Judge, tribunal both claim a win

The JQC and Judge Charles Cope each seek compensation in his improper conduct case.

By WILLIAM R. LEVESQUE, Times Staff Writer
© St. Petersburg Times
published August 31, 2002

Somebody won this case. But who should pay?

Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Charles W. Cope wants the state to pay him $389,000 in legal fees and expenses after saying he prevailed at a trial in June over allegations he violated rules of judicial conduct.

But a special counsel for the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission disagrees, and now says Cope is the one who should hand over some cash.

JQC special counsel John Mills filed papers this week seeking "reasonable expenses" for the JQC's efforts to prove facts that Cope denied right up to his June trial for violating judicial canons.

Mills declined to comment, and his motion did not detail those expenses or say how much he thought Cope should pay.

Cope was found guilty by a JQC hearing panel on charges of public intoxication and improper sexual conduct while he was visiting Carmel, Calif., for a judicial conference in April 2001. Two women accused Cope of stealing their hotel room key and trying to enter their room as they slept.

Cope is accused by one of the women of trying to kiss her during a beach walk the previous night, before she fled.

While Cope was found guilty of the two JQC charges, the panel dismissed four other, more serious charges against him.

Mills filed the new papers Thursday, the same day Cope accepted a plea deal with California prosecutors that ended the criminal case that had imperiled Cope's career.

Bob Merkle, Cope's attorney, said the judge always acknowledged that he was intoxicated in California and guilty of inappropriate behavior. So the JQC simply found him guilty of violations to which he already admitted.

For that reason, Merkle said, Cope prevailed at the JQC hearing and should have his expenses paid.

"They didn't prevail on anything," Merkle said in an interview on Friday. "That's just wishful thinking on Mills' part. He's really going out on a limb."

Cope declined to discuss specifics of the JQC case. But he said, "I'm shocked, amazed and continue to be disappointed. We will address these issues in open court. I just ask readers to wait to hear the truth, when I can ethically respond."

The JQC hearing panel recommended to the Florida Supreme Court that Cope receive a public reprimand. The court is yet to decide on punishment.

Before the JQC trial, Mills asked Cope, in what are called "Requests for Admission," to deny or admit certain facts. Among facts he was asked to admit was whether he was intoxicated in California at several points during his trip.

Mills said in his motion Cope either failed to respond to or denied eight specific facts that were later proved at trial.

Therefore, under rules of civil procedure, the JQC can recoup expenses incurred to prove those facts, Mills' motion said.

But Merkle said Cope either did admit many of the facts the JQC sought, or the questions Cope was asked in papers before trial were flawed in a way that forced Cope to deny them.

Mills also said in documents that Cope, months before his JQC trial, agreed to resolve his JQC case by admitting guilt for public intoxication, improper behavior and failing to report his arrest to the JQC.

Cope agreed to an unpaid suspension (the motion does not say how long) and a public reprimand.

But Mills said the deal was rejected by a JQC investigative committee. Merkle said Cope never agreed to resolve the case.

© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright