On Wednesday, January 22, 2025, Santa Barbara Independent reported that two judges in Santa Barbara County are facing significant scrutiny due to allegations of misconduct, leading to disciplinary actions by the Commission on Judicial Performance. One judge has been publicly reprimanded for inappropriate behavior in a courtroom, while the other is facing serious charges of willful misconduct.

The Commission, an independent agency responsible for investigating judicial misconduct, released reports detailing the issues surrounding Judges Thomas R. Adams and Michael J. Carrozzo. The allegations against Adams stem from a 2023 incident where he was reported to have lost his temper during a court session. According to the commission, Adams became visibly agitated with a public defender, who had only recently been admitted to the bar. Witnesses reported that he raised his voice, stood up from the bench, and threw papers at the attorney, causing her distress and leading to her dismissal from the court for the day.

In response to inquiries about his behavior, Adams allegedly attempted to undermine the attorney’s credibility, claiming without evidence that she had prior issues with court personnel. The commission’s report highlighted a history of disciplinary actions against Adams, who has been on the bench since 1983. His past misconduct included a 1993 incident where he jailed a litigant for two days without a proper contempt hearing, which the commission deemed a serious violation of due process rights.

Additionally, the commission noted that Adams had failed to cooperate with fellow judges and court officials, engaged in remarks perceived as biased or prejudicial, and did not disclose ex parte communications with a jury foreperson. The commission criticized Adams for providing misleading statements during their investigation, particularly regarding his intentions to retire. At 84 years old, Adams had indicated that his retirement was imminent, despite private communications suggesting otherwise.

Just two days after reprimanding Adams, the commission issued a formal notice of proceedings against Judge Michael J. Carrozzo, charging him with willful misconduct in office and conduct that undermines the integrity of the judicial system. The allegations against Carrozzo involve actions taken between 2017 and 2020 that benefitted his then-secretary, Sara Eklund, who later became his wife.

The commission accused Carrozzo of representing himself as Eklund’s legal counsel during her divorce and following her involvement in a car accident, which constitutes a grave breach of ethical standards for judges. Furthermore, Carrozzo is alleged to have used his judicial position to influence various matters for Eklund, including opposing a rent increase, expediting a mattress delivery, and securing a spot for their child in a competitive school.

A key piece of evidence against Carrozzo includes a recorded conversation in which he allegedly identified himself as Eklund’s representative to an insurance agent dealing with her accident claim. The commission pointed out that as a judge, Carrozzo was not authorized to practice law, emphasizing that he had previously been suspended from active membership in the California State Bar.

During the initial stages of the investigation, Carrozzo contended that he did not intentionally advocate for Eklund in any legal capacity. However, the commission found his explanations unconvincing, stating that his statements were misleading and reflected a lack of honesty towards the investigation.

Carrozzo’s attorney, Heather Rosing, recently submitted a formal response to the charges, asserting that her client accepts full responsibility for his actions and acknowledges the need for improvement. Rosing emphasized that Carrozzo has sought further training and mentorship to prevent similar violations in the future. However, she disputed the commission’s claims that he made misleading statements and argued that the allegations do not pertain to his judicial conduct.

Rosing argued for a lesser form of discipline than removal from the bench, suggesting that Carrozzo’s alleged misconduct was related to his personal life rather than his official duties as a judge. She maintained that the focus of the commission’s inquiry should be on off-bench conduct related to his relationship with Eklund, rather than his performance on the bench.

The proceedings against Carrozzo will continue, with a special master appointed by the California Supreme Court set to hear the case. Both parties will have the opportunity to present evidence and call witnesses, after which the special master will compile a report for the commission’s review.

As these cases unfold, they highlight ongoing concerns about judicial conduct and the standards expected of those serving in the judiciary, impacting public trust in the legal system.

 

 

Source: Santa Barbara Independent