# Boggan v. JUDICIAL INQUIRY COM'N OF STATE

> Supreme Court of Alabama · December 3, 1999 · 759 So. 2d 550

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9935574

## Case

- **Full name:** Jerry Boggan, Probate Judge of Wilcox County v. Judicial Inquiry Commission of the State of Alabama.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Alabama
- **Decided:** December 3, 1999
- **Citations:** 759 So. 2d 550; 1999 WL 1100912
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Hooper
- **Judges:** Cook, Hooper, Houston
- **Cited by:** 6 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/9935574

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- concluding that judge waived state constitutional challenges by not raising them at Court of the Judiciary, but then considering merits of constitutional challenge

## Opinion text

With respect to Justice Cook's dissenting opinion, I will briefly comment. Justice Cook writes: "The main opinion asserts that `this Court does not have the authority to reduce or reject the sanction imposed by the Court of the Judiciary.'" 759 So.2d at 558. I have always agreed with this wise saying: "A text without a context is a pretext." The complete quote, which I consider to be a more accurate communication of this Court's holding in this case, is as follows:
"This Court has repeatedly held that when it reviews the record of the proceedings of the Court of the Judiciary on the law and the facts, if the record shows by clear and convincing evidence that the charge or charges have been committed then this Court does not have the authority to reduce or reject the sanction imposed by the Court of the Judiciary."
759 So.2d at 555. (Citations omitted; emphasis added.)
The Alabama Constitution of 1901, Amendment 328 , §§ 6.17 and 6.18, set up a system for policing the Alabama judiciary. It is not for this Court to second-guess the decisions of the policing mechanisms the people set up for judges by adopting Amendment 328. Of course, if a sanction imposed by the Court of the Judiciary was not supported by clear and convincing evidence, or if it was not clear that a judge had committed a particular offense, then this Court would do its duty to superintend the Court of the Judiciary. However, this case does not present such a situation.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9935574. Public record. Not legal advice.