Judge Hiroshige, Ernest Mitsuo #48015

Los Angeles County
Admitted January 1971

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ernest Hiroshige Draws Public Admonishment From CJP

Please take the time to rate this corrupt criminal who hides like a coward behind a false image of Judge

PUBLIC ADMONISHMENT OF JUDGE ERNEST M. HIROSHIGE
The Commission on Judicial Performance ordered Judge Ernest M. Hiroshige publicly
admonished, pursuant to article VI, section 18(d) of the California Constitution and commission
rule 115, as set forth in the following statement of facts and reasons found by the commission:

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND REASONS
Judge Ernest M. Hiroshige has been a judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court
since 1982, and previously served on the municipal court beginning in 1980. His current term
began in January 2013.

Judge Hiroshige has engaged in a practice of delegating his responsibility to conduct case
management conferences to his court clerk. The judge has continued to engage in this practice
despite the private admonishment he received in 2010 addressing, in part, such conduct.

Judge Hiroshige explained in his response to the commission in this matter that, after
receiving his 2010 private admonishment, he posted a notice in his courtroom advising counsel
and parties that he had reviewed all case management conference statements submitted and
indicated to the clerk the range of dates that should be scheduled in each case. The judge’s
notice further advised that “[t]he clerk will meet & confer with counsel/parties and attempt to
schedule dates in court that are agreeable to all parties,” and that if there is any disagreement
with the proposed dates and other entries on the proposed case management order, “please
request to discuss the issue with the court.” As noted in Judge Hiroshige’s 2010 private
admonishment, Judge Hiroshige’s practice violates canon 3B(1), which requires a judge to “hear
and decide all matters assigned to the judge except those in which he or she is disqualified.”
(Italics added.) Improper delegation of judicial responsibilities to the court clerk constitutes
misconduct. (See Inquiry Concerning Judge Christopher J. Sheldon (1998) 48 Cal.4th CJP
Supp. 46 (Sheldon).)

Judge Hiroshige asserts that his case should not be compared to Sheldon because his
conduct in delegating judicial duties is less serious than that of Judge Sheldon, who delegated his
judicial authority to his clerk by, among other things, allowing his clerk to accept pleas and
waivers of constitutional rights in misdemeanor matters. The Sheldon decision is not cited as a
comparison of the facts of the two matters, but only as authority for the proposition that improper
delegation of judicial responsibilities to the clerk constitutes misconduct.

In this matter, Judge Hiroshige allowed his clerk to conduct case management
conferences. Case management conferences are scheduled proceedings at which attorneys and
unrepresented parties are required to appear, with the expectation that issues in cases may be
addressed in court by a judge. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.721, 3.722, 3.724.) The subjects
to be considered at case management conferences are not limited to ministerial issues such as the
setting of a jury trial date, but include a host of issues enumerated in California Rules of Court,
rule 3.727, including what discovery issues are anticipated, whether discovery is complete, the
nature of injuries, the amount of damages, and any additional relief sought. “At the conference,
counsel for each party, and each self-represented party, must appear by telephone or personally

and must be prepared to discuss and commit to the party’s position on the issues enumerated in
C.R.C., Rules 3.724 and 3.727.” (7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Judgment § 45, p. 69.)
A case management order may, however, be issued on the court’s review of the parties’ written
submissions when the court determines that appearances at the conference are not necessary,
and when the parties are notified that no appearance is required. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule
3.722(d).)
Judge Hiroshige does not contend that it is his practice to notify parties that no
appearance is required. Rather, Judge Hiroshige reviews the parties’ written submissions,
prepares written notes of his review for the case management order that address all the case
management issues, and provides his notes to the court clerk for the clerk’s use during the
conference.
Judge Hiroshige’s practice of having his clerk meet with parties and counsel and convey
his decisions in court gives the appearance that the clerk, rather than the judge, is running the
court. Further, the purpose of case management is “to secure the fair, timely, and efficient
disposition of every civil case.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.700.) Discussion between the court
and parties or counsel at a case management conference can be effective in resolving issues that
may not have been apparent from the written submissions, and, in that sense, an appearance
before a judge at a case management conference can be more efficient and effective in terms of
the disposition and management of a case than issuing an order without an appearance before a
judge. Moreover, as noted in the private admonishment Judge Hiroshige received in 2010, a
judge may not delegate judicial responsibilities to the court clerk.

