N.C. Jud. Standards Comm'n R. 9

(a) Summary Dismissal After Initial Review. The Executive Director

and the Commission Counsel shall review a written complaint received by the

Commission to determine whether the complaint discloses facts that, if true, indicate

that a judge has engaged in conduct in violation of the Code or suffers from a

disability that seriously interferes with the judge’s judicial duties. If the initial

review does not disclose such facts, or if the allegations in the written complaint are

obviously unfounded or frivolous, then the presiding Chairperson or

Vice-Chairperson shall summarily dismiss the complaint at the next investigative

panel meeting, subject to the right of a member of the panel to review the complaint

and request consideration of it pursuant to subsection (b) of this rule.

(b) Action on Review by the Investigative Panel. A written complaint

not summarily dismissed pursuant to subsection (a) of this rule shall be considered

by an investigative panel. The investigative panel shall also consider any complaint

brought on the Commission’s own motion that is based on credible information

received by the Commission disclosing facts that, if true, indicate that a judge has

engaged in conduct in violation of the Code or suffers from a disability that seriously

interferes with the judge’s judicial duties. By the affirmative vote of at least 5

members, the investigative panel may dismiss the complaint or authorize an

investigation pursuant to Rule 10.

(c) Notice to Judge Regarding Complaint. A judge who is the subject

of a complaint pending before the Commission shall not be notified of the filing of the

complaint, except:

(1) if notification to the judge is required pursuant to Rule 10,

following the authorization of a formal investigation;

(2) if the investigative panel considering the complaint has

authorized the Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, Executive

Director, Commission Counsel, or Commission Investigator to

notify the judge of the complaint in the interests of the

administration of justice; or

(3) if the judge has been notified by the complainant that the

complaint was filed, or if the judge has been notified by another

state agency of the receipt of a complaint that was received by

that agency and forwarded to the Commission as required by law

or other rules.

(d) Notice to Complainant Regarding Commission Action.

A complainant who files a complaint with the Commission shall be notified in writing

of:

(1) the Commission’s receipt of the complaint;

(2) the initiation of a formal investigation into the complainant’s

allegations;

(3) a dismissal of the complaint by the investigative panel, if

applicable;

(4) the investigative panel’s decision with respect to an appropriate

request for reconsideration after the dismissal of a complaint; and

(5) the issuance of an order of public discipline by the Supreme Court

in the matter.

In cases in which a complaint is dismissed with a private letter of caution

pursuant to Rule 11, the complainant shall be notified that the matter has concluded

and that the Commission has taken appropriate action within its authority to address

the complainant’s concerns of judicial misconduct.

In cases in which disciplinary proceedings against the judge have been

initiated, the complainant shall be notified of the proceedings only if the complainant

is to be called as a witness, or if the presiding Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson deems

notice to be necessary in the interests of the administration of justice.

(e) Requests for Reconsideration. Upon dismissal of a complaint, a

complainant may request reconsideration of the dismissal, provided that a request

for reconsideration will only be considered by the investigative panel that dismissed

the complaint if a request includes new or additional information not previously

considered by the panel. Multiple requests for reconsideration without new or

additional information will be considered an abuse of the Commission’s complaint

process and may result in a bar order pursuant to subsection (f) of this rule.

(f) Abuse of the Complaint Process. At any meeting of an investigative

panel, the Commission Counsel may request that the Commission bar a complainant

from filing further complaints or requests for reconsideration with the Commission

for either a specified period of time or permanently as to allegations against the judge

that have already been considered by the Commission. A bar shall be ordered only

upon the affirmative vote of at least 5 members of the panel after a finding by clear

and convincing evidence that the complainant has abused the complaint process by:

(1) using abusive or threatening language that is directed toward the

Commission, Commission members, or Commission staff, or

toward specific members of the judiciary;

(2) knowingly filing false information with the Commission;

(3) repeatedly demanding that the Commission rehear a complaint

that has already been reviewed and dismissed without providing

new or significantly different allegations or evidence, or

repeatedly demanding that the Commission consider a complaint

that has already been determined to be outside of the time period

allowed for review of the alleged misconduct by the Commission

or outside of the Commission’s jurisdiction; or

(4) filing complaints that maintain the complainant is not subject to

the authority of the State of North Carolina, or its laws, rules, or

procedures, and that refuse to recognize the authority of the

General Statutes of North Carolina over the Commission’s

operations and procedures.