Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
INQUIRY CONCERNING a Judge JQC No. 2024-796 re: Martha Cannon ADAMS.
The Judicial Qualifications Commission has filed with our Court a Stipulation and Findings and Recommendations of Discipline to resolve a charge against Orange County Judge Martha Adams. The parties agree that Judge Adams violated the Canons of Judicial Conduct through “biased, impatient, undignified, and discourteous behavior [toward] the staff and management of the Ninth Circuit State Attorney's Office.” The parties further agree that Judge Adams should be disciplined by the imposition of a public reprimand. We accept the stipulation and findings and will impose the recommended discipline. See art. V, § 12(c)(1), Fla. Const. (allowing the Court to accept, reject, or modify the Commission's findings and recommendations).
The parties agree that, while presiding over criminal cases in her court, Judge Adams directed rude and intemperate comments at members of the State Attorney's Office. She called one assistant state attorney an “ass”; talked about making the life of one State Attorney's Office employee “a shambles”; and said that the State Attorney's Office was conspiring to remove her from the bench and that therefore she would have to start “being a ‘bitch’ ” in her rulings. We accept the Commission's conclusion that these actions violated Canons 1, 2A, 3B(4), and 3B(5) of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Aside from generally requiring judges to uphold the integrity of the courts, these canons demand that judges treat parties respectfully and impartially.
Judge Adams’ comments are well outside the bounds of what is acceptable for members of our judiciary. In many cases, adequate discipline for such behavior would require more than a public reprimand. The record shows, though, that Judge Adams had a clean disciplinary record throughout her seventeen years of prior judicial service and that she had no other complaints of this nature. The Commission also found that Judge Adams has expressed deep regret and apologized in writing to the individuals directly affected by her misconduct. We accept the Commission's determination that, given this mitigation, discipline short of a suspension is sufficient.
For all these reasons, we approve the Stipulation and Findings and Recommendations of Discipline in this matter. Judge Adams is hereby ordered to appear before this Court for the administration of a public reprimand at a time to be established by the Clerk of this Court.
It is so ordered.
PER CURIAM.
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, LABARGA, COURIEL, FRANCIS, and SASSO, JJ., concur. GROSSHANS, J., recused.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. SC2025-0278
Decided: May 08, 2025
Court: Supreme Court of Florida.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)