Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 22.30.070 (2026)
Disqualification, suspension, removal, retirement, and censure of judges
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 22.30.070. Disqualification, suspension, removal, retirement, and censure of judges.
(a) A judge is disqualified from acting as a judge, without loss of salary, while there is pending (1) an indictment or an information charging the judge in the United States with a crime punishable as a felony under Alaska or federal law, or (2) a recommendation to the supreme court by the commission for the removal or retirement of the judge.
(b) On recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may reprimand, publicly or privately censure, or suspend a judge from office without salary when in the United States the judge pleads guilty or no contest or is found guilty of a crime punishable as a felony under state or federal law or of a crime that involves moral turpitude under state or federal law. If the conviction is reversed, suspension terminates, and the judge shall be paid the judge's salary for the period of suspension. If the judge is suspended and the conviction becomes final, the supreme court shall remove the judge from office.
(c) On recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may (1) retire a judge for disability that seriously interferes with the performance of duties and that is or may become permanent, and (2) reprimand, publicly or privately censure, or remove a judge for action occurring not more than six years before the commencement of the judge's current term which constitutes wilful misconduct in the office, wilful and persistent failure to perform duties, habitual intemperance, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, or conduct that brings the judicial office into disrepute. The effective date of retirement under (1) of this subsection is the first day of the month coinciding with or after the date that the supreme court files written notice with the commissioner of administration that the judge was retired for disability. A duplicate copy of the notice shall be filed with the judicial council.
(d) A judge retired by the supreme court shall be considered to have retired voluntarily. A judge removed by the supreme court is ineligible for judicial office for a period of three years.
(e) A supreme court justice who has participated in proceedings involving a judge or justice of any court may not participate in an appeal involving that judge or justice in that particular matter.
(a) A judge is disqualified from acting as a judge, without loss of salary, while there is pending (1) an indictment or an information charging the judge in the United States with a crime punishable as a felony under Alaska or federal law, or (2) a recommendation to the supreme court by the commission for the removal or retirement of the judge.
(b) On recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may reprimand, publicly or privately censure, or suspend a judge from office without salary when in the United States the judge pleads guilty or no contest or is found guilty of a crime punishable as a felony under state or federal law or of a crime that involves moral turpitude under state or federal law. If the conviction is reversed, suspension terminates, and the judge shall be paid the judge's salary for the period of suspension. If the judge is suspended and the conviction becomes final, the supreme court shall remove the judge from office.
(c) On recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may (1) retire a judge for disability that seriously interferes with the performance of duties and that is or may become permanent, and (2) reprimand, publicly or privately censure, or remove a judge for action occurring not more than six years before the commencement of the judge's current term which constitutes wilful misconduct in the office, wilful and persistent failure to perform duties, habitual intemperance, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, or conduct that brings the judicial office into disrepute. The effective date of retirement under (1) of this subsection is the first day of the month coinciding with or after the date that the supreme court files written notice with the commissioner of administration that the judge was retired for disability. A duplicate copy of the notice shall be filed with the judicial council.
(d) A judge retired by the supreme court shall be considered to have retired voluntarily. A judge removed by the supreme court is ineligible for judicial office for a period of three years.
(e) A supreme court justice who has participated in proceedings involving a judge or justice of any court may not participate in an appeal involving that judge or justice in that particular matter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: In Re Hanson, 532 P.2d 303 (Alaska 1975).
In Re Hanson, 532 P.2d 303 (Alaska 1975). “) Finally, it is to be our findings of fact and conclusions of law, upon which we are to make our determination of the ultimate action to be taken, to wit, whether we should dismiss the proceedings or order the judge concerned censured or removed from office 25 Article IV,…”
In Re Cummings, 211 P.3d 1136 (Alaska 2009). “AS 22.30.070 provides, (b) On recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may reprimand, publicly or privately censure, or suspend a judge from office without salary when in the United States the judge pleads guilty or no contest or is found guilty of a crime punishable…”
In Re the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Joan K., 273 P.3d 594 (Alaska 2012). “735(d) ("If [at a 30-day commitment hearing] the court finds that there is a viable less restrictive alternative available and that the respondent has been advised of and refused voluntary treatment through the alternative, the court may order the less restrictive alternative…”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Luciano G., 450 P.3d 1258 (Alaska 2019). “Luciano cites no legal authority to support his argument that we should narrowly interpret “threatening harm” to mean only verbal threats.”
In Re the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Stephen O., 314 P.3d 1185 (Alaska 2013). “Alaska Psychiatric Institute, requiring this heightened standard of proof in involuntary commitment cases “is one way to impress the factfinder with the importance of the decision and thereby perhaps to reduce the chances that 18 (.”
