Ethics: Understanding the role of the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline

Jeff Benoist became administrator/counsel for the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline on April 1, 2025. Prior to that, Benoist spent 25 years handling insurance litigation while successfully trying over 50 jury trials and 75 bench trials in every corner of Missouri. He has practiced in front of hundreds of judges in more than half of the counties in Missouri. He graduated from the Saint Louis University School of Law in 2000.

The Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline ensures Missouri’s judiciary remains fair, impartial, and accountable to the public by investigating complaints against judges and enforcing disciplinary actions when necessary. The commission’s function is vital in upholding public trust in the judicial system, reinforcing the idea that no judge is above the law.¹ 

What is the CRRD? 

The CRRD was established in 1972 when Missouri voters approved § 24 of Article 5 of the Missouri Constitution to oversee the ethical conduct and fitness of judges.² It serves as a check and safeguard against judicial misconduct and incompetence. 

The CRRD consists of six volunteer members who serve six-year, staggered terms. The CRRD includes two members of the public appointed by the governor who are not members of The Missouri Bar; two members of The Missouri Bar selected by the bar’s Board of Governors; one judge of the Missouri Court of Appeals selected by a majority of the appellate judges (rotates from the Eastern to Western to Southern District); and one circuit judge selected by a majority of the Missouri circuit judges. 

The CRRD investigates complaints against judges of the Supreme Court of Missouri, Missouri Court of Appeals, circuit and associate circuit courts, and municipal courts, as well as members of the judicial nominating commissions that fill vacancies in accordance with Missouri’s Non-Partisan Court Plan.³ 

The CRRD also oversees judicial retirement and removal. Missouri’s judges are subject to mandatory retirement at the age of 70. 

Additionally, judges can be removed from office if they are found unfit due to incompetence or inability to perform their responsibilities. 

Supreme Court of Missouri Rule 12.21(A) requires the CRRD to keep all proceedings confidential until the CRRD files a recommendation with the Court that the judge or member of a judicial commission be retired, removed, or disciplined. Rule 12.21(B) details exceptions to the rule of confidentiality. Further, a complainant may choose to waive confidentiality and request that the complaint be sent to the judge. 

How does the CRRD disciplinary process work? 

Members of the public, lawyers, and judges can submit complaints about judges to the CRRD by mail or by emailing CRRD@courts.mo.gov. Rule 4-8.3(B) of the Rules of Professional Conduct requires a lawyer to inform the appropriate authority (CRRD) if they know that a judge has committed a violation of Rule 2 (Code of Judicial Conduct) that raises a substantial question as to the judge’s fitness for office. Rule 2-2.15 requires a judge who has knowledge that another judge committed a violation of Rule 2 to inform the appropriate disciplinary authority (CRRD). 

In 2024, the CRRD investigated 303 complaints, and that number rose to 405 complaints in 2025. Each year, approximately 45% of judges receive a complaint.

The CRRD follows a structured process when handling cases of judicial discipline. If a complaint is found to have merit, the CRRD writes a request to the judge for a response regarding the allegations. The CRRD may then recommend an informal disposition, such as a meeting with the judge or an informal reprimand by the commission, or it may proceed to a formal hearing pursuant to Rule 12. 

At a formal hearing, a judge is allowed to be represented by counsel, may call witnesses, and may introduce evidence. 

Upon completion of the hearing, the CRRD can recommend disciplinary actions such as formal reprimands, suspensions, or even removal from office. If formal proceedings are initiated and at least four members of the CRRD find that the judge should be disciplined in some manner, the CRRD then publicly files its findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations with the Supreme Court of Missouri. 

The Court has the final authority to determine and impose disciplinary measures. This system creates a balanced approach where oversight is exercised while still allowing due process for judges accused of misconduct. 

Conclusion 

The CRRD helps foster transparency and accountability within the judiciary.

By providing a formal avenue for complaints and ensuring judges adhere to ethical guidelines, the CRRD enhances the legitimacy of Missouri's courts. 

For more information about the CRRD, including a link to a complaint form, visit the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline's webpage at Courts.mo.gov.

Endnotes 
1 Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline, Mo. Ct., https://www.courts.mo.gov/page.jsp?id=230 (Feb. 19, 2026). 
2 Id. 
3 Id.