431st District Judge Jonathan Bailey of Denton County

A special court of review has reinstated a public admonition against 431st District Judge Jonathan Bailey after he nonsuited his appeal of the sanction, which condemned him for violating a father's rights in a parental-termination case.

Bailey indicated he would instead focus on a death-penalty case he's adjudicating, instead of fighting the ethics charge against him.

"Having considered the significant judicial resources that will be expended by this special court of review, I no longer wish to pursue this matter, and hereby give notice of nonsuit with respect to my request for a trial de novo," the judge wrote.

His notice of nonsuit, which asked the court to dismiss his appeal with prejudice, suggests the judge won't continue to challenge his public admonition.

Bailey wrote in an email that the trial in his appeal was scheduled for Sept. 16, when he'll be presiding over an ongoing capital murder trial in which the defendant faces the death penalty.

"I could not pursue and devote attention to the [special court of review] appeal without neglecting my judicial responsibilities, something I was unwilling to do," Bailey said.

The Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct filed a charging document in Bailey's appeal that recounted the same allegations of judicial misconduct contained in the commission's July 16 public admonition against Bailey.

That admonition condemned Bailey's conduct in a parental rights termination case between a Texas agency and a father. The commission found Bailey violated judicial ethics rules, which require judges to recuse themselves when it's appropriate, to be patient, dignified and courteous to those who appear before them in court, and to perform their duties without bias or prejudice.

"The judge failed to treat [the] father with patience, dignity and courtesy by characterizing his trial testimony as 'ridiculous' and 'crap,' and threatening him with prosecution for perjury," the public admonition said.

It recounted findings of an appellate court that overturned Bailey's ruling. The appellate court found Bailey coerced the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services into seeking termination of the father's parental rights, fast-tracked the trial, improperly considered evidence in matters related to other children in the family, failed to appoint a lawyer for the father in a timely manner, refused both sides a continuance, acted as an advocate by questioning the father in the trial, and more.

"I continue to disagree with several of the [State Commission on Judicial Conduct's] allegations, and believe that I could have successfully demonstrated that those allegations were baseless," Bailey wrote in his notice. "However, I came to the conclusion that the appeal would demand considerable judicial resources—from myself and the justices assigned to the [special court of review]—that were better devoted to our primary judicial responsibilities."

Eric Vinson, executive director of the judicial commission, didn't respond to an email seeking comment before deadline.

Related stories:

Public Admonition for Texas Judge Who Called Litigant's Testimony 'Crap'

In Rare Move, Texas Judge Appeals Judicial Misconduct Sanction

Read the commission's charging document: