Court clarifies how records are handled ‘at the conclusion of judicial service’
The Florida Supreme Court, acting on its own authority, has amended court rules and the Code of Judicial Conduct to clarify the treatment of judicial branch records “at the conclusion of judicial service.”
The November 17 opinion notes that existing rules generally define judicial papers as “administrative records of the judicial branch,” outline their custody, define when they are considered confidential, and describe how long they should be retained.
“However, the Court has not adopted rules to explicitly address the treatment of judicial papers upon a judge’s or justice’s departure from the bench,” the opinion states. “We do so now.”
The unanimous opinion offers a brief review of Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.240, which governs public access to and the protection of judicial branch records. It cites the rule’s definitions of court records and administrative records and its reference to a retention schedule for “court decision-making records.”
The opinion also cites Canon 3(B)(12) of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which states that “[a] judge shall not disclose or use, for any purpose unrelated judicial duties, nonpublic information acquired in a judicial capacity.”
“As we have explained, rule 2.420 and canon 3 already govern the treatment of judicial records (including confidential records) and judges’ use of nonpublic information obtained in a judicial capacity,” the opinion states. “However, we have determined that is prudent to amend rule 2.420 and canon 3 to resolve any remaining uncertainty and inconsistency in the treatment of judicial branch records at the conclusion of judicial service and in the continued confidentiality of nonpublic information.”
The opinion amends Rule 2.420(b)(3) to provide that “[a]t the conclusion of service on the court, each justice or judge shall deliver to the court’s chief justice or chief judge any records of the judicial branch in the possession of the departing justice or judge.”
The amendment, “accounts for justices’ and judges’ departure from the bench and formally relieves them of their role under rule 2.240 as records custodians,” the justices note.
Canon 3(B)(12) is amended to provide that “[a] former judge is expected to maintain the confidentiality of nonpublic information acquired in a judicial capacity.”
That language, the opinion notes, “is intended to emphasize the expectation of judicial confidentiality beyond retirement and to communicate as much to the public.”
The amendments become effective immediately. However, noting that the revisions were not previously published, the justices invite “interested persons” to file a comment with the Supreme Court by January 31, 2023.
The opinion is In Re: Amendments to the Florida Rules of General Practice and Judicial Administration and the Code of Judicial Conduct, Case No. SC22-1387.
