Since 1986, the Supreme Court-appointed Advisory Committee on the Code of Judicial Conduct has been responding to inquiries from judges seeking guidance on ethical dilemmas. Judges have posed questions to the Committee about their personal business dealings, political activities, acceptance of gifts, charitable work, teaching and writing, and many other issues. Invariably, the Committee has responded to these judges with sound and clear advice on how to conduct themselves in ways consistent with the requirements of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

The Committee's advice has come in the form of advisory opinion letters sent to the individuals requesting their guidance. These letters have not been published, and have only been available through the Supreme Court Law Library or the office of the Committee Chair, the Hon. Frank Allen, District Judge. This has, until now, meant that judges in need of guidance on the application of the Code of Judicial Conduct generally did not have the benefit of these letters unless they wrote the Committee directly. It also meant that judges have often written to the Committee about problems that had already been addressed in previous advisory opinions.

The Judicial Education Center has also received copies of most of these letters, and has long felt that they form a valuable body of explanatory material for judges seeking to understand the application of the Code of Judicial Conduct to specific and common situations. With the development of JEC Web site and our acquisition of improved scanning technology, we are now able to publish these letters on our Web site for immediate access by judges.

Finding applicable advisory opinions
To facilitate access to these letters, we have classified them in several different ways. Judges seeking advice on ethical problems will be able to research these advisory letters through the JEC web site by looking either at the number and date of the opinion letter; the subject matter; the section of the Code of Judicial Conduct applied in the letter; or the applicable section of the JEC handbook on ethics. For example, Advisory Opinion No. 97-06, dated Apri130, 1997, may be found either by its date and number; by its subject matter: "Renting office to attorneys"; by its reference to §21-500 D of the Code of Judicial Conduct; or by referring to §§6- 720 (Recusal) or 10-850 (Financial dealings with parties or lawyers) of the Judicial Education Center's Judicial Handbook on Ethics.

Which advisory opinions are included
This compilation includes all advisory opinions issued by the Advisory Committee on the
Code of Judicial Conduct since the adoption of the 1995 Code by the New Mexico Supreme Court. In addition, several opinions predating the adoption of the current Code are also included where they have been cited by the committee in their post-1995 opinions. Caution should be exercised in using any letter dated prior to 1995 since the citations are out of date.

Are the letters on this Web site identical to the originals?
Almost. Since we had to scan from photocopies of the advisory opinions and the scanning process does allow errors to creep in, the Judicial Education Center had to edit the scanned versions to restore them as closely as possible to the original text. Some scanning errors have undoubtedly been missed. At the same time, we decided to leave in place occasional typographical errors in the original letters, rather than to risk changing any meanings through editorial corrections.

Is confidentiality of these letters still protected?
The Advisory Committee protects the confidentiality of all inquiries. The photocopies of the original letters sent to the Judicial Education Center protect that confidentiality by blacking out with a marking pen all references that might reveal the identity of the judge requesting the opinion. The letters on the JEC web site replace all those blackouts with underscores or blank spaces. In a very few instances we noted apparent oversights by the Committee in this regard and we deleted several references to names and communities that appeared to have been inadvertently included in our copies.

Are there any other changes from the originals?
Because our scanning process causes changes in type sizes, less text appears on each page of the scanned version than on the originals. This has resulted in format changes within the text of each letter, and bottom lines often end short of the right margin. We have left these slight changes in place so that page numbers in each letter will match between our version and those of the committee, for easier reference during discussion. A specific number line on our version may appear at a higher or lower place in the original, but it will appear on the same page as on the original.

Also, advisory letters often refer to enclosures of earlier opinions that have addressed similar or related issues. Since almost all of those referenced letters from this Advisory Committee will be accessible on this site by their number, we have not attempted to link them up to the advisory letter; judges may simply access any other opinion directly. Where the advisory letter essentially adopts as its opinion a letter issued prior to 1995, we have included that earlier letter. In a few instances, letters reference advisory opinions from other state's advisory committees. Due to the poor quality of our copies of those letters, they have been omitted from this web site.

The large body of advisory committee letters on our web site will demonstrate the extensive service that has been performed by this committee over the years in guiding New Mexico judges in their compliance with ethics rules. In particular, we note the service of District Judge Frank Allen of the Second Judicial District Court, who has served as the committee's chair since its inception, and whose signature appears on almost every letter issued. The Judicial Education Center is pleased to be able to make this valuable resource for understanding the Code of Judicial Conduct more accessible to the New Mexico judiciary than ever before.