FOR THE RESPONDENT FOR THE INDIANA COMMISSION
ON JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS
Kevin McGoff Meg Babcock, Counsel to the
Commission
8900 Keystone Crossing, Suite 400 115 West Washington Street,
Suite 1080
Indianapolis, Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
IN THE MATTER OF )
FREDRICK R. SPENCER, ) Case No. 48S00-0102-JD-137
JUDGE OF THE MADISON )
CIRCUIT COURT )
JUDICIAL DISCIPLINARY ACTION
December 27, 2001
Per curiam
This matter comes before the Court as a result of a judicial
disciplinary complaint filed by the Indiana Commission on Judicial
Qualifications (“Commission”) against the respondent, Fredrick R. Spencer,
Judge of the Madison Circuit Court. The Court has original jurisdiction
under Article 7 Section 4 of the Indiana Constitution and Indiana Admission
and Discipline Rule 25. The Court appointed masters to hear and take
evidence. See Admis. Disc. R. 25 (VIII)(I). Before the case went to
trial, however, the Commission and respondent jointly submitted a
“Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline.” See
Admis. Disc. R. 25(VIII)(H). The Court approved the parties’ agreed
settlement by written order dated September 24, 2001.
The parties stipulated that during his 2000 judicial re-election
campaign, the respondent placed an advertisement on television that ran
approximately 128 times in Madison County, Indiana. The advertisement
included narration stating, “When Judge Spencer ran for judge of the
Circuit Court, he promised to send more child molesters to jail . . .
burglars to jail . . . drug dealers to jail . . . .” The advertisement
depicted a cell door slamming shut with each statement. The narrator
stated in conclusion, “He’s kept his promise. Let’s keep Judge Spencer.”
The respondent appeared in his judicial robe at the beginning and at the
end of the advertisement.
The parties stipulated, and the Court agrees, that the respondent
violated Canon 5(A)(3)(d)(i) of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which
prohibits a judicial candidate from making pledges or promises of conduct
in office other than the faithful and impartial performance of the duties
of the office; Canon 5(A)(3)(d)(ii), which prohibits a judicial candidate
from making statements that commit or appear to commit the candidate with
respect to cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before
the court; and Canon 5(A)(3)(a), which requires a candidate to maintain the
dignity appropriate to the judicial office and act in a manner consistent
with the independence of the judiciary.
The parties further agreed that an appropriate sanction for the
respondent’s misconduct is a public reprimand. A harsher sanction may be
appropriate for some violations of Canon 5(A)(3). However, in light of the
Court’s policy favoring the agreed resolution of disciplinary cases and the
resulting savings of judicial resources and expenses, the Court accepts the
parties’ agreed discipline. Accordingly, the respondent, Judge Fredrick R.
Spencer, is hereby reprimanded and admonished for his conduct.
Costs of this proceeding are assessed against the respondent.
All Justices concur.