2016 Pa. Jud. Disc. LEXIS 58
Ct. Jud. Disc. Pa2016Background
- Thomasine Tynes served as a Philadelphia Traffic Court (PTC) judge from ~1990 and was PTC President Judge from March 2005 until retirement on July 3, 2012.
- Federal grand jury investigated a practice of providing "special consideration" to favored defendants; Tynes testified before the grand jury on October 4, 2011, and was indicted January 29, 2013.
- After a May 2014 trial, a jury convicted Tynes of two counts of perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1623); she was sentenced December 4, 2014 to 24 months concurrent; federal appeal remains pending.
- Philadelphia County prosecuted Tynes for acceptance of improper influence based on a bribe alleged during her tenure; she pleaded guilty December 17, 2014 to one count (65 Pa.C.S.A. § 1103(c)) and received a negotiated concurrent sentence; a PCRA challenge to that conviction is pending.
- The Judicial Conduct Board filed disciplinary charges alleging (Count 1) conviction of felonies and (Count 2) conduct bringing the judicial office into disrepute, each predicated on the federal and state convictions; parties entered joint stipulations of fact and law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Judicial Conduct Board) | Defendant's Argument (Tynes) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tynes’ federal perjury convictions subject her to discipline for conviction of a felony under Pa. Const. art. V, § 18(d)(1) | Federal perjury convictions are felonies warranting discipline/removal. | Requested deferral and noted ongoing federal appeal; procedural and health-based requests for delay. | Court: Yes — federal perjury convictions subject her to discipline under Art. V, § 18(d)(1). |
| Whether Tynes’ state conviction for accepting improper influence subjects her to discipline for conviction of a felony under Art. V, § 18(d)(1) | State felony conviction (accepting improper influence) warrants discipline/removal. | Contended matters were subject to collateral challenge (PCRA) and relied on negotiated plea; sought procedural deferral. | Court: Yes — state conviction subjects her to discipline under Art. V, § 18(d)(1). |
| Whether Tynes’ federal conviction brought the judicial office into disrepute under Art. V, § 18(d)(1) | Federal perjury convictions constitute conduct that brings the judicial office into disrepute, warranting discipline. | Emphasized appeals/status and health/procedural concerns; no substantive denial of the stipulated facts. | Court: Yes — federal convictions brought the judicial office into disrepute; discipline appropriate. |
| Whether Tynes’ state conviction brought the judicial office into disrepute under Art. V, § 18(d)(1) | State conviction (accepting improper influence) similarly brings office into disrepute and warrants discipline. | Noted plea and PCRA challenge; requested further proceedings/deferral. | Court: Yes — state conviction brought the judicial office into disrepute; discipline appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
(No officially reported decisions with Bluebook citations appear in the opinion.)