unable to control your alcohol problem and that you are a threat to your own safety and the safety of others.

“It therefore appears that immediate, irreparable and continuing public harm has resulted from your conduct, and that further harm is likely to occur if you continue to serve as a judge.”

Bradley’s attorney, Thomas C. Brayton of Claremont, said the judge will fight the suspension and the misconduct charges because he hopes to return to the bench within a month of finishing the 30-day treatment program in Port Hueneme.

“The prerequisite is for him to maintain his sobriety, which we believe he will be able to do,” Brayton said. “And if he does that, I think the court system can acknowledge that he is a valuable member of the bench and can do a good job.”

Brayton specifically questioned the commission’s charge of the judge’s habitual intemperance in the use of alcohol, an allegation that the state Constitution cites as conduct allowing removal from the bench.

“That’s a stretch,” the lawyer said. “It implies someone who is constantly under the influence, and that is not the judge’s reputation. His reputation is being very hard-working, considerate and knowledgeable with a good judicial temperament.”

Bradley has until Monday to challenge the suspension and until April 2 to answer the misconduct charges and request a hearing.

Victoria Henley, chief counsel for the commission, said a hearing before a three-judge panel appointed by the chief justice of the state Supreme Court would probably occur within two months.

The Bradley case is unusual not only because of the state’s move to suspend the judge, but also because only two judges have been removed for habitual intemperance due to alcohol or drugs since 1990, Henley said.

During the same period, 32 other judges have resigned or retired while facing a variety of charges, and at least two have been removed, she said.

The judicial commission is composed of six public members, three judges and two lawyers, and chaired by Bonner, a former federal judge and U.S. attorney in Los Angeles.

Henley said Bradley could be cleared of wrongdoing or face a spectrum of penalties--a public or private admonishment, censure for unprofessional conduct, or removal from office.

If he is removed, Bradley would be barred for life from assignments as a temporary judge in state courts, Henley said. But Brayton said that removal does not automatically ban a judge from such assignments.

Friday’s charges capped a turbulent period for Bradley--a former chief criminal deputy district attorney who was appointed to the Municipal Court in 1983 and the Superior Court in 1985.

He was arrested for drunk driving Dec. 6 and again Jan. 3, the day after completing a four-week rehabilitation program. On both occasions his blood-alcohol levels were more than twice the legal limit of 0.08%--measuring 0.21% to 0.23% the first time and 0.27% the second.

Commission charges note Bradley’s questionable conduct during both arrests.

In the first incident, he lied to officers by saying he had only one glass of wine to drink. He then told the officers he was a judge, asked to be driven home and finally walked toward his car while saying he would drive himself home, according to the charges.

In the second, he also lied by saying he had drunk just one beer, then asked the Santa Paula officers if they knew who he was. “You asked them not to continue with the tests and to drive you home because it would ruin your career,” the charge said. And the judge also attempted to leave the police station during booking.

Thirty-six hours after the second arrest, Bradley returned to the bench, vowing to work his way through his problems. But on Jan. 13, he showed up at the courthouse drunk and was sent home. He entered another treatment center full time, eliminating all chances that he would run for another term on the Superior Court.