INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications has officially filed formal disciplinary charges against two Marion County Superior Court judges, alleging recurring failures to adequately supervise court personnel and properly manage case proceedings.
The filings target Marion County Superior Court 23 Judge Jose D. Salinas and Marion County Superior Court 9 Judge Geoffrey A. Gaither. Both cases stem from independent investigations conducted by the seven-member state commission, which oversees ethical misconduct allegations against Indiana judicial officers.
The public charges were formally submitted to the Appellate Clerk’s Office, opening official proceedings against both jurists. Under commission rules, each judge has 20 days to submit a formal response to the allegations, though filing an answer is not mandatory.
Allegations Against Judge Jose D. Salinas
The statement of charges against Judge Salinas (Case No. 26S-JD-312) outlines five counts of judicial misconduct:
- Inadequate Staff Supervision (2 Counts): The commission alleges Judge Salinas failed to properly supervise court staff regarding case entries, leading to severe consequences for criminal defendants. Deficiencies contributed to delayed inmate releases, missed court appearances, missing court orders, and failures to process criminal record expungements.
- Failure to Act on Criminal Cases (3 Counts): The remaining counts charge that Judge Salinas failed to take necessary judicial action on multiple criminal cases, causing unreasonable delays in case progression and leading to eventual case dismissals.
Judge Salinas is represented by attorney James J. Bell of Hoover Hull Turner LLP.
Allegations Against Judge Geoffrey A. Gaither
In a separate filing, the commission charged Judge Gaither (Case No. 26S-JD-311) with three counts of misconduct:
- Motion Delays: Failing to promptly schedule hearings or issue rulings on pending motions following hearings, which resulted in cases being removed from his authority.
- Failure to Supervise Magistrate: Failing to adequately oversee a magistrate judge operating under his direct judicial authority, leading to widespread case delays.
- Administrative Oversight Deficiencies: Failing to properly supervise court staff, resulting in case dismissals, delayed case resolutions, and inaccurate or erroneous case entries.
Judge Gaither is represented by attorney Gregory H. Coleman.
Next Steps and Potential Sanctions
The Indiana Supreme Court holds final authority to decide whether judicial misconduct occurred in either matter and what penalties, if any, are appropriate.
Following a review of the charges, the state’s highest court may dismiss the cases outright, approve or reject negotiated consent agreements, or appoint a panel of special masters to conduct public hearings. If misconduct is established, the Supreme Court can issue penalties ranging from a private or public reprimand to fines, temporary suspension, or a permanent ban from holding judicial office in Indiana.
