BLOOMFIELD, NJ — An attorney for the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct has requested that Bloomfield Chief Magistrate Wilfredo Benitez be publicly reprimanded for his conduct during his 2016 arrest by NJ state troopers.
Maureen Bauman, the disciplinary attorney for the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, made her recommendation at a May 23 committee hearing for Benitez. The attorney representing Benitez, Brian Molloy, proposed that Benitez be admonished. Judicial public reprimands are issued by the NJ Supreme Court while admonishments are issued by the committee and seen as retribution for lesser violations. The committee has not yet issued a judgement.
Three ethics charges were brought against Benitez: failure to observe high standards of conduct; failure to promote public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary by giving the appearance of impropriety; and asking for special treatment for personal gain.
According to the State Police arrest report, Benitez was found asleep behind the wheel of an idling car along the shoulder of Route 80, westbound, by two patrolling state troopers at 2:13 a.m. on Nov. 12, 2016.
According to the report and testimony, Benitez had been drinking. A field sobriety test was administered. He failed this and was handcuffed and arrested. During the incident, Benitez informed the troopers that he was a judge, asked for “courtesy,” told the troopers they were wasting their time, and cursed repeatedly. He was later charged with DUI, but acquitted at trial over a procedural error by the State Police.
A recording of the ACJC hearing of May 23 was recently obtained by this newspaper. The hearing was conducted by Justice Virginia Long. The following narrative is derived from that recording.
Under questioning by Molloy, his attorney, Benitez said he told the troopers that he was a judge because he wanted them to know he was a professional, a member of the court, and was not going to do anything to hurt them.
“I never exerted my influence or said don’t do your job,” he said.
Benitez said he asked for “courtesy” so he would not have to be handcuffed. Molloy asked him what he meant when he told the committee he took “umbrage” at being treated like a common criminal. Benitez had written this in a letter to the ACJC, in his initial response to the ethics charges against him.
“I wish I had used better words,” he said. “I was addressing the issue of handcuffs.”
Molloy produced character letters on behalf of Benitez. One was written by Raymond Hamlin, an attorney. Hamlin said that as a man of color, he has identified himself as an attorney when stopped or encountered by police. Benitez had described himself as a black Puerto Rican at the beginning of the hearing. Hamlin’s letter appeared to have bolstered Benitez’ contention that the reason he told the troopers he was a judge was not to elicit special treatment. Benitez later told the committee he advises his children that if they are ever stopped by the police to be respectful.
But Benitez was asked by a committee member why he told the troopers he was a judge and not an attorney.
“Good question,” Benitez replied. “Whether I said attorney or judge — just trying to convey I’m a professional and officer of the court. I wish I had used ‘attorney.’ I can’t dispute that.”
Benitez also told the troopers they were “wasting their time” by reading him his Miranda rights. A committee member wanted to know what he meant by that. Benitez said it was “hard to say” what he meant, but he thought the troopers were being condescending.
“I did all the right things,” he said. “I pulled over, I was not on the road, I put on my blinkers. I’m certainly not trying to disparage them. The way they were treating me, the way they were addressing me was uncalled for. I didn’t particularly think using the handcuffs was necessary and I wanted to express that to them because I know I needed to pull over and because I thought I did all the right things to make sure I didn’t bring harm to myself or others. I thought the way they approached me was a waste of time. I don’t think they had to do that.”
The committee member asked Benitez if he said it was a “waste of time” because he thought being a judge, he would not be found guilty at a trial.
“Absolutely not,” he said. “I knew I was in trouble.”
A third questioner wanted Benitez to clarify why he told the troopers he was going home to Montclair and had just dropped his daughter off at school. The questioner said they understood that Benitez’ daughter went to school in Maryland.
“That was not an accurate statement to make,” Benitez said.
In actuality, he said he was coming home from Harlem where he had dinner and a few drinks with friends. He pulled onto Route 80 after coming off the George Washington Bridge.
In her summation, Bauman told the committee that when Benitez told the troopers they did not have to read him his Miranda Rights, he was asking for preferential treatment.
“All people arrested have to be read them,” she said. “He knows now the reference of being a judge is improper under any circumstances. The judge’s contriteness is important, but his behavior cannot be overlooked.”
Molloy then said that the use of profanity does not rise to the level of impugning the judiciary and that he did not think asking for a courtesy is the same thing as asking not to be arrested.
“An admonition is appropriate,” he said. “At worst, a public reprimand. Judge Benitez has gotten the message and would like to move on with his life.”
According to MaryAnn Spoto, a spokesperson for the ACJC, there is no specific time-frame for a decision, but a press release will be posted online when one is made.
About the Author
