The Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board on Wednesday filed a lengthy complaint against Kane County Judge James T. Doyle, founder and overseer of the county’s drug rehabilitation court, saying he abused his powers and violated the rights of criminal defendants.
The 20-count complaint also says Doyle intimidated lawyers and court workers with “conduct that was prejudicial to the administration of justice.”
Doyle’s attorneys have three weeks to respond to the allegations that he “engaged in intemperate acts of intimidation, retribution and vindictiveness in response to those who have disagreed with the manner in which he has presided over judicial proceedings.”
Theresa Gronkiewicz, an attorney for Doyle, said the judge intends to fight the allegations.
“We’re going to defend the charges vigorously,” she said. “Judge Doyle is very disappointed the JIB elected to file these charges.”
Doyle, 54, is on vacation and could not be reached for comment.
Kane County Chief Judge Donald Hudson said Wednesday that he will review the complaint and decide whether Doyle should be temporarily reassigned to other duty while the case is pending.
Supreme Court rules allow the chief judge to temporarily assign a judge to restricted duties or non-judicial duties, he said.
More Top Picks Best Sunglasses For Men Driving
After a public hearing, the Illinois Courts Commission can remove from office, suspend without pay, censure or reprimand any member of the judiciary for willful misconduct in office or persistent failure to perform duties. The commission is composed of a Supreme Court judge, two Appellate Court judges and two circuit judges.
The drug-rehabilitation program is part of the prison diversion program and is strictly voluntary for non-violent felons whose crimes are related to drug abuse. Nearly 1,000 people are expected to participate in drug court this year.
The court, which has drawn widespread praise for its successes during the last four years, combines counseling, treatment and testing, and includes intense hands-on involvement by Doyle–too intense, the inquiry board’s 65-page complaint says.
In late October, the county bar association said Doyle was “not presently recommended” for retention in the November election, the first time he received a negative rating.
At the time, drug court director Michael C. Daly said complaints about the program were from a small group of disgruntled lawyers whose client list had been hurt because of Doyle’s efforts.
“The vast majority of attorneys support this program,” Daly said.
But the complaint says Doyle tried to conceal rights violations “by questioning defendants either without a court reporter present or after instructing the court reporter to go off the record.”
The complaint also contends that in December 2003 Doyle ignored instructions by then-Chief Judge Philip DiMarzio not to violate defendants’ rights and to address concerns raised a month earlier by several attorneys who had complained about Doyle’s tactics.
The complaint also says Doyle “intimated, threatened and acted vindictively towards … probation officers, the director of court services, the public defender, assistant public defenders and other lawyers.”
Doyle also is accused of trying steer people into programs favored by his church.
According to the complaint, in late 2002 or early 2003, when told a defendant balked at being placed in a Pentecostal treatment center called “Teen Challenge,” Doyle “stated words to the effect of that the defendant could `either go to Teen Challenge or remain a Catholic and stay in jail.'”
A former police officer, prosecutor and public defender, Doyle was appointed an associate judge in 1989 and was elected a full circuit judge in 1992.
Doyle founded Kane’s drug rehabilitation court in August 2000.
According to the complaint, Kane’s drug court, from the time of its creation until recently, operated without any local “written rules, policies, or procedures.”
The complaint includes 30 “specific examples of systematic violations” against defendants who appeared before Doyle and claim, among other things, that some were not informed of their right to counsel or the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination, and that he failed to inform them about the terms of drug court.
Gronkiewicz said state law establishes different procedural rules for drug courts and Doyle thought he was complying with state law.
Hudson said although he is prohibited from commenting on the pending complaint, he cautioned that allegations made against the judge should not be construed as an indictment of the drug court.
“Does this mean the drug court is a failure? Absolutely not,” Hudson said.
Defense attorney Kathleen Colton of Batavia, who has represented drug court defendants in Kane and DuPage Counties, called DuPage’s drug court “a model program,” but declined to comment on Kane’s drug rehab program.