Judge Hiroshige’s conduct was, at a minimum, improper action and dereliction of duty.

Judge Hiroshige’s 2010 private admonishment addressed the improper delegation of his
judicial duties to the court clerk, as well as his abuse of the prestige of judicial office through his
use of stationery and checks bearing his judicial title and address. The judge’s prior discipline
was a significant factor in the commission’s decision to issue this public admonishment.
Commission members Nanci E. Nishimura, Esq.; Hon. Michael B. Harper; Anthony P.
Capozzi, Esq.; Hon. William S. Dato; Mr. Eduardo De La Riva; Ms. Sarah Kruer Jager; Ms.
Pattyl A. Kasparian; Dr. Michael A. Moodian; Mr. Adam N. Torres; and Hon. Erica R. Yew
voted to impose a public admonishment.
Date: October 24, 2018

• Corrupt Commissioner Bruce E. Mitchell
• Corrupt Judge Theresa R. McGonigle
• Corrupt Judge Ariadne J. Symons
• Corrupt Judge Armen Tamzarian
• Corrupt Judge Aviva K. Bobb
• Corrupt Judge Barbara R. Johnson
• Corrupt Judge Brenda J Penny
• Corrupt Judge Brian Lamb
• Corrupt Judge Bruce F. Marrs
• Corrupt Judge Candace J Beason
• Corrupt Judge David A. Mason
• Corrupt Judge David J. Cowan
• Corrupt Judge David P. Yaffe
• Corrupt Judge Deborah L. Christian
• Corrupt Judge Elizabeth A. Lippitt
• Corrupt Judge Ernest M. Hiroshige
• Corrupt Judge Gregory Wilson Alarcon
• Corrupt Judge James A. Bascue
• Corrupt Judge Jeffrey W. Johnson
• Corrupt Judge John D. Lord
• Corrupt Judge John T. Laettner
• Corrupt Judge John W. Ouderkirk
• Corrupt Judge Jose I. Sandoval
• Corrupt Judge Joseph DeVanon
• Corrupt Judge Joshua D. Wayser
• Corrupt Judge Kathryn Doi Todd
• Corrupt Judge Kevin C. Brazile
• Corrupt Judge Luna Ana Maria
• Corrupt Judge Mary Thornton House
• Corrupt Judge Michael G. Nott
• Corrupt Judge Michael R. Powell
• Corrupt Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff
• Corrupt Judge Morris D. Jacobson
• Corrupt Judge Patrick T. Madden
• Corrupt Judge Paul Boland
• Corrupt Judge Randolph M. Hammock
• Corrupt Judge Reva G. Goetz
• Corrupt Judge Roger W. Boren
• Corrupt Judge Scott M. Gordon
• Corrupt Judge Shirley K. Watkins
• Corrupt Judge Stanley Blumenfeld
• Corrupt Judge Steven C. Bailey
• Corrupt Judge Tamara E Hall
• Corrupt Judge Thomas Long
• Corrupt Judge Timothy Joseph Stafford
• Corrupt Judge William P. Barry
• Corrupt Justice Ronald M. George

• CORRUPT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT ELDORADO COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT KERN COUNTY
• CORRUPT LOS ANGELES COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT MARIPOSA COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT ORANGE COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SACRAMENTO COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SAN DIEGO COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SAN MATEO COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SANTA BARBARA COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SANTA CLARA COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT SHASTA COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT TRINITY COUNTY JUDGES
• CORRUPT VENTURA COUNTY JUDGES