IARDC says Adrian has demonstrated lack of respect for court, gives him two-year suspension

QUINCY — Former Eighth Judicial Circuit Judge Robert Adrian has been suspended for two years by the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (IARDC).

The recommendation for Adrian’s discipline was made after an Oct. 28 video conference of a hearing board panel consisting of:

• Sonni Choi Williams, city attorney for Lockport and president of the Illinois State Bar Association; 
• Joanna Belle Gunderson, executive inspector general for the Office of the Illinois Comptroller in Springfield; and 
• Carol A. Kulek, an independent government relations professional based out of Springfield.

The IARDC complaint, filed by attorney Peter L. Rotskoff on behalf of ARDC Administrator Lea Gutierrez,alleged Adrian’s conduct subjected him to discipline according to Supreme Court Rule 770, which says, “Conduct of attorneys which violates the rules of professional conduct contained in article VIII of these rules shall be grounds for discipline by the court.”

Rotskoff appeared on behalf of the IARDC for the video conference. Adrian did not appear, nor did any counsel appear on his behalf. Adrian also did not appear for a pre-hearing conference on Aug. 21, nor did he file an answer to the complaint filed in July.

When Adrian learned about the IARDC complaint in July, he said, “It’s a waste of everybody’s time. It just shows how political and corrupt (the IARDC is).”

Asked if he planned to file a reply, Adrian replied, “Why would I? I’m retired. I’ve taken my name off the active list.”

The IARDC requested that Adrian be suspended for at least one year, but the panel recommended a two-year suspension.

“In aggravation, (Adrian) made statements to the media that this disciplinary matter was politically motivated and a waste of time,” the panel wrote in its decision. “(Adrian) has demonstrated a lack of respect for the court and the disciplinary process through his refusal to participate in this proceeding and his comments to the media. 

“This is particularly troubling given his position as a former judge, and we find that it constitutes substantial aggravation. Based on the serious misconduct and significant aggravating factors, we conclude that a suspension of two years and until further order of the court is warranted. We considered as mitigation that (Adrian) has no prior discipline, but that does not lead us to recommend a different sanction.”

The IARDC complaint had three counts. The first was making false statements in a written response to the Judicial Inquiry Board.

Adrian submitted a written response to the JIB on March 15, 2022, concerning allegations in a Feb. 22, 2022, letter. Adrian found Drew Clinton, 18, guilty of felony criminal sexual assault following a three-day bench trial in October 2021. Then, on Jan. 3, 2022, Adrian vacated Clinton’s conviction, resulting in Clinton being released from the Adams County Jail.

The JIB letter alleged Adrian reversed his guilty verdict on one count of criminal sexual assault to circumvent the law that required him to impose a mandatory sentence of at least four years of imprisonment. 

Adrian repeatedly stated in his written response that he reversed his guilty finding because the evidence did not support the verdict. The IARDC’s complaint said his statements were false, believing Adrian reversed his decision to circumvent the law.

The second count is for Adrian making false statements in his testimony before the JIB.

Adrian appeared before a group of board members and JIB staff on April 8, 2022. The complaint says Adrian had the following exchange with Michael Deno, executive director and general counsel for the JIB.

• MD: (In your ruling) you never mentioned anything about the issue of consent or the people totally failing to prove lack of consent, correct? 
• RA: Correct. 
• MD: Yet that is, as you state in your response, why you reversed your decision in this matter, correct? 
• RA: It is … I did it based on the evidence in the case. I did it not because I wanted to thwart to (sic) get around the law, I did it because that was what the evidence was. 

The Illinois Courts Commission wrote in its order, “(W)e find respondent’s testimony was untruthful, and that his position before this commission — that he reversed his guilty finding based on his belief that the state had failed to prove its case — was a purely deceptive scheme designed to justify, or conceal, his misconduct.”

The third count is for Adrian making false statements under oath before the Illinois Courts Commission during the November 2023 hearing. 

The ICC wrote in its order, “(Adrian) testified before this commission that when he said, ‘The court will not do that’ and ‘I will not do that,’ he meant he would not sentence (Clinton) to prison when he was not guilty. This proffered explanation, given after the fact, is not believable. To any reasonable person hearing (Adrian’s) words, (Adrian) was refusing to sentence (Clinton) to a mandatory prison term ‘for what happened in [the] case’ because he did not believe prison was a ‘just’ sentence under the circumstances.”