CHARLESTON – A McDowell Circuit Judge has been publicly admonished by the state Judicial Investigation Commission for holding two correctional officers in contempt, having them incarcerated and strip searched.
The public admonishment of Judge Rudolph J. Murensky II was issued April 25.
According to the filing, a female inmate was transferred from Southern Regional Jail in Beaver to McDowell Circuit Court in Welch for a hearing January 5 by two male correctional officers, both of whom were corporals. The inmate had been involved in an altercation at the jail, and she had two black eyes as well as some cuts and bruises.
Rudolph J. Murensky, II
| courtswv.gov
Murensky decided to send the inmate to Southwestern Regional Jail in Holden rather than the Southern Regional Jail. He said he had a transport order and asked the two officers if they had “any problems taking her to Southwestern.”
One of the officers said he would have to contact a supervisor and go through the chain of command to get authorization for the transfer. Murensky cut him off mid-sentence, according to the filing.
“Well, I have a direct court order here,” Murensky said. “Are you going to obey it or not?”
“I’ll have to contact my supervisor,” the officer replied.
Murensky then ordered the two officers be taken into custody and incarcerated for civil contempt.
“Well, until you do, go into the hands – both of you will go into the hands of the correctional officer for incarceration here for violating a court order and not take her to Southwestern Regional Jail, in violation of this court order,” Murensky said. “Mr. Deputy, take both of these correctional officers and incarcerate them up here and have them come before the court in the morning at 11 a.m.”
Once taken into custody and detained, the officers were required to surrender their weapons, and they were allowed to call their supervisors to relay the situation. They were handcuffed.
They also were strip searched and had their badges, shoestrings, wallets and watches confiscated. Then, they were told to put their uniforms back on and were placed in a cell with six inmates.
When the superintendent from Stevens Correctional Center arrived, he was able to have the officers held in a separate room from other inmates.
After learning of the incident, leaders with the Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation authorized the inmate transfer, and the officers were released to transport her. But, they still were to be in Murensky’s court the next morning for a show cause hearing. DCR leadership as well as an Assistant Attorney General were present for the hearing, but Murensky said he considered the matter moot.
On January 20, Murensky entered an order purging the contempt charges against the officers.
On February 22, DCR Commission Betty Jividen filed a judicial ethics complaint against Murensky, alleging he violated several rules of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
In his reply to the allegations, Murensky said the officers could have purged their civil contempt charges “by immediately complying with my lawful directive that were aimed at protecting the health, safety, welfare and life of (the inmate).”
“Contrary to the contentions in the complaint, these correctional officers always had the keys to their own cell,” Murensky wrote. “The purpose of my rulings was to compel compliance with my directives for (the inmate’s) safety – not to punish these correctional officers.”
The JIC ruled Murensky did violate rules of the Code of Judicial Conduct, including compliance with the law, confidence in the judiciary, avoid abuse of the prestige of judicial office, impartiality and fairness, competence, diligence and cooperation, decorum, demeanor and communication with jurors.
But, the JIC also said formal discipline was not required as Murensky had no prior disciplinary actions and “his general reputation as a good judge.”
“The Judicial Investigation Commission has no complaint with the respondent’s decision to protect an inmate from further harm,” the filing states. “However, the manner and means with which he went about it were wrong. The commission also has some concerns about the manner in which respondent went about holding the complainant in contempt. …
“The one correctional officer who spoke never said he wouldn’t transport the inmate to a different facility. He merely said he would first have to contract his supervisor. The second officer never said anything. Neither officer said they would not comply with the court order at that point. Therefore, they should not have been held in contempt.”
It said Murensky also didn’t tell the officers what they needed to do to get out of jail.
“Instead, he left that up to his bailiff to perform the task,” the admonishment, signed by JIC Vice Chairman F. Layton Cottrill, states.
Murensky has 14 days after receiving the admonishment to file a written objection.
Murensky is a McDowell County native, and his father also was a circuit judge. He practiced law in Welch from 1978 to 2000, and he served in the House of Delegates from 1980 to 1992. He was Majority Leader from 1987 to 1990 and Finance Committee Chairman from 1991 to 1992.
He was elected to the bench in 2000 and re-elected in 2008 and 2016, and he was a member of the Judicial Hearing Board for nine years and served as its chairman and vice-chairman.
Judicial Investigation Commission complaint 20-2022