On Friday, March 27, 2026, the California Commission on Judicial Performance released its 2025 Annual Report. The report provides statistics on complaints received, investigations, and disciplinary actions involving active and former judges, as well as subordinate judicial officers.
In 2025, the commission had jurisdiction over 1,868 judgeships. The commission is responsible for handling complaints involving California’s 200 commissioners and referees.
The commission considered 1,778 new complaints regarding active and former California judges in 2025. These complaints named 2,271 judges, with 1,166 being different individuals. In addition to these, 78 complaints concerned subordinate judicial officers, and 734 complaints involved individuals and matters outside the commission’s jurisdiction, such as federal judges and other government officials.
The commission ordered 99 preliminary investigations in 2025. At the start of 2025, one formal proceeding was pending, with two additional cases initiated during the year. Ultimately, two formal proceedings were concluded, leaving one pending at the end of the year.
The commission deferred 28 investigations in 2025, adding to the 30 pending from the previous year. Twelve deferred investigations were resolved and concluded, while 14 were returned to the active calendar and remained pending. Thirty matters remained deferred at the end of the year. The reasons for deferral included pending resolution of underlying cases, appeals, civil or criminal proceedings, rule 112 monitoring, and mentoring.
In 2025, the commission concluded 1,786 cases, with an average disposition time of 6.6 months from filing. A significant portion of complaints, 87%, originated from litigants, family members, or friends. Attorneys accounted for 5% of complaints, while judges and court staff made up 2%.
The majority of complaints, 1,683, were closed without discipline due to insufficient evidence of misconduct. Another 69 matters were closed without discipline following preliminary investigations, where allegations were unfounded, unprovable, or adequately explained.
In terms of disciplinary actions, the commission publicly censured three judges and issued 10 public admonishments. Additionally, there were nine private admonishments and 12 advisory letters. The most common type of misconduct resulting in discipline was demeanor/decorum, with 20 instances.
The California Constitution allows the commission to continue proceedings even after a judge retires or resigns. In 2025, the commission did not close any matters without discipline when a judge resigned or retired with an investigation pending.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