In Re Cummings, 292 P.3d 187 (Alaska 2013). “011(b). 4 . AS 22.30.011(d). 5 . In re Johnstone, 2 P.”
Josh L. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Off. of Child.'s Servs., 276 P.3d 457 (Alaska 2012). “" In re Johnstone, 2 P.3d 1226, 1234 (Alaska 2000) (quoting Buster v.”
In Re the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Mark V., 375 P.3d 51 (Alaska 2016). “3d 1226, 1234 (Alaska 2000)); see also id. at 1193 ("Clear and convincing evidence has been characterized as evidence that is greater than a preponderance, but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Inquiry Concerning a Judge, 822 P.2d 1333 (Alaska 1991). “conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute, in violation of AS 22.30.070(c)(2)." 532 P.2d at 309 . We held that the Commission was in error in concluding that there was a violation of Canon 25 or AS 22.”
In re the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Jeffrey E., 281 P.3d 84 (Alaska 2012). “In re Johnstone, 2 P.3d 1226, 1234-35 (Alaska 2000) (quoting Buster v.”
In Re Curda, 49 P.3d 255 (Alaska 2002). “[3] In re Johnstone, 2 P.3d 1226, 1234 (Alaska 2000); In re Inquiry Concerning A Judge ( Judge I ), 762 P.”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Meredith.B., 462 P.3d 522 (Alaska 2020). “” Meredith suffered from “paranoia about her food, that it’s being tainted or poisoned,” and even when family members brought her food they could not be certain that she would eat it.”
— Alaska Stat. § 22.30.070(b) — 1 case
In Re Cummings, 211 P.3d 1136 (Alaska 2009). “AS 22.30.070 provides, (b) On recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may reprimand, publicly or privately censure, or suspend a judge from office without salary when in the United States the judge pleads guilty or no contest or is found guilty of a crime punishable…”
— Alaska Stat. § 22.30.070(c) — 28 cases
In Re the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Joan K., 273 P.3d 594 (Alaska 2012). “735(d) ("If [at a 30-day commitment hearing] the court finds that there is a viable less restrictive alternative available and that the respondent has been advised of and refused voluntary treatment through the alternative, the court may order the less restrictive alternative…”
In Re Cummings, 211 P.3d 1136 (Alaska 2009). “AS 22.30.070 provides, (b) On recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may reprimand, publicly or privately censure, or suspend a judge from office without salary when in the United States the judge pleads guilty or no contest or is found guilty of a crime punishable…”
In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Luciano G., 450 P.3d 1258 (Alaska 2019). “Luciano cites no legal authority to support his argument that we should narrowly interpret “threatening harm” to mean only verbal threats.”
In Re Hanson, 532 P.2d 303 (Alaska 1975). “) Finally, it is to be our findings of fact and conclusions of law, upon which we are to make our determination of the ultimate action to be taken, to wit, whether we should dismiss the proceedings or order the judge concerned censured or removed from office 25 Article IV,…”
In Re the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Stephen O., 314 P.3d 1185 (Alaska 2013). “Alaska Psychiatric Institute, requiring this heightened standard of proof in involuntary commitment cases “is one way to impress the factfinder with the importance of the decision and thereby perhaps to reduce the chances that 18 (.”
— Alaska Stat. § 22.30.070(c)(2) — 4 cases
In Re Hanson, 532 P.2d 303 (Alaska 1975). “) Finally, it is to be our findings of fact and conclusions of law, upon which we are to make our determination of the ultimate action to be taken, to wit, whether we should dismiss the proceedings or order the judge concerned censured or removed from office 25 Article IV,…”
Inquiry Concerning a Judge, 822 P.2d 1333 (Alaska 1991). “conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute, in violation of AS 22.30.070(c)(2)." 532 P.2d at 309 . We held that the Commission was in error in concluding that there was a violation of Canon 25 or AS 22.”
In Re Cummings, 211 P.3d 1136 (Alaska 2009). “AS 22.30.070 provides, (b) On recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may reprimand, publicly or privately censure, or suspend a judge from office without salary when in the United States the judge pleads guilty or no contest or is found guilty of a crime punishable…”
In Re Inquiry Concerning a Judge, 762 P.2d 1292 (Alaska 1988).
— Alaska Stat. § 22.30.070(d) — 1 case
In Re Cummings, 292 P.3d 187 (Alaska 2013). “011(b). 4 . AS 22.30.011(d). 5 . In re Johnstone, 2 P.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.