Judge Emily Cole

Judge Emily Cole has served on the Los Angeles Superior Court since January 5, 2021, having been appointed to the bench. Her tenure has been marked by a significant judicial misconduct finding documented by the Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP). Specifically, texts she sent to a prosecutor were found to have compromised a murder conviction, resulting in that conviction being voided and the defendant facing a third murder trial. This misconduct was reported by the Daily Journal and Courthouse News in November 2025. The CJP record and the underlying facts of the misconduct finding are the primary documented data points available about Judge Cole's conduct on the bench. The misconduct involved ex parte-style communications with a prosecutor in a high-stakes criminal matter, which a reviewing authority determined was sufficient to void a prior conviction. This represents a serious and documented breach of judicial conduct standards. No ruling analyses, attorney observations, or additional case data are available at this time. Attorneys appearing before Judge Cole should be aware of the CJP record and the documented misconduct finding as the central known facts about her judicial conduct. Any strategic assessment beyond these documented facts is not supported by available data.

Given the documented CJP record involving improper communications with a prosecutor, defense attorneys in particular should be acutely attentive to any indications of ex parte contact or asymmetric treatment between prosecution and defense. If you are defense counsel, the documented misconduct pattern involved communications favorable to the prosecution, which is a concrete and documented concern. Prosecutors appearing before Judge Cole should be aware that any communications outside formal court proceedings — even informal ones — have been shown in the documented record to create grounds for reversal and further CJP scrutiny. Strict adherence to formal communication channels is essential for both sides to protect the integrity of the record. Because no ruling analyses or attorney observations are available, attorneys cannot rely on documented patterns regarding her procedural preferences, motion practice tendencies, or courtroom management style. Attorneys should consult colleagues who have recently appeared before her and review any available tentative ruling records through the court's online system prior to any appearance.

• critical

  Review CJP Public Record

  Before any appearance, obtain and review the full Commission on Judicial Performance public record for Judge Cole. This record contains the formal findings and may detail the scope and nature of the documented misconduct, which is directly relevant to case strategy.

• critical

  Document All Communications Meticulously

  Given the documented misconduct involving improper communications with a prosecutor, ensure that all communications with the court are on the record and formally documented. Flag any irregularities immediately.

• important

  Consult Attorneys with Recent Appearances Before Judge Cole

  No ruling analyses or attorney observations are available in this dataset. Peer consultation with attorneys who have recently appeared before Judge Cole is the most direct way to supplement the limited available data.

• important

  Monitor for Asymmetric Treatment Between Parties

  The documented misconduct involved communications with the prosecution. Defense counsel should monitor the record carefully for any procedural asymmetry and preserve objections on the record if asymmetric treatment is observed.

• important

  Review Daily Journal and Courthouse News Coverage

  The November 2025 reporting by the Daily Journal and Courthouse News on the misconduct finding contains factual detail that may inform case strategy, particularly in criminal matters.

• ›Ensure all communications with the court occur on the record and through formal channels only — the documented misconduct involved off-record texts, making strict formality essential.
• ›If you observe any communication between the judge and opposing counsel outside of formal proceedings, raise the issue on the record immediately and preserve your objection.
• ›Given the active CJP record, maintain scrupulous professionalism in all filings and oral argument — any conduct that could be characterized as encouraging or tolerating improper procedure should be avoided.
• ›Request that all scheduling, evidentiary, and substantive discussions occur in open court with both parties present.