Florida Judge 'Regrets Her Conduct' After Pretending to Be Her Son's Lawyer, Which Sparked Slew of Ethics Charges
The judge said she regretted lying to investigators after they told her only her son's attorney could see him and participate in his interrogation. It was an incident that resulted in a domino effect of ethics charges.
June 08, 2020 at 07:26 PM
4 minute read
A Leon Circuit judge who reported herself to the Judicial Qualifications Commission for pretending to be her son's lawyer after he was arrested filed a response to ethics charges Friday.
Leon Circuit Judge Barbara Hobbs said she regretted lying to investigators on July 30, 2019, after they told her that only her son's attorney could see him and participate in his interrogation.
"She acknowledges that she should not have presented herself as her son's lawyer and regrets her conduct," the filing said.
It was an incident that resulted in a domino effect of ethics charges.
Hobbs's son was arrested for allegedly shooting an acquaintance. He has been charged with attempted second-degree murder, according to the JQC's filing, which accused Hobbs of trying to arrange unmonitored access to him in jail.
The judge denied those allegations, arguing she never asked for any preferential treatment. Hobbs did not appear in court on behalf of her son at any time.
The jurist also claimed she later followed protocol by telling court security that she wanted to visit her son, but she didn't go through with it after being advised, "that was not a good idea in that she was on the criminal felony bench, and that she had received death threats in her judicial position," according to Friday's filing.
Hobbs then reportedly went to the sheriff's office, which shared the same concerns over safety. The office tried, but failed, to set up the technology necessary for her to speak with her son remotely. Hobbs has still not been able to visit her son, according to her filing, but has talked to him via monitored phone calls.
Roosevelt Randolph of Knowles & Randolph in Tallahassee represents Hobbs.
But that wasn't the end of it. The JQC also took issue with the fact that an attorney who was set to appear before Hobbs in two cases then filed a notice of appearance on her son's behalf in a separate pending DUI case.
Hobbs admitted she should have recused herself but argued she'd recently transferred the criminal division to the family division, where she took over a previous judge's docket, and didn't know who would be appearing before her.
The JQC has accused Hobbs of failing to supervise her judicial assistant's timesheets. It alleged the judge allowed the assistant to "inappropriately interpose herself" in the case by sitting at the judge's son's attorneys' table during the detention hearing. The judicial assistant also allegedly gave her security badge to Hobbs's son, allowing him to access nonpublic areas of the courthouse.
Hobbs claimed she was out of town and didn't know about this incident, but noted that her son's lawyer had asked the judicial assistant to sit with Hobbs's father, and to explain what was happening, because the father is hard of hearing.
"Judge Hobbs followed through with personally counseling her JA on court security and the seriousness and inappropriateness of her (JA's) conduct," Hobbs's filing said.
The JQC claimed the judicial assistant helped the mother of Hobbs' son's child to file an injunction against the victim in his pending criminal case. But the judge countered that the mother simply asked about where to file completed paperwork.
Hobbs is also accused of being late with orders and decisions on emergency matters after transferring into family court—something the judge countered happened because of a misunderstanding about how her new role worked and because a death in the family took her out of the office. The judge has since gone through training, according to Friday's filing.
Read Judge Hobbs's full response:
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
Trending Stories
- 1Some of 2024's Most Notable GC Moves Were Drenched in Drama
- 2Will 2025 Bring a Change to Lawyers' Mandatory Pro Bono Duties Under 'Madden'?
- 3Wholesale Real Estate Transaction Transparency and Protection Act Takes Effect Jan. 4: What You Need to Know
- 4Decision of the Day: 'Attorney's Eyes Only' Protective Order Denied; Good Cause Not Demonstrated
- 5The Crypto Guys Seem to Like Paul Atkins as a New SEC Commissioner, but Will He Be Good for the Securities Industry?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250