On Wednesday, September 17, 2025, The Florida Bar reported that the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee (JEAC) has issued an opinion regarding the necessity of disclosure or recusal for judges who previously served as legal counsel for a sheriff’s office.
The committee, acting on September 12 in JEAC Opinion 2025-15, addressed an inquiry concerning whether a judge must recuse from presiding over criminal cases where sheriff’s office deputies appear as investigative witnesses, particularly when the judge was formerly employed as the sheriff’s chief legal counsel.
The inquiry also questioned whether a judge is obligated to disclose their prior employment as counsel for the sheriff in every criminal case where the sheriff’s office is the investigating entity, clarifying that sheriff’s office employees are considered agents of the state or witnesses rather than litigants. The JEAC’s opinion stated that, based on the specific facts presented, such disclosure is not mandatory.
The judge in question, appointed within the past year and potentially rotating to the circuit criminal bench soon, previously held the position of chief legal counsel for a sheriff within the same circuit. In this former role, the judge officially represented the sheriff in civil cases, advised on policies and procedures, and primarily focused on administrative operations, without representing individual deputy sheriffs.
In its discussion, the committee considered the self-disqualification requirements outlined in The Florida Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3E. This includes instances of personal bias or prejudice concerning a lawyer, personal knowledge of disputed facts, prior service as a lawyer or lower court judge in the matter, previous law practice with an attorney involved in the case, or serving as a material witness. The committee also took into account whether the judge or their spouse has an economic interest in the matter or a party involved, or any interest that could be significantly affected by the proceeding.
The JEAC also deliberated on four prior opinions: JEAC Op. 2010-36, JEAC Op. 2021-18, JEAC Op. 2017-17, and JEAC Op. 2005-05. These previous opinions addressed varying circumstances related to judicial disqualification and disclosure. The committee concluded that self-disqualification would not be mandatory, and therefore, disclosure is also not mandatory.
The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee is responsible for providing advisory opinions to judges and judicial candidates regarding the application of the Code of Judicial Conduct. While these opinions can be cited as evidence of good faith, they are not binding on the Judicial Qualifications Commission.
Source: The Florida Bar
