Judge Genece Brinkley.

The defense team for Meek Mill has kicked up a significant ethical cloud around the Philadelphia judge who handed the rap star a lengthy jail sentence last year, but, according to several court watchers, the storm may blow over without significantly impacting either Mill's case, or the judge's ability to preside over cases.

The dispute between Mill, whose real name is Robert Williams, and Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Genece Brinkley has been roiling since November when Brinkley sentenced the rapper to a two- to four-year prison sentence for violating his probation. The controversy began with allegations from Williams team that Brinkley was infatuated with the rapper and pushed him to switch managers from the New York-based Roc Nation to the Philadelphia-based Charlie Mack, and has since escalated to Brinkley's decision two weeks ago to hire an attorney to possibly file a defamation suit against the rapper's defense team.

Williams' attorney, Joseph Tacopina of Tacopina & Seigel, who has raised numerous allegations about Brinkley allegedly being infatuated with Williams, said the team not only wants to have Brinkley off the case, but also said Brinkley should be removed from the bench.

“We think obviously she's unfit to sit in judgment of Meek Mill,” Tacopina said. “The bigger issue is you have someone who we think acted unethically, and shouldn't be sitting in judgment of others. That's one of the prime tactics, and prime motivating factors.”

Tacopina declined to comment about whether the defense team has filed any disciplinary proceedings against Brinkley.

Brinkley's attorney, A. Charles Peruto Jr., had harsh words for Williams' defense team.

“What business is this of theirs? How does this affect anything the judge did [in Williams' case]?” Peruto said. “This is a sideshow.”

Several ethics attorneys said that documents obtained by The Legal raised numerous ethical questions. However, the lawyers generally agreed that, without evidence showing more a pattern of misconduct, it is unlikely the alleged conduct rises to the level of having a judge removed from the bench and likely wouldn't receive much more than a reprimand.

The documents obtained by The Legal include a decade's worth of Brinkley's statements of financial interest to the state Supreme Court that fail to list three properties she owned (two of which she sold), a police report noting that Brinkley brought her secretary during a work day to help the judge fire a contractor who had been working on a property she owned, and a letter regarding a personal lawsuit sent on Brinkley's personal stationary. The two-sentence letter includes the secretary's initials, suggesting that the secretary may have authored the letter.

Another document The Legal obtained was a copy of a letter Brinkley sent to tenants of a property she owned telling them to vacate the premises for nonpayment. The 2004 letter said, “As you know, I am a judge of the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia County and I will not hesitate to proceed against you immediately to remove you from the property.”

Peruto said Brinkley had owned the properties with her husband, but that they had separated roughly a decade ago. He did not comment specifically about the other documents, except to say that the allegations are a distraction and taken out of context.

Ethics attorneys who spoke with The Legal said failing to list the properties can be a tough disciplinary issue to pursue, as the conduct board would need to show Brinkley intentionally meant to hide the properties from the Supreme Court.

Regarding using her judicial secretary for personal business, attorneys likened the situation to former Philadelphia Judge Willis Berry. Berry used his judicial staff to help him manage several rental properties. In 2009, Berry was suspended for the conduct, and in 2015, a jury found him guilty on charges of theft of services and conflict of interest.

Attorneys said the disciplinary proceedings against Berry clearly established that judicial staff can only conduct judicial business. However, ethics attorneys said Berry's conduct was significantly more egregious, and without more of a pattern, Brinkley's conduct would likely be considered de minimis.

According to attorneys, the most problematic issue is the letter Brinkley sent to her tenants indicating that she was a judge.

The letter, attorneys said, appears to a violate conduct rule barring judges from abusing “the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests.” However, the age of the letter may bring some challenges if the Conduct Board wanted to pursue disciplinary charges, and without additional evidence showing a clear pattern of abuse, it is unlikely Brinkley would face any serious disciplinary penalties.

“The age of the 2004 letter might mean it gets dismissed because, if there is mitigating evidence, she might not be able to marshal that mitigating evidence,” ethics attorney Ellen Brotman said.

“All together, if it was all over the last six months it would be significant,” ethics attorney Samuel Stretton said. “But I'm not sure they're that significant because they seem to be more isolated.”

Stretton noted that he is representing Wanda Chavarria, a former court clerk who worked for Brinkley, but was fired last week after it was revealed that she had given Williams a letter asking him to pay for her son's college tuition.

Criminal defense attorneys also questioned what impact raising these issues would have on getting Williams' case overturned.

One defense attorney said the alleged conduct involving her secretary and rental properties seemed “irrelevant” to Williams' case, and that pushing the issue could do more harm than good for Williams' appeal.

“You can't throw everything at the wall and hope it sticks,” the defense attorney who declined to be named for the story said. “If you miss it's really bad, and it can hurt your client.”

Matthew Mangino, a defense attorney and former prosecutor, also said he didn't see a high likelihood that other defense attorneys will seek to raise the issues in their cases.

“The issues don't relate directly to her decision-making,” Mangino said. “I don't see anything necessarily that would cause the [court administration] to say you need to step aside. I don't see that right now.”

Mangino, and others, also said that, given the publicity the case has attracted, it is highly unlikely Brinkley would be able to preside over the case going forward, regardless of the ethical cloud the defense team has kicked up. And Peruto threatening to possibly sue Williams' defense team makes it even more likely Brinkley will have to recuse, attorneys agreed.

Attorneys suggested that, at this point, the best defense would be to focus on whether Williams' sentence was excessive.

“The bottom line is, your client got a two- to four-year sentence. You think it's excessive, or out of line, what does the judge's failure to disclose something on her financial disclosure form have to do with that?” Mangino said. “Making points in the court of public opinion is not going to result in a modification of Meek Mill's sentence.”