## Facts

- John F. Lallo served as an associate judge of the Rhode Island Administrative Adjudication Court (AAC).
- The Rhode Island Commission on Judicial Tenure and Discipline notified Lallo that substantial evidence supported charges of violations of the Rhode Island Code of Judicial Conduct.
- Lallo admitted that he was a compulsive gambler and that, on 66 days between 1993 and 1997, he was absent from his AAC office during normal work hours because he was gambling at a Connecticut casino.
- On those days, Lallo typically arrived early, completed his calendar and assigned work, then left; he remained on the state payroll and received salary while absent.
- While serving as a judge, Lallo knowingly made a false statement in connection with his personal bankruptcy petition and pleaded guilty in federal court to making false declarations before a court or grand jury (18 U.S.C. § 1623), resulting in a felony conviction.
- Under Rhode Island law, Lallo’s felony conviction mandated removal from judicial office.
- The commission’s final report concluded that Lallo’s misconduct warranted mandatory removal and an additional sanction, unanimously recommending that he reimburse the state $28,000 (his salary for the 66 gambling days).
- Lallo did not dispute removal or the underlying facts, but objected that the commission lacked authority to recommend, and the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to impose, the monetary reimbursement; he also claimed the reimbursement was penal and required a jury trial.

## Issues

1. Whether the Rhode Island Supreme Court, acting on the commission’s recommendation in a judicial discipline matter, has authority and jurisdiction to order a judge to reimburse the state for salary paid during periods of improper absence from judicial duties.
2. Whether the reimbursement order is penal in nature such that imposing it without a jury violates the Rhode Island constitutional right to trial by jury.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Rhode Island accepted the commission’s recommendation.
- The court held it had constitutional and inherent authority over judicial discipline to order reimbursement of salary wrongfully received for days Lallo was absent and gambling.
- The court characterized the $28,000 reimbursement as civil and remedial (restitutionary/compensatory), not criminal or punitive.
- Because the sanction was remedial and imposed in a disciplinary proceeding, the court held Lallo had no right to a jury trial on the reimbursement issue.
- The court ordered Lallo’s removal from office (mandated by the felony conviction) and required him to reimburse the state $28,000.

## Legal Principles

- A state supreme court’s constitutional and inherent authority to discipline judges may include imposing sanctions beyond removal when necessary to protect the integrity of the judiciary.
- In judicial discipline matters, the commission’s function is advisory; the supreme court has final authority to adopt, modify, or reject recommended discipline.
- A monetary assessment requiring repayment of salary for time not worked may be treated as restitution or reimbursement designed to prevent unjust enrichment and compensate the public.
- When a monetary sanction is remedial rather than punitive and is imposed within a judicial disciplinary framework, it does not trigger a constitutional right to a jury trial.

## Conclusion

The Rhode Island Supreme Court held that it could require a judge, removed due to a felony conviction, to repay salary received during gambling-related absences because the repayment was a civil, remedial reimbursement to taxpayers and could be imposed in judicial discipline proceedings without a jury trial.


In re Lallo, 768 A.2d 921 (R.I. 2001)