Andreatta: High court balked over ending Astacio's pay

Ever since Rochester City Court Judge Leticia Astacio stopped acting like a judge, the only threat to her continuing to get paid like a judge has been the foot-dragging state commission tasked with disciplining judges who don’t act like judges.

That changed Tuesday when Astacio was arrested on a felony charge of attempting to buy a gun in violation of her probation.

The felony opened the door for the state’s highest court, the New York Court of Appeals, to step in and cut off her pay, which this month swelled to $187,200 a year as part of an incremental salary raise for city court judges across the state.

More: Judge Astacio suspended by state Court of Appeals

The state Constitution and Section 44 of the state Judiciary Law spell out the option.

They both read: “The court of appeals may suspend a judge or justice from exercising the powers of his office … while he is charged in this state with a felony by an indictment or an information. … A judge or justice who is suspended from office by the court shall receive his judicial salary during such period of suspension, unless the court directs otherwise.”

So, what did the high court do? It balked by suspending her with pay.

In practical terms, the court suspending Astacio and stripping her of her pay would have made no difference in how the judiciary functions.

More: Judge Leticia Astacio charged with attempting to purchase weapon

Her local supervising judges haven’t let her preside over a case since her drunken driving arrest in February 2016. They assigned her to administrative duties at the courthouse, but her attendance was spotty from the start and she has shown up once since August.

Stripping Astacio of her pay wouldn’t free up the money to hire another City Court judge, either. Hers is an elected position with a 10-year term, and her suspension wouldn’t equate to a vacant seat that could be filled with a special election.

But what the high court suspending Astacio and stripping her of her pay would have done was send a message that the judiciary does indeed function.

No one should be permitted to sip from the public trough for so long for doing nothing. Yet Astacio has done so, largely because there was no provision in law to stop her.

Until now.

That the high court would take a stand on her pay was doubtful.

The court just last week suspended with pay a Suffolk County District Court judge, Robert Cicale, who was arrested for allegedly burglarizing a home and stealing women's underwear.

Also recently suspended by the Court of Appeals was a town court justice in Albany County who was accused of stealing more than $4 million from a trust fund for which he was responsible.

That judge, Richard Sherwood of Guilderland Town Court, was charged with two counts of grand larceny, two counts of criminal possession of stolen property and one count of scheming to defraud. He, too, was allowed to stay on the payroll.

Those charges are far more egregious than any faced by Astacio, whose original drunken driving conviction was a misdemeanor.

Astacio has been under investigation by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, the body empowered to discipline judges, for over a year with no end in sight.

Although the commission itself isn’t an extension of the judicial branch, its prolonged probe has shaken public confidence in the judiciary to its core in greater Rochester.

Working people can’t grasp how powerless the system is to cut Astacio off from the trough when she continuously refuses to act like a judge — from not showing up for work to posting rambling videos on Facebook.

Astacio now faces a class E felony, the lowest felony charge, for allegedly attempting to buy a 12-gauge shotgun at Dick’s Sporting Goods in Henrietta on April 2.

The conditions of her probation, on which she was placed last summer after a series of violations of her original sentence, forbid her from “possessing a firearm, dangerous weapon, or noxious substance.”

In a video that has since been deleted but was posted to her Facebook page shortly before her latest arrest, Astacio denied attempting to buy the gun and claimed it was her sister who tried to make the purchase.

Her sister, Felicia Astacio, responded with a Facebook post of her own on April 8.

“I honestly hate to address allegations of rumors but for the sake of my business and professional reputation I want to clarify all accusations,” the post read. “I’ve never been to Dick’s to buy a gun, there was no mistaken identity — it was not me.”

All of it was more evidence that Astacio is a judge in title only.

The seven judges on the Court of Appeals had an opportunity to show Rochester how real judges act. They didn't take it.

David Andreatta is a Democrat and Chronicle columnist. He can be reached at dandreatta@gannett.com.