“You’re a younger man, handsome, and well-built,” Mitchell told the defendant, according to court transcripts. “You will be an attraction in state prison… Is that the environment you want to be in?”
The commission found her remarks undignified and discourteous, ruling that she violated Canons 3B(4) and 2A of the judicial code. Mitchell later admitted that commenting on a defendant’s physical appearance was inappropriate and stated that she regretted her choice of words.
Judicial Commission Issues Rare Public Admonishment
The Commission on Judicial Performance voted 8-0 to publicly admonish Judge Mitchell, with one commissioner recused, another not participating, and one seat vacant. The commission—comprised of six public members, three judges, and two attorneys—rarely issues public reprimands, underscoring the gravity of the violations.
Neither Judge Mitchell nor a representative for the commission could be reached for comment.
As the dust settles on this extraordinary case, the California Judge Jurists Chambers scandal serves as a stark reminder of the high ethical standards judges must uphold—and the consequences when those standards are breached.
