photo by: Contributed Photo

Suzanne Valdez was elected to serve as Douglas County district attorney in November 2020.

Updated at 4:44 p.m. Thursday, May 11

A disciplinary hearing has been scheduled with the Kansas Office of the Disciplinary Administrator for Douglas County District Attorney Suzanne Valdez, and a special prosecutor has been retained to oversee the proceedings.

A disciplinary hearing is generally scheduled after a complaint has been filed against an attorney and the Review Committee of the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys reviews the complaint and concludes that probable cause exists to believe that an attorney violated the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct.

Gayle Larkin, the state disciplinary administrator, confirmed Thursday that a disciplinary hearing has been scheduled in August, but she was unable to comment on the specifics of any complaint.

A special prosecutor, Kimberly Bonifas, of Wichita, was retained to handle the case for the ODA after it was determined that there was a conflict of interest within the ODA, Larkin said.

The complaint filed against Valdez may be a public document at this point in the process, but since it is being handled by an outside prosecutor, Larkin said that she was unaware what public documents might be available and that the question could be answered by Bonifas or by Counsel to the Board Krystal Vokins. Larkin said that Vokins was out of the office until next week. Bonifas was not available when the Journal-World called Thursday afternoon.

The public information officer for Valdez’s office, Cheryl Cadue, told the Journal-World Thursday afternoon only that Valdez had not received a formal complaint from the disciplinary administrator. Cadue provided no further comment.

The ODA oversees rules governing attorneys in Kansas and works under the direction of the Kansas Supreme Court. The disciplinary administrator reviews and investigates complaints of misconduct against attorneys; ​holds public hearings when appropriate and recommends discipline to the Supreme Court in serious matters; and ​provides education and resources for Kansas attorneys to prevent the occurrence of misconduct, according to its website.

Valdez, a Democrat, was elected as DA in 2020.

The Journal-World first asked her office about possible ethics violations and complaints filed against the office in September of 2022 after she unsuccessfully requested $30,000 from the county’s budget to hire outside counsel to investigate and respond to complaints filed against her office.

During that same period, the Journal-World received tips from members of the local bar association who had reason to believe that a Douglas County District Court judge had filed an ethics complaint against Valdez. The Journal-World was unable to confirm whether such a complaint had been made, in part, because the process of filing a complaint against an attorney in Kansas is largely closed from public view. Even in cases where complaints are made against an elected official — such as a district attorney — the public does not have a right under state law to see the initial complaint, the Journal-World was told by state officials. Complaints become publicly acknowledged by the state only after the review committee concludes that probable cause exists and an action is taken.

The Journal-World did reach out to Valdez about the allegation, but she declined to confirm whether a Douglas County judge had filed an ethics complaint against her. The Journal-World also reached out to Chief Judge James McCabria. He said the question was a valid one, but one that he felt he could not answer.

“I very much appreciate your interest in this topic. As a citizen, I can appreciate that the people of this county would have interest in such matters and that it is a proper subject of inquiry. As a judge, it is my own view that it is appropriate for me to decline to discuss such matters,” McCabria said in an email to the Journal-World.

McCabria said his own ethical obligations prevented him from responding to the question.

“Were it the case that an attorney engaged in conduct sufficient to prompt me or another judge to file a complaint, it is my own view that such complaints should be resolved by the Disciplinary Administrator without public comment by me. It is merely a matter of both respecting and protecting the process,” McCabria said in the email.

“Second, if a complaint were pending, any comment I might offer could be construed as expressing a personal bias. As a judge, I can best promote the fair and impartial administration of the law when I refrain from making comments on matters of this nature.”

The Journal-World asked other Douglas County District Court judges whether they had filed an ethics complaint against Valdez. All of them but one responded and either said they had not filed such a complaint or directed the Journal-World to McCabria’s statement.

The Journal-World is aware of at least one other pending complaint filed against Valdez alleging that the District Attorney’s Office violated the rights of a victim in a criminal case. That complaint was filed in March by Joel Juelsgaard, who has said he is working on a petition to recall Valdez. He alleges that Valdez’s office did not properly consult with the family of a victim in a rape case that ultimately was reduced to a lesser charge that led to a sentence of probation for the offender.

As the Journal-World reported, Juelsgaard tried to get answers from Douglas County Sheriff Jay Armbrister since it was the sheriff’s office that handled the investigation into the alleged rape. Armbrister eventually suggested to Juelsgaard that he should file the recall petition.