Wis. Judicial Comm'n v. Piontek (In Re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Piontek)
927 N.W.2d 552
Wis.2019Background
- Judge Michael J. Piontek (Racine County circuit judge) was disciplined for two separate misconducts arising from criminal matters he presided over in 2014–2015.
- In S.S., Piontek made an ex parte phone call to the prosecutor, expressing views on guilt and urging that any plea include a felony conviction; he did not disclose the call to defense counsel and initially denied initiating it.
- In P.E., Piontek conducted an independent internet investigation into the defendant’s nursing licensure, relied on incorrect information at sentencing, curtailed the defendant’s responses, and did not give the parties prior notice or an opportunity to respond; the court of appeals vacated the sentence and ordered resentencing before a different judge.
- The Judicial Commission charged willful violations of the Code of Judicial Ethics (including SCR 60.04(1)(g) prohibiting ex parte communications and the prohibition on independent fact-finding) and related duties of impartiality and conduct.
- The Judicial Conduct Panel found the violations willful, noted mitigating (community service, no prior complaints, some remediation) and aggravating factors (bias, initial false denials, minimization), and recommended a 5–15 day suspension.
- The Wisconsin Supreme Court adopted the panel’s findings, concluded a suspension was warranted, and imposed a five-day unpaid suspension (bottom of recommended range) beginning June 24, 2019.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Piontek engaged in improper ex parte communication with prosecutor in S.S. | He initiated an undisclosed ex parte call expressing views on guilt and plea terms, violating SCR 60.04(1)(g). | He initially denied the call or minimized statements, later admitting only "off-handed" comments. | Held: Yes; willful violation of SCR 60.04(1)(g) and related ethical duties. |
| Whether Piontek impermissibly conducted independent factual investigation in P.E. | He independently researched licensure, relied on erroneous results at sentencing, and denied parties chance to respond, violating the ban on independent fact-finding. | He claimed he sought truth due to PSI concerns and later said the licensure issue "wasn’t a big deal," denying reliance. | Held: Yes; willful violation of SCR 60.04(1)(g) (independent investigation) and related duties; appellate court found sentence affected. |
| Whether violations were willful misconduct under Wis. Stat. § 757.81(4)(a) | Misconduct was knowing/willful violations of ethics rules warranting discipline. | Argued mitigating factors (no prior complaints, community service, early bench tenure, remedial change in practice). | Held: Violations were willful; mitigators considered but not dispositive. |
| Appropriate discipline (reprimand, suspension, removal) | Judicial Commission sought reprimand up to short suspension; panel recommended 5–15 day suspension. | Piontek requested a public reprimand. | Held: Suspension appropriate; Court imposed five-day unpaid suspension to protect public confidence and deter recurrence. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Judicial Disciplinary Proceedings Against Carver, 192 Wis.2d 136 (1995) (15-day suspension for judge’s undisclosed communications, biased on-record comments, and failure to disqualify)
- In re Judicial Disciplinary Proceedings Against Calvert, 382 Wis.2d 354 (2018) (15-day suspension for independent investigation, ex parte contact, and misleading statements undermining judicial impartiality)
- In re Judicial Disciplinary Proceedings Against Aulik, 146 Wis.2d 57 (1988) (90-day suspension for ex parte communications on merits and failure to fully disclose them)