Panel fires back on Halverson’s claims

CARSON CITY -- The Judicial Discipline Commission has followed the rules in seeking to hold a hearing on formal disciplinary charges filed against suspended Clark County District Judge Elizabeth Halverson and should be allowed to proceed, the panel said in a filing Tuesday with the Nevada Supreme Court.

In a 34-page response to a petition filed by Halverson seeking to dismiss the proceedings against her because of undue delays, commission Executive Director David Sarnowski said Halverson has been afforded the due process rights that apply to the panel's proceedings.

He asked the Supreme Court to dismiss Halverson's petition, which alleges the commission has moved too slowly in bringing formal charges against her.

"It is the commission's desire to now move forward with a hearing on the formal statement of public charges filed against Judge Halverson on Jan. 7, 2008," Sarnowski said. "Therefore, the commission respectfully asks this court to reject the petition, thus clearing the way for a contested hearing during which Judge Halverson will be allowed to counter the allegations of ethical misconduct and the evidence proffered to support them."

The Judicial Discipline Commission complaint lists a number of allegations of inappropriate and bizarre behavior including mistreating staff members, sleeping during trials and having illegal communication with jurors.

Halverson has denied the allegations.

She has been on an interim suspension with pay since July, and has filed for re-election.

The Supreme Court has not indicated when it will rule on Halverson's petition.

Sarnowski said in the filing that the petition is the third case initiated by Halverson to either stop the commission from moving forward with its case or challenging the commission's decision for an interim suspension.

Had the commission acted too hastily in bringing charges, there would have been criticism of what undoubtedly would be described as a shoddy and hurried investigation, Sarnowski said.

If the court agrees that Halverson's "gossamer claims of due process violations are viable and that they warrant relief, the commission will be hamstrung in all future cases because it would be required to work at a pace well beyond what its staff and budgetary resources can sustain," he said.

Halverson was given her due process rights by being allowed to review all information generated during the commission's investigation and the chance to answer the complaint, Sarnowski said.

There is no requirement that the commission, after suspending a judge, file charges immediately, he said.

In Halverson's case, she and her attorneys "were doing everything they could to throw a wrench in the gears of the well established procedural process in order to thwart it completely," Sarnowski said.

Halverson sought to have the commission proceedings temporarily halted while the Supreme Court considers her petition to dismiss the complaint entirely. That request was rejected by both the commission and the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court on Nov. 1 upheld a decision by the Judicial Discipline Commission to temporarily bar Halverson from her duties. But the court also warned the commission to move forward quickly with formal proceedings.

Contact Capital Bureau reporter Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or (775) 687-3900.