ILNews

Allen Circuit judge faces misconduct charges

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications filed misconduct charges today against Allen Circuit Judge Thomas Felts, who pleaded guilty last year to drunk driving.

In the notice of formal proceedings and statement of charges, the commission lodges two counts against Judge Felts: that he violated Canons 1A and 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which requires judges to uphold the integrity of the judiciary and that they avoid impropriety at all times.

The judge was arrested in July following a traffic stop in Indianapolis, and tests later showed his blood alcohol content was 0.19. Judge Felts pleaded guilty in August to a misdemeanor of operating a vehicle while intoxicated. He was sentenced to a 90-day license suspension, one year of probation, alcohol treatment, attendance at an Advocates Against Impaired Driving panel, and $705 in legal costs.

Last year, Judge Felts issued a statement following his guilty plea and accepted full responsibility for what happened.

The judge has 20 days to respond to the commission's charges, though that is not required. The Indiana Supreme Court can appoint a three-judge panel to hold a hearing on the charges; and if no agreement is reached, those special masters would recommend any sanctions to the high court, which has final say on any discipline issued.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT