Which statement about ex parte communications is true?

Which statement about ex parte communications is true?

• A. It is permissible to relay information about a death threat to the judge.
• B. It is never allowed to talk to a defendant on the phone about the case.
• C. It is not ex parte communication to inform the judge about information from a defendant relating to the defendant's case pending in the court.
• D. A defendant cannot communicate any information to the judge.

Answer: (C)

Ex parte communications happen when a judge is contacted by one party outside the presence or knowledge of the other party, which is generally not allowed. The important distinction is how the information reaches the judge. If information from the defendant relating to the case is presented to the judge through the proper channels—such as in open court with both sides present, or via a filing or motion that the other party has notice of and can respond to—then it becomes part of the court record and isn’t considered an ex parte communication. So, informing the judge about information from a defendant that is provided through the appropriate, formal process (with notice to the other side) is not ex parte. This aligns with the idea that not all information from a defendant is barred from the judge; the key is that it must be conveyed through proper procedure so both sides have a chance to participate. The other scenarios—directly relaying a death threat, talking to the defendant on the phone about the case without the other party’s involvement, or stating that a defendant can’t convey any information to the judge—would involve improper ex parte contact or are simply incorrect.

Ex parte communications happen when a judge is contacted by one party outside the presence or knowledge of the other party, which is generally not allowed. The important distinction is how the information reaches the judge. If information from the defendant relating to the case is presented to the judge through the proper channels—such as in open court with both sides present, or via a filing or motion that the other party has notice of and can respond to—then it becomes part of the court record and isn’t considered an ex parte communication.

So, informing the judge about information from a defendant that is provided through the appropriate, formal process (with notice to the other side) is not ex parte. This aligns with the idea that not all information from a defendant is barred from the judge; the key is that it must be conveyed through proper procedure so both sides have a chance to participate. The other scenarios—directly relaying a death threat, talking to the defendant on the phone about the case without the other party’s involvement, or stating that a defendant can’t convey any information to the judge—would involve improper ex parte contact or are simply incorrect.