In re Investigation of DesJardins
This text of In re Investigation of DesJardins (In re Investigation of DesJardins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCJD-13-0003734 21-AUG-2014 10:38 AM
SCJD-13-0003734
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
In the Matter of the Investigation of
MIMI DESJARDINS, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (#13-01)
ORDER OF SUSPENSION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ., and Intermediate Court of Appeals Chief Judge Nakamura, assigned by reason of vacancy)
Upon review of the October 1, 2013 Findings,
Conclusions and Recommendations submitted by the Commission on
Judicial Conduct (“the Commission”), the Commission’s subsequent
February 20, 2014 recommendation, this court’s March 24, 2014
order to show cause, and Respondent Mimi DesJardins’s April 21,
2014 response to the order to show cause and her attached
declaration and exhibit, this court makes the following findings
of fact and reaches the following conclusions of law based on
clear and convincing evidence.
On February 17, 2013, Respondent Mimi DesJardins, while
serving as a district court judge of the Second Circuit, improperly altered ten Judicial Determination of Probable Cause
documents, which is conduct involving dishonesty and deceit. On
March 9, 2013, the matter was properly referred to the Commission
for further investigation. On March 15, 2013, the Chief Justice,
in his capacity as administrative head of the courts, pursuant to
the Hawai#i State Constitution, article VI, section 6, see also
HRS §§ 601-2(a) and 601-2(b)(6) (1993), appropriately placed
Respondent DesJardins on paid administrative leave. By letter
dated April 16, 2013, Respondent DesJardins resigned as a
district court judge, effective May 1, 2013. On April 23, 2013,
the Office of the Attorney General filed a criminal complaint
charging Respondent DesJardins with one count of tampering with a
government record, in violation of HRS § 710-1017(1)(a) (1993).
Respondent DesJardins amended her resignation to take effect
April 23, 2013. On May 9, 2013, Respondent DesJardins pleaded no
contest to one count of violating HRS § 710-1017(1)(a) and was
ordered to, inter alia, pay a $2,000.00 fine and perform 300
hours of community service. Respondent DesJardins was granted a
one-year deferred acceptance of her no contest plea (“the DANC
plea”) and, on April 24, 2014, the District Court of the Second
Circuit entered an order, finding she had paid the fines and had
completed her community service, and granting dismissal of the
matter in accordance with the conditions of the DANC plea.
On March 24, 2014, this court, pursuant to its inherent
2 and constitutional authority to discipline judges and oversee the
practice of law within its jurisdiction, see Hawai#i State
Constitution, article VI, section 5, HRS §§ 602-5(a)(5) and (6)
(Supp. 2010), In re Disciplinary Bd. of the Haw. Supreme Court,
91 Hawai#i 363, 368, 984 P.2d 688, 693 (1999), entered an order
to show cause upon Respondent DesJardins, notifying her the court
was contemplating a period of suspension up to and including six
months, and offering her the opportunity of an evidentiary
hearing, in recognition of her rights to due process, cf. State
v. Freitas, 61 Haw. 262, 277, 602 P.2d 914, 925 (1979).
Respondent DesJardins declined the offer of an evidentiary
hearing.
Respondent DesJardins’s misconduct in office violated
Rules 1.2, 2.2, and 2.5 of the Hawai#i Revised Code of Judicial
Conduct, RSCH Rules 8.5(a)(2), 8.5(a)(4), and 8.5(a)(5), and
Rules 8.4(b) and (c) of the Hawai#i Rules of Professional Conduct
(1994). The misconduct was prejudicial to the performance of
Respondent DesJardins’s duty as a judge to ensure the fair and
impartial administration of justice, brought her judicial office
into disrepute, and undermines public confidence in the
judiciary. The record therefore establishes that a period of
suspension is required. In aggravation, Respondent DesJardins’s
conduct involved ten separate falsified documents and affected
the custody status of an arrestee, and Respondent DesJardins has
3 extensive experience in the practice of law. In mitigation,
Respondent DesJardins has a clean disciplinary record,
immediately admitted her conduct was wrong, was cooperative
during the Commission’s investigation, has expressed remorse for
her conduct, has a reputation as a concerned and committed family
law practitioner, and has performed extensive pro bono work on
behalf of families and children in the Second Circuit.
Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Mimi DesJardins is
suspended from the practice of law in this jurisdiction for 120
days, effective 30 days from the date of entry of this order,
pursuant to article VI, section 5 of the Hawai#i Constitution,
RSCH Rules 8.5 and 8.10, HRS §§ 602-5(a)(5) and (6) (Supp. 2010),
and Disciplinary Bd., 91 Hawai#i at 368, 984 P.2d at 693.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent DesJardins shall
serve her period of suspension in accordance with the duties
described in RSCH Rule 2.16, including submitting to this court
an affidavit of compliance with her suspension, similar to the
affidavit described in RSCH Rule 2.16(d), within 10 days after
the effective date of her suspension.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission on Judicial
Conduct shall perform the duties described in RSCH Rules 2.16(e)
and (f), though the Commission may, at its discretion, determine
the best method for transmission of the certified copies of the
4 suspension order to the judges of this state.
bear the cost of publication of the legal notice of suspension by
the Commission, upon the submission by the Commission to this
court of a verified bill of costs within 60 days from the entry
date of this order.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Respondent DesJardins may
not resume the practice of law until reinstated by order of this
court. The reinstatement process shall be conducted in
accordance with RSCH Rule 2.17.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, August 21, 2014.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Craig H. Nakamura
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In re Investigation of DesJardins, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-investigation-of-desjardins-haw-2014.