Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 13-17 Re Sandy K. KAUTZ , 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 639 ( 2014 )

Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC13-2262
____________
INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE, NO. 13-17
RE: SANDY K. KAUTZ
[October 16, 2014]
PER CURIAM.
We approve of the below stipulation and the Judicial Qualifications
Commission’s findings and recommendation that Judge Sandy K. Kautz receive a
public reprimand.
It is so ordered.
STIPULATION
In this disciplinary proceeding, the Investigative Panel of the Florida Judicial
Qualifications Commission and Judge Sandy K. Kautz, Circuit Judge, 5th Judicial
Circuit, present the following stipulation to this Court pursuant to [a]rticle V,
[s]ection 12 of the Florida Constitution and [r]ule 6(j) of the Florida Judicial
Qualifications Commission’s Rules.
1. Under [r]ule 6(j), the Investigative Panel “may reach agreement with a
judge on discipline or disability, and such stipulation shall be transmitted directly
to the Supreme Court, to accept, reject or modify in whole or in part.”
2. A Notice of Investigation dated March 11, 2013 was served on Judge
Kautz. A hearing before the Investigative Panel was held in Tampa, Florida on
April 12, 2013 at which Judge Kautz appeared and testified. The Investigative
Panel concluded that probable cause existed for the filing of Formal Charges.
3. In light of Judge Kautz’s responses to the Panel’s inquiries, the
Investigative Panel respectfully submits that the interest of justice and sound
judicial administration is best served by entering into this Stipulation regarding the
matters at issue and by the Findings and Recommendations which accompany this
Stipulation.
4. The allegations of violations of the [j]udicial [c]anons arise in three
distinct areas. The first involves Judge Kautz’s conduct and demeanor in presiding
over injunction, juvenile and dependency cases. From a review of the audio
recordings of those cases, it is apparent that Judge Kautz was frustrated by the use
of the court system by some as a solution to the many prob[l]ems inherent in those
cases. It is clear that Judge Kautz was intending to engender a more self-reliant
spirit in those appearing in court. However in doing so, she at times demeaned
-2-
those who appeared seeking injunctions or family members seeking assistance
from the Court.
5. As a new judge, Judge Kautz also failed to appreciate the input from the
other stakeholders in the court system to the extent that she on occasion would rule
in a way that made it appear she either did not know the law or refused to apply it.
Although done without any improper purpose, it did have the consequence of
undermining the public’s confidence in the judiciary.
6. On December 26, 2012 Judge Kautz appeared at a First Appearance
hearing before Judge Ritterhoff Williams, on behalf of her sister, Rhonda Kautz.
At that hearing Judge Kautz first vouched for her as a character witness. She also
argued on her sister’s behalf about the circumstances surrounding the allegations
contained in the probable cause affidavit. Finally she requested that the Judge
order law enforcement to assist her sister by accompanying her to the house to
retrieve personal items.
7. Judge Kautz admits that her actions in appearing on behalf of her sister
were improper due to her position as a judge. She did not, however, identify
herself as a judge, nor did she make any argument other than that envisioned by the
Rules of Criminal Procedure. She does now admit that her actions did violate the
Code of Judicial Conduct.
-3-
8. Judge Kautz accepts full responsibility for the conduct set forth above,
admits that it should not have occurred and regrets and apologizes for such
conduct. Judge Kautz denies that she intended to violate the applicable [c]anons,
and contends that she acted in the good faith belief that such conduct was
appropriate. Judge Kautz now acknowledges that her understanding of the effect
of the foregoing actions in light of the judicial [c]anons was erroneous.
9. Guided by the circumstances set forth above and the decisions in In re
Maloney, 916 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 2005)[,] and In re Maxwell, 994 So. 2d 974 (Fla.
2008), the Investigative Panel and Judge Kautz have reached an agreement on what
both believe is appropriate discipline under the circumstances. Consequently, the
Investigative Panel has [] concurrently filed Findings and Recommendations of
Discipline with the Court. Judge Kautz does not contest the Findings and
Recommendations and waives a plenary hearing before the Hearing Panel of the
Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, if the Recommendations are accepted
by the Court.
The parties acknowledge and understand that this Stipulation and attached
Findings and Recommendations of Discipline are subject to the review and
approval of this Court. The parties acknowledge and understand that this
Stipulation and Findings and Recommendations of Discipline may be rejected by
the Court, and in that event this matter may be returned to the Hearing Panel for a
-4-
final plenary hearing. In such event, the parties agree that none of the statements
in the Stipulation (or the attached Findings and Recommendations of Discipline)
are admissible in that hearing for any purpose. The parties further agree that none
of the negotiations related to this Stipulation are admissible for any purpose.
10. The parties agree that oral argument before this Court is not necessary in
light of the record, the nature of the charges, the contents of this Stipulation, and
the attached Findings and Recommendation of Discipline. As previously noted,
Judge Kautz waives her right to further hearings if they are accepted.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF DISCIPLINE
The Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (the “JQC”) served a Notice
of Investigation on Circuit Judge Sandy K. Kautz, Fifth Circuit, pursuant to [r]ule
6(b) of the Florida Judicial Qualification[s] Commission Rules.
The Investigative Panel of the Commission has now entered into a
Stipulation with Judge Kautz in which Judge Kautz admits that her conduct, in
appearing on behalf of her sister at her sister’s first appearance after an arrest was
inappropriate. This conduct violated [c]anons 1, 2A, 2B, and 5G of the Code of
Judicial Conduct, as set forth in the Stipulation submitted herewith.
Judge Kautz also admits that in presiding over certain types of cases
involving juveniles and those seeking injunctions, she has, on occasion, not
comported herself in accordance with the requisite patience, dignity and courtesy
-5-
that is expect[ed] of her judicial office. She further admits that she did not avail
herself of the support and assistance offered by her colleagues. This conduct
violated [c]anon 3B(4).
Judge Kautz has admitted the foregoing, accepts full responsibility, and
acknowledges that such conduct should not have occurred. Judge Kautz now
recognizes that this understanding was incorrect and has undertaken steps to
prevent their reoccurrence.
The Judicial Qualifications Commission has concluded that while the
judge’s conduct was misguided, it was not ill intentioned. Accordingly, the
Commission therefore finds and recommends that in the interests of justice, the
public welfare and sound [judicial] administration will be well served by a public
reprimand of Judge Kautz.
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON,
and PERRY, JJ., concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND
IF FILED, DETERMINED.
Original Proceeding – Judicial Qualifications Commission
Ricardo Morales, III, Chair, Michael Louis Schneider, General Counsel, and
Brooke S. Kennerly, Executive Director, Tallahassee, Florida,
for Judicial Qualifications Commission, Petitioner
James Michael Sawyer, Gainesville, Florida,
for Judge Sandy K. Kautz, Respondent
-6-