# Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 99-09, re Kinsey

> Supreme Court of Florida · January 30, 2003 · 28 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 97

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7758126

## Case

- **Full name:** Inquiry Concerning a Judge, No. 99-09, re Patricia KINSEY
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Florida
- **Decided:** January 30, 2003
- **Citations:** 28 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 97; 842 So. 2d 77; 2003 Fla. LEXIS 103
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Wells
- **Judges:** Anstead, Harding, Lewis, Pariente, Quince, Shaw, Wells
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7758126

## Opinion text

WELLS, J.,
dissenting.
I dissent from the majority’s decision. I would approve only the recommendation that Judge Kinsey was guilty of material misrepresentations in charges 7 and 9. For that, I believe the appropriate sanction would be a public reprimand.
My reason for dissenting as to the acceptance of the other charges is that I believe that the JQC’s findings of guilt in respect to those charges are in direct conflict with the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765 , 122 S.Ct. 2528 , 153 L.Ed.2d 694 (2002). While I agree with this Court’s majority that the Court in White did not declare our Code’s “pledge or promise” clause unconstitutional, I cannot read the charges for which the JQC found Judge Kinsey guilty in charges 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 12 as being other than charges based upon Judge Kinsey announcing her position on these matters. The guilty findings run directly contrary to the United States Supreme Court decision by which we are bound.
QUINCE, J., concurs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7758126. Public record. Not legal advice.