Judge Carl L. Marshall Faces Formal Complaint for Judicial Misconduct

Allegations include improper warrant recall and misuse of LinkedIn for personal gain

NEW JERSEY - In a significant development, Judge Carl L. Marshall of the Municipal Court, who serves in Elizabeth, Roselle, and Plainfield, has been formally accused of judicial misconduct by the Supreme Court of New Jersey's Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct (ACJC). The formal complaint, filed on July 1, 2024, outlines two primary allegations against Judge Marshall, pertaining to the improper recall of a warrant and the misuse of his LinkedIn account to advance personal interests.

Count I: Improper Recall of an "At-Large" Warrant

The first allegation centers around an incident involving an active warrant issued on September 23, 2018, for criminal mischief against Anthony Hawthorne. The warrant remained unserved until February 19, 2021, when Judge Marshall contacted L.G., an Acting Court Administrator, to inquire about the warrant. Following this inquiry, Judge Marshall instructed L.G. to recall the warrant and schedule a hearing, an action that was documented in the New Jersey Automated Complaint System (NJACS) and signed off by Judge Marshall.

However, the complaint contends that Judge Marshall failed to follow the correct procedure for recalling an "at-large" warrant, which requires the defendant to be processed in Central Judicial Processing (CJP) court. This oversight resulted in the warrant not being removed from the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) system, leading to Hawthorne's subsequent wrongful arrest in July 2023 during a traffic stop.

Judge Marshall, in his response filed on August 2, 2024, admits to some of the factual claims but denies awareness that the warrant was "at-large" rather than a "bench" warrant. He argues that the recall was made in good faith and without knowledge of the procedural error, emphasizing his lack of responsibility for the failure to remove the warrant from the NCIC system.

Count II: Misuse of LinkedIn for Personal Gain

The second allegation involves Judge Marshall's LinkedIn account, where he identified himself as a municipal court judge and referenced his judicial positions in Elizabeth, Plainfield, Roselle, and previously Hillside. The ACJC argues that this constitutes using the prestige of his judicial office to advance personal and economic interests, violating several Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

In his defense, Judge Marshall asserts that he was unaware of the impropriety of such an account and promptly removed it once informed. He explains that his intention was purely informational, akin to a directory listing for professionals.

Implications and Next Steps

The ACJC has charged Judge Marshall with violating multiple Canons, including failing to observe high standards of conduct, respect for the law, avoiding impropriety, and using judicial office for personal gain. These violations, if proven, could undermine public confidence in the judiciary's integrity and impartiality.

Judge Marshall has served as a municipal court judge since 2001 and holds positions in multiple jurisdictions. He maintains that any violations were unintentional and without improper purpose, emphasizing his previously unblemished judicial record.

The outcome of this case will be closely watched as it unfolds, with significant implications for Judge Marshall's career and the broader judicial community in New Jersey. The ACJC's findings and recommendations will play a crucial role in determining the appropriate disciplinary actions, if any, to be taken against Judge Marshall.

For further updates on this developing story, stay tuned to local news channels and official statements from the Supreme Court of New Jersey's Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct.