Impeachment in California

[6] In all cases except a gubernatorial impeachment, the vacancy left by such a suspension must temporarily be filled by a temporary officeholder appointed by the government with confirmation from the Senate.

Such a temporary appointee will hold the office until the acquittal of the impeached official, or until (in the case of a conviction and removal) a new officeholder is chosen at the next election.

[3][18] The Government Code further specifies that if the Senate does not reach support from an absolute two-thirds of its members for a conviction, the defendant will be acquitted.

[19] Once such a resolution is adopted by a majority of members present that had previously voted on the question of conviction or acquittal, it formally will become the judgement of the Senate.

In a letter he sent the State Legislature on January 1, 1857, treasurer Bates himself denied rumors of illegal payments being made to benefit outside interests and urged for the bodies to investigate the allegations.

[2] One of the joint committees, which had been tasked with determining the total amount of coin and treasure in the Treasury issued its count on January 13, 1857.

[2] After the select committee released its report on February 9, 1857, outrage was ignited and a resolution was quickly introduced in the Assembly to impeach Treasurer Bates for misdemeanors in office.

However, the Assembly instead adopted a resolution allowing Bates to present written or oral arguments pertaining to the allegations levied against him by noon the next day.

By the end of the day, the Assembly had unanimously by a vote of 61–0 adopted a resolution impeaching Bates for misdemeanors in office.

[2] On February 11, 1857, Bates tendered his resignation to the governor, citing his inability to secure an increase in his official bond as had been demanded by district court.

The defense responded later that day with a plea claiming that the fact that several allegations in their initial answer that had not been challenged by the impeachment managers would sufficiently provide grounds to demonstrate a lack of jurisdiction.

Still protesting jurisdiction and disagreeing with the adequacy of the articles of impeachment brought against him, Bates refused to enter such as plea.

[25] Taking place amid the American Civil War, one allegation was that he was disloyal to the Union,[26] having frequently used "seditious and treasonable language concerning the Government of the United States."

[27] In 1929, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Carlos S. Hardy was impeached "for misconduct and misdemeanor in office.

[28] In the impeachment trial, Hardy denied all allegations brought against him and attacked the validity testimony of a witness against him on the grounds that she had once been confined to an insane asylum.

[28] Despite being acquitted in his impeachment trial, Hardy, lost his membership in the American Bar Association due to his acceptance of the $2,500 gift from McPherson.

The governor later ordered the state's attorney general to assist the San Francisco prefect to force the City Council to act in accordance with this law.

[1] In response to his suspension, on April 2, 1850, Hawes sent the Speaker of the State Assembly John Bigler a letter with charges against Governor Burnett.

The letter urged that the speaker present these charges to the Assembly, "for such action as a sense of their own dignity, and that the State of California may dictate."

At the start of the March term of the court, Parsons instructed a grand jury to find "disturbance of the public tranquility" and "slander or libel [of] individual character" in these editorials.

It reached the conclusion that contempt of court had occurred by finding that the editorial had impaired the necessary confidence between the grand jury and the judge and harmed the administration of law.

After debate, on April 22, 1851, the Assembly voted 17–12 to find that testimony taken did not support the allegations that Walker had made against Parsons and did not demonstrate a need for an impeachment.

[1] Subsequently, it was voted by the Assembly that testimony by Judge Parsons be removed from the journals and instead filed in the secretary of state's office.

[1] Westmoreland accused Turner of, Having been grossly tyrannical, with having wantonly deprived citizens of their liberty, with having willfully and corruptly neglected and refused to perform duties incumbent upon him, with having used his judicial power for the furtherance of his own private hate, with being an habitual drunkard...and with other disgraceful conduct, which made him a burden upon the people of the district too grievous to be borne.

The committee was chaired by Assemblyman H. S. G. McCartney, with its other members being Assemblymen Thomas E. Atkinson, Robert Beardslee, John J. Burke, and Aubrey M.

[31] Smith had first been appointed to his judgeship on September 3, 1893, to fill the vacancy left by the August 8, 1893 death in office of Judge Ferdinand Jay McCann.

A total of twelve specific allegations of misconduct were presented to the Assembly on February 6 by Santa Cruz Attorney John H. Leonard.

That day, Assemblyman George C. Cleveland introduced a resolution that cerated a special committee to run an impeachment inquiry into Smith.

On March 7, 1905, the special committee recommended against impeachment for "want of sufficient evidence" to sustain the allegations brought against Smith.

However Santa Cruz Surf editor Arthur A. Taylor wrote on September 4, 1905, that the hearings into Smith had resulted in, "a report embodying the most severe reprimand ever administered to a judge in the State.