Judiciary
California judge admonished for doing this after telling newbie attorney to stop shaking her head
Judge Thomas R. Adams has been a judge of the Santa Barbara County Superior Court in California (pictured above) since 1983. His current term began in 2021. (Photo from Shutterstock)
A California judge has received a public admonishment partly for flinging court papers at a newbie defense lawyer because he thought that she was shaking her head at him.
Judge Thomas R. Adams of Santa Barbara County, California, acted in November 2023 after expressing impatience with Deputy Public Defender Reem Yassin, according to the Dec. 10 public admonishment. Yassin had been admitted to law practice for only three months at the time.
Law360 has coverage.
Yassin had filed a request for pretrial diversion for her client and noticed it for hearing during a continued arraignment. During the hearing, the prosecution objected to the diversion request on several grounds, including that the arraignment department was not the proper forum.
The California Commission on Judicial Performance’s public admonishment says this exchange followed:
“Let me interrupt,” Adams said. “This is not the time that I’m supposed to play referee between public defender and district attorney. OK? I just don’t have the time or the patience to do that. OK? If you want to have a fistfight with the DA, take it outside.”
Adams continued after Yassin tried to interject.
“I have a whole bunch of people sitting here waiting for their cases to be called. I just don’t need this, OK? I just don’t need it. This is not the first time it’s happened. So, we’re all on—we’re all on notification.”
“And I’m sorry,” he said as he threw off his glasses. “Don’t shake your head at me like, ‘Oh, don’t give me this crap,’ OK?”
Yassin protested that she wasn’t shaking her head at the judge.
“No, you are,” he said as he pointed at Yassin. “I’ll come back later. You guys can have a seat right there, OK? I just don’t need this from you today, OK? Are we on the same page? You’re asking the court to do you a big favor.”
At that point, he flung the moving papers toward Yassin. They landed in front of the podium where she was standing.
The defendant then commented, “That was crazy.”
Yassin was so distressed by the incident that her superiors sent her home and temporarily reassigned her cases to other attorneys. She didn’t return to court until the following week.
Adams later sent Yassin an apology letter acknowledging that his conduct was inappropriate.
The public admonishment also said Adams made misleading statements to the California Commission on Judicial Performance in a previous ethics investigation when he said he intended to retire.
“Judge Adams hopes that the commission will conclude that in light of nearly half of a century’s career on the bench and Judge Adams’ retirement, his missteps do not warrant the imposition of discipline,” he said in his response to the preliminary investigation letter in the previous ethics case.
Adams did not retire. He was privately admonished in June 2023 in that case, which cited an ex parte conversation with the jury foreperson, a failure to cooperate with other judges and court officials in the administration of court business, and conduct that could reasonably be interpreted as biased based on sex and gender.
The bias incident stemmed from a defendant’s remark that a female attorney was “so beautiful.”
“I’ll stipulate to that,” Adams replied.
Adams received a previous private admonishment in 1993 for ordering a pro se family law litigant to be taken into custody for two days without a contempt hearing.
Adams respects the public admonishment decision by the California Commission on Judicial Performance, his representatives told Law360 in a statement.
Throughout his 50-year judicial career, the statement said, Adams endeavored to be “respectful, courteous and patient” to everyone in his courtroom, the statement said.
“The incident involving the deputy public defender was an isolated occurrence for which he immediately sought to make amends by sending her a private letter of apology,” the statement said. “Judge Adams did not intend to mislead the commission regarding his plans to remain on the bench but acknowledges that he should have communicated with the commission more clearly his intention to continue his judicial service.”
