Remorseful judge fights to keep her job

Having just been elected to a four-year term, Palm Beach County Judge Dana Santino is trying to prevent a quick removal from the bench.

Last month, the state’s judicial watchdog agency charged Santino with running afoul of the standards for ethical behavior of judges, showing “a clear and present unfitness for office.”

She’s accused of misconduct over her campaign before the November election — specifically over the way she condemned opponent Gregg Lerman’s criminal defense practice.

Santino, in her first response to the allegations made by Florida Judicial Qualifications

Commission, has admitted some violations and expressed that she is “deeply remorseful” about it.

The former guardianship and probate lawyer also sent a separate apology letter to Lerman, noting that she’s “done a lot of soul searching.” She said she’s sorry for the way her campaign portrayed his practice as “representing murderers, rapists, child molesters and other criminals.”

“It was my responsibility to run my campaign like a judge and not a politician and I fell short of that duty,” Santino wrote. “It is deeply humbling to reflect and realize I didn’t handle certain things the right way.”

Unlike other races for public office where smear tactics may be used, judicial contests are expected to remain civil. Florida’s Code of Judicial Conduct expressly demands judges or anyone campaigning for a seat “refrain from inappropriate political activity” and maintain the dignity that comes with wearing the black robes.

In one attack, she slammed Lerman as a lawyer who “chooses to represent individuals who commit heinous crimes.” Now, she admits such comments were inappropriate and regrets making them.

“Judge Santino acknowledges that she made mistakes, but that those mistakes and the totality of circumstances do not represent a clear and present unfitness for office,” wrote her lawyer, Jeremy Kroll, in a March 24 pleading.

Kroll, a Fort Lauderdalebased criminal defense attorney, will represent Santino during disciplinary proceedings before the Judicial Qualifications Commission and finally the Florida Supreme Court.

The Tallahassee-based commission will hold hearings and a trial and can recommend sanctions ranging from a public reprimand to a suspension to removal from office.

While this process can take 12 months, Santino continues to preside over civil court cases, such as disputes involving amounts less than $15,000.

Lerman, who had filed a complaint with the Judicial Qualifications Commission after the election, called Santino’s apology “too little, too late” and not sincere because it came only after she was charged.

“She’s only sorry for what’s happening to her,” he said.

Before the charges were filed, Santino appeared before the judicial commission’s investigative panel in February and was “remorseful and apologetic,” wrote Alexander Williams, assistant general counsel for the independent agency.

Santino, 48, also acknowledged the statements about Lerman were disparaging and “could lead a reasonable person to question” her impartiality, Williams wrote.

But the commission’s attorney advised Santino on March 6 that because her remorse followed “steadfast defense of your misconduct, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that you and your campaign consultants employed a win-at-all-costs and pay-the-fine-later strategy.”

Lerman put it another way: “You can’t cheat and win and then sit in judgment of other people.”

In the nonpartisan election, Santino won the seat with 248,765 votes, while Lerman picked up 233,949 votes.

If Santino is removed, the governor would have to fill the vacancy with an appointment to serve out the rest of the term.

Should Santino be taken off the bench, she also would likely face discipline by the Florida Bar, which governs attorneys’ conduct in Florida. The Judicial Qualifications Commission has also accused Santino of violating two Bar rules.

In her response to the commission, Santino denied that she knowingly violated a Bar rule against making a statement that “the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard … concerning the qualifications or integrity” of a candidate for a judicial office.

Kroll, lawyer for Santino, also wrote that Santino was not involved with the creation of a Facebook page that blasted Lerman’s defense of “Palm Beach County’s worst criminals” and listed a few of his higherprofile cases.

According to the charges, Santino’s campaign consultants created a “political organization” called “Taxpayers for Public Integrity,” which started the Facebook page. It showed a photo of Lerman surrounded by the words “child pornography,” “murder,” “rape” and more, in boldface and all capital letters.

Santino “denies that she pre-approved of or was aware of that content until after it was initially posted,” wrote Kroll, adding that his client directed the page be taken down after she became aware of it.

The judge agrees that the language on the page violated the Code of Judicial Conduct.

In the eyes of the commission, wrote Williams, the Santino campaign’s attacks on Lerman “undeservedly impugns the integrity of the entire judicial system by demeaning the work of private attorneys who represent accused persons.”

The Palm Beach County Bar Association also has called out Santino — six days before she prevailed at the ballot box.

The group’s Judicial Campaign Practices Commission, which makes advisory-only opinions, was unanimous in finding her campaign crossed the line into misconduct.

In its review, the commission wrote that an email sent by Santino to potential voters was “rife with innuendo that Mr. Lerman would favor even the worst of the worst from the bench, whereas by implication, Ms. Santino would not.”

Such a viewpoint, the commission found, “is inconsistent with the impartial performance of judicial duties.”

Mudslinging, or negative ads, may be commonplace in national, state and some local elections. But lawyers, who are candidates for a judgeship, and judges seeking re-election, are forbidden from running what could be thought of as a dirty campaign. These rules are spelled out in the Florida Supreme Court’s Code of Judicial Conduct.

The state’s Judicial Qualifications Commission has charged Palm Beach County Judge Dana Santino with violating a rule that states, “A Judge or Candidate for Judicial Office Shall Refrain From Inappropriate Political Activity.”

These are the specific alleged violations by Santino under that rule:

A candidate for a judicial office won’t:

With respect to … issues that are likely to come before the court, make pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial performance … of the office.

Knowingly misrepresent the identity, qualifications, present position or other fact concerning the candidate or an opponent.

A candidate for a judicial office will:

Be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it, and shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.

Maintain the dignity appropriate to judicial office and act in a manner consistent with the impartiality, integrity, and independence of the judiciary.

Source: Canons 7A(3)(e)(i), 7A(3)(e)(ii), 7A(3)(a), and 7A(3)(b) of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct; Judicial Qualifications Commission

Santino