STATE IN INTEREST OF v. << (2020)

Writ application denied.

I concur with the Court's denial of the State's writ application in this matter, as the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal correctly reversed the trial court's delinquency adjudication of the juvenile in this matter. However, although we decline to exercise our supervisory jurisdiction, I write separately to emphasize the paramount importance of our duty as judges to promote public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary. See Canon 1, Louisiana Code of Judicial Conduct. Specifically, judges must avoid overzealous commentary from the bench and rule according to the record before them. In this case, not only did the trial judge appear to ignore the repeated hearsay objections by defense counsel, she hijacked the district attorney's questioning of the witness and injected unnecessary commentary into the proceedings before any finding of guilt [“All I know is that J.P. is currently on probation (in another jurisdiction) ․ at some point it (car burglaries) has to stop ․ when does enough become enough ․?”]. In my view, such interjections during the trial of the case reflect a lack of impartiality and could run afoul of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Hughes, J., would grant. Crichton, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.