Opinion 09-79

March 12, 2009

Digest:         A judge may participate in a video production to be screened for students at the local high school to discourage them from driving while intoxicated, using illegal drugs, and smoking, provided the judge does not comment on pending or impending cases or render advice that casts doubt on the judge's ability to be impartial, and the judge’s participation does not detract from the dignity of judicial officer or interfere with the judge's performance of his/her judicial duties.

Rule:            22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2[A]; 100.3(B)(8); 100.4(A)(1)-(3); 100.4(B); Opinion 98-141(Vol XVII).

Opinion:

         A judge advises that the town, the county, the local high school and area churches have formed an ad hoc group that will prepare a video to be screened for students at the local high school this year and in the future, to discourage them from driving while intoxicated (DWI), using illegal drugs, and smoking. According to the judge, the video will depict such incidents as a simulated DWI traffic stop, courtroom plea, and sentencing. The Assistant District Attorney who prosecutes DWI cases in the town will appear as the prosecutor, and the Town Supervisor will appear as the defense counsel. The judge asks whether it is permissible for him/her to appear as the Town Justice. The judge also advises that the Assistant District Attorney will prepare the script, but that the judge will approve his/her portions of the script.

         A judge must avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and must act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]). A judge may engage in extra-judicial activities such as teaching see (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[B]), so long as they do not cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartiality, that do not detract from the dignity of judicial office, that do not interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties and are not incompatible with judicial office (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[A][1] - [3]). However, a judge must not comment on pending or impending cases (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[B][8]).

         In Opinion 98-141 (Vol. XVII), the Committee advised that a judge may participate in a video production of a not-for-profit group intended to educate teenagers about the court system and police procedures, provided the judge does not comment on pending or impending cases or render advice that casts doubt on the judge's impartiality. The judge's participation in the video also must not detract from the dignity of judicial officer or interfere with the judge's performance of his/her judicial duties (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[A][1]-[3]).

         Accordingly, the inquiring judge may participate in the proposed video production, subject to these limitations.