News & Observer | newsobserver.com | Judge faces new charges

Published: Nov 29, 2005 12:00 AM
Modified: Nov 29, 2005 05:54 AM

Judge faces new charges

High court has censured her twice

Hill could be removed if culpable of willful misconduct.

Story Tools

Advertisements
For the third time in a little more than three years, Wake Superior Court Judge Evelyn W. Hill will answer a complaint before the state judicial ethics board that her conduct on the bench was unprofessional.

Hill, who has been censured twice by the state Supreme Court, is accused this time of not hiding her "disdain" for two defense lawyers in front of juries.

In one case, the N.C. Court of Appeals found that Hill's conduct so prejudiced the jury during a 2003 trial that it granted a new trial to the defendant -- a convicted sex offender.

Hill, 57, who earns a salary of $109,279, is the third judge since the N.C. Judicial Standards Commission was created in 1973 to face allegations of misconduct three times. The other two received censures and eventually retired.

Since becoming a judge in 2001, Hill has had numerous complaints against her, including that she jokingly threatened to shove a deputy's genitals through his nose, referred to a black lawyer as "a token," and berated other lawyers.

Hill has never been recommended for the most severe punishment -- removal from office. However, she now faces a charge of willful misconduct based on a pattern of misbehavior, according to the Nov. 22 complaint, which was released Monday.

The N.C. Judicial Standards Commission does not generally reveal what prompted the complaint and can open an inquiry under its own authority. The commission is made up of other judges, lawyers and the general public.

Judges have been removed from office when found responsible for willful misconduct, which is done intentionally or in bad faith, a legal expert says.

"A single event of willful misconduct can support removal from office," said Jim C. Drennan, a court system expert with the Institute of Government at UNC-Chapel Hill.

Hill did not return a message left Monday at her office at the Wake County courthouse, where she is holding court this week. Her lawyer, Joseph E. Zeszotarski Jr., declined to comment Monday.

In November 2003, Hill, through her lawyer, apologized to those involved in the incidents that sparked the complaints. "Judge Hill has served the citizens of this county and state in a distinguished fashion as a Superior Court judge for the past three years," Zeszotarski said in that statement. "She looks forward to continuing her hard work for the court system in our state."

A hearing has not yet been scheduled before the full commission. After a hearing, the commission will make a recommendation to the N.C. Supreme Court, which ultimately decides judicial discipline. The options are removal, censure or no action.

Convictions appealed

Defense lawyers have appealed at least eight defendants' convictions because they say Hill's commentary from the bench denied their clients the right to a fair and impartial trial. Twice defendants have gotten new trials based on complaints about Hill's conduct.

In one case, which is at issue in the pending ethics complaint, Douglas Shane Wright, 32, of Burlington, was convicted in October 2003 of two counts of taking indecent liberties with a child. In August, the state appeals court granted Wright a new trial because of Hill's treatment of his defense lawyer.

Hill complained about Graham lawyer Craig Thompson's habit of saying "OK" while questioning witnesses, according to court records. She threatened to fine him $100 each time he said the word. Hill also called Thompson's behavior "rude, discourteous, uncivil and contemptuous," records say.

The appeals court ruled that Hill's "numerous negative comments to the defense counsel, both in and out of the presence of the jury, created a negative atmosphere at the trial to the prejudice of the defendant."


Next page >

Staff writer Andrea Weigl can be reached at 829-4848 or aweigl@newsobserver.com.
No comments have been posted for this story. Log in to be the first to comment.


The News & Observer is pleased to be able to offer its users the opportunity to make comments and hold conversations online. However, the interactive nature of the internet makes it impracticable for our staff to monitor each and every posting.

Since The News & Observer does not control user submitted statements, we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted on our website. In addition, we remind anyone interested in making an online comment that responsibility for statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not The News and Observer.

If you find a comment offensive, clicking on the exclamation icon will flag the comment for review by the administrators, we are counting on the good judgment of all our readers to help us.

Print Ads View all ads from past 7 days »

Hosting Partners of
newsobserver.com

Member of the
Real Cities Network

A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company