JQC 2025 001 RE CLERMONT v. << (2026)

Before the Court are the Judicial Qualifications Commission's Findings and Recommendations of Discipline and an accompanying joint stipulation to resolve charges against Broward County Judge Woody Clermont. As explained below, the Court accepts the findings and will impose the recommended discipline. See art. V, § 12(c)(1), Fla. Const. (authorizing the Court to accept, reject, or modify the Commission's recommendations and to order appropriate discipline).

Judge Clermont admits that, on April 11, 2025, he represented a friend at a first appearance proceeding in Broward County after the friend's arrest for domestic violence. Judge Clermont negotiated with the assistant state attorney prosecuting the case, presented argument to the court in favor of a proposed bond, and offered unsubpoenaed character testimony on behalf of the friend. The presiding judge and the assistant state attorney knew of Clermont's judicial status, but the Commission found no evidence that it affected the other officials’ handling of the case.

The Commission concluded, and Judge Clermont agrees, that Clermont's actions violated Canons 1, 2A, 2B, and 5G of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Those canons require judges to uphold the integrity of the judiciary and to avoid the appearance of impropriety, and they prohibit judges from using their office to advance the private interests of another, from voluntarily testifying as a character witness, and from practicing law. We agree that Judge Clermont's factual admissions amply support the Commission's legal conclusions.

The Commission and Judge Clermont have asked this Court to impose a public reprimand as discipline. The Commission notes that Judge Clermont has no prior disciplinary history and that he has been remorseful and cooperative throughout these proceedings. We accept the Commission's recommendation. Therefore, we order Judge Clermont 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 LABARGA, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, FRANCIS, SASSO, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.