Florida Judicial Ethics Panel Denies Judge’s Law Enforcement Recertification Request

On Monday, June 16, 2025, the Florida Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee issued an opinion stating that a judge cannot retain active law enforcement credentials by completing recertification training with the police department where the judge previously served. The committee’s ruling, documented in Opinion Number 2025-12, emphasizes that such actions could reasonably cast doubt on the judge’s impartiality.

The judge in question, who previously served as a reserve city police officer in the same county, sought to maintain active certification, which mandates the completion of 40 hours of continuing education every four years. Although the judge is no longer working with the police department, the judge expressed a desire to complete the required training with that department and have it cover the associated costs.

The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee concluded that this relationship would likely undermine the judge’s independence and integrity. They referenced past opinions to support their stance, highlighting that associations with a former employer, particularly a police department in the same jurisdiction as the judge’s court, can create perceptions of bias.

The committee pointed to several previous cases to illustrate their reasoning. In JEAC Opinion 2000-04, a special hearing officer was advised against attending a local police department’s Citizens Police Academy due to potential appearances of impropriety. Similarly, in JEAC Opinion 2001-03, the committee determined that a judge could not act as a spokesperson for the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles promoting seatbelt use, as it could raise doubts regarding the judge’s impartiality in related cases. In another instance, JEAC Opinion 2006-29 found that a judge’s involvement with the Florida Highway Patrol Association would similarly interfere with the judge’s judicial duties and create an appearance of bias.

The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee serves to provide advisory opinions to judges and judicial candidates regarding the application of the Code of Judicial Conduct in specific situations. While these opinions can be utilized by judges and candidates as evidence of good faith, it is important to note that they are not binding on the Judicial Qualifications Commission.

A copy of the opinion can be found here.