Suspended 7th Circuit Judge A.P. “Pete” Fuller will have his day in court later this month after the South Dakota Supreme Court denied his latest appeal Thursday.
Fuller’s latest appeal asked the court to modify or reject the Judicial Qualification Commission’s recommendation and appoint a referee to hear his arguments.
The Supreme Court is considering a recommendation by the commission to remove or retire Fuller from the bench for judicial misconduct. The court set a hearing to consider the recommendations for 11 a.m., April 28, in Pierre.
Fuller is the first judge in the 121-year history of the state’s judicial system to face removal from the bench by the state Supreme Court.
Since Fuller’s suspension with pay in October, each step in the process has been precedent setting for the state Supreme Court.
People are also reading…
After the commission filed its recommendation for Fuller’s removal or retirement in late January, Fuller responded to the recommendation. The commission then answered Fuller, and he was permitted to file a final response.
The judge’s most recent brief in response to the commission was filed on Monday and was rejected Thursday.
That brief also restated his desire for a full hearing on the charges against him in front of a referee appointed by the court.
Fuller has argued that 7th Circuit Judge Jeff Davis, who sits on the commission, should have removed himself from the case because he could not impartially weigh the facts.
The commission has said that Fuller should have requested Davis’ removal.
In addition, Fuller argued that the commission’s investigation went well beyond the scope of the accusation that he referred to law enforcement officers as a “bunch of racists.” Pennington County State’s Attorney Glenn Brenner, Rapid City Police Chief Steve Allender and former Pennington County Sheriff Don Holloway filed the complaint last May.
“Judge Fuller should not face the consequences of being the first judge removed from the bench in this state without the Court being absolutely certain that his misconduct rises to a level to warrant that result. The referral of this matter to a referee can do nothing but assist this Court in making its independent evaluation of the evidence,” Fuller’s brief states.
But the state Supreme Court rejected the need for a referee, saying it was “unwarranted.”
The state Supreme Court did reserve the right to appoint a referee after the April 28 hearing, “to make fact findings on limited questions relevant to this matter.”
Contact Andrea Cook at 394-8423 or andrea.cook@rapidcityjournal.com.
