The Colorado Supreme Court, in addition to deciding cases, has ultimate responsibility for disciplining Colorado’s attorneys and judges.

For attorneys, their conduct is governed by the Rules of Professional Conduct and the agency that investigates and prosecutes violations is the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel. For judges, their conduct is governed by the Code of Judicial Conduct and the agency that investigates and prosecutes violations is the Commission on Judicial Discipline.

Back in August, the Supreme Court approved the disciplining of Judge Mark Thompson, chief judge of the Fifth Judicial District, pursuant to a stipulation worked out between Judge Thompson and the Commission on Judicial Discipline. Under this stipulation, Thompson received a public censure and a 30-day suspension of his judicial duties without pay.

So what did Thompson do to end up in front of the Commission on Judicial Discipline? Well, on July 25, 2021, he got into a heated verbal confrontation with his 22-year-old stepson. The confrontation started in front of Thompson’s Summit County home and then moved inside the home, at which time Thompson took an Ar-15-style rifle out of a gun safe and pointed it at this stepson’s chest. (Thompson claimed the gun was not loaded; his stepson claimed Thompson said it was.) At this point, said stepson had the good sense to leave the home and call 911. That call eventually led to Thompson being charged with a class 2 misdemeanor — disorderly conduct in the form of recklessly displaying a dangerous weapon in a manner calculated to alarm.

Because of Thompson’s position as the chief judge for the Fifth Judicial District, which includes Summit County, this episode presented a conflict of interest for the Summit County Sheriff’s Department. This resulted in the sheriff’s department’s recusal and the Colorado Bureau of Investigation taking over the case. Also, the Fifth Judicial District Attorney’s Office and the other judges in the district recused themselves, resulting in the appointment of a special prosecutor and a judge from another judicial district to handle the case.

Ultimately, Thompson pleaded guilty to the charges against him and, as he was required to do under the Code of Judicial Conduct, he reported these events to the Commission on Judicial Discipline.

Thompson cooperated with the commission in teasing out the facts of the stepson incident and was allowed to tell the commission of the stress in his life coming from a death and illness in his family, and threats he had received relating to his work as a judge. He also told the commission he and his stepson have made “extraordinary progress reconciling their differences” and that, since the time of the July 2021 confrontation, he had engaged in anger and stress management therapy.

The commission, in working out the terms of the discipline it was recommending, and that the Supreme Court approved, found that Thompson had violated a section of the Code of Judicial Conduct that says judges must comply with the law. The commission also found that Thompson had violated a section of the code that says: “A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.”

The last day of Thompson’s suspension without pay was Nov. 13. For several more months, he will remain on unsupervised probation in the criminal case brought against him.