The Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline announced formal proceedings against Montezuma County Court Judge Ian MacLaren of the 22nd Judicial District on Monday, alleging he misused his power on the bench to hold a performative hearing, then ultimately lied during an inquiry into his actions.
The proceedings against MacLaren emerged after he called a diversion agreement that was reached for Montezuma-Cortez RE-1 Superintendent Harry (Tom) Burris a “slap on the wrist.”
The complaint alleges that MacLaren scheduled a hearing intentionally to criticize Burris, presumed Burris to be guilty, invited news media to advance his own self-image and, in a separate matter, used his position as a judge to sway Colorado Parks and Wildlife officers from giving him a ticket for an expired boat registration.
Additionally, the complaint alleges that when the commission asked about the matters, MacLaren misrepresented the truth.
“Judges are guardians of the honesty and integrity that are the foundation for the public’s confidence in our justice system,” the complaint reads. “Put simply, Judge McLaren (sic) can’t credibly swear in witnesses to ‘tell the truth’ if he can’t do the same. Given this, the Commission on Judicial Discipline, regretfully, is compelled to seek removal.”
In nine claims, Montezuma County judge Ian MacLaren is alleged to have violated multiple ethical canon rules:
Canon Rule 1.2 states in relevant part: A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
Canon Rule 1.3 states in relevant part: A judge shall not abuse the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests of the judge or others, or allow others to do so.
Canon Rule 2.2 states in relevant part: A judge shall uphold and apply the law, and shall perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.
Canon Rule 2.3(A) states in relevant part: A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office, including administrative duties, without bias or prejudice.
Canon Rule 2.4 states in relevant part: (A) A judge shall not be swayed by public clamor or fear of criticism. (B) A judge shall not permit family, social, political, financial, or other interests or relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment.
Canon Rule 2.6(A) states: A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person’s lawyer, the right to be heard according to law.
Canon Rule 2.16(A) states: A judge shall cooperate and be candid and honest with judicial and lawyer disciplinary agencies.
A longtime resident of the area, MacLaren was appointed by Gov. Jared Polis to Montezuma County Court in October 2024. Previously, MacLaren served as a municipal court judge in Dove Creek as well as an attorney for Montezuma County.
In August 2024, Burris was charged with a Class 2 misdemeanor for failing to report alleged sexual abuse of a student by a teacher. An investigation found that no abuse had occurred.
During the hearing on Feb. 25, MacLaren criticized the diversion agreement, which called for Burris to undergo training.
“It is alleged that a report was made to the RE-1 School Board, and it is alleged that Mr. Burris, the superintendent of the school district, failed to report those allegations to law enforcement,” he said.
“Sitting here, I’m very disturbed that those reports weren’t made,” MacLaren said. “Looking at the diversion agreement, this looks to me to be a slap on the wrist.”
After MacLaren’s comments to Burris, Assistant District Attorney Justin Pierce questioned MacLaren’s judgment and experience, while Burris’ defense attorney, David Illingworth, called the judge’s comments “totally inappropriate.”
The Journal contacted Montezuma County Court on Tuesday morning to reach MacLaren, but was only able to get in touch with Court Executive Eric Hogue.
Hogue said that he had no comment on behalf of the 22nd District, but added, “We will let the disciplinary proceedings play out according to statute and rule.”
On April 15, 22nd District DA Jeremy Reed filed a motion to disqualify MacLaren from the Burris case, seeking to remove him from ruling on the case because he failed to meet standards of impartiality. By April 28, however, the court had denied the motion.
On April 24, Anne Mangiardi, executive director of Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline, emailed MacLaren, asking for a response regarding MacLaren’s choice to hold a hearing for Burris after a diversion agreement was signed by both parties. Mangiardi also questions why MacLaren denied Burris’ request to waive his presence at the hearing.
The letter takes a step further, asking MacLaren whether he had invited Journal reporter Cameryn Cass to attend the hearing or whether he permitted her to take a photograph in the courtroom. The letter also asked about the nature of MacLaren’s relationship with Cass.
Cass, now a freelance reporter for The Journal, covered the February diversion agreement hearing while she was a full-time reporter for the newspaper.
In a letter dated May 20, MacLaren responded in writing to the commission’s questions, saying that he ordered a hearing for the sake of public transparency.
“There was grave risk, from my perspective, that staying proceedings absent a hearing would cast the illusion that things were being done ‘behind closed doors,“’ the letter reads.
Regarding his “slap on the wrist” comments about the diversion agreement, MacLaren wrote that he had upheld judicial integrity, respected the presumption of innocence, and held no ill will toward Burris.
“That said, I wanted to be clear that my signature on the order staying proceedings was in no way indicative of my comfort or agreement with the disposition,” MacLaren wrote.
With regards to his interaction with The Journal, MacLaren said that although he answered a question from Cass about the date and time of the hearing to save time, he did not invite her to attend.
“At no point did I suggest that she attend or cover the hearing, and at no point did I discuss any facts about the case with her,” his letter says.
“I knew that the press had been previous (sic) at previous hearings in the case, and I didn’t feel as if providing the date and time of the hearing would cause harm,” he said.
MacLaren’s relationship with Cass became a focal point for the commission.
“I would describe our relationship as more than friends but less than being an official couple,” he wrote. “We have gone on what I would describe as ‘dates,’ and we have spent time together as just friends. It is fair to say that at times we have been romantically involved.”
MacLaren said the relationship did not affect performance of his job.
“Nothing about our relationship has influenced my ability to do my job in an unbiased, impartial, and honest way,” he wrote.
Cass told The Journal that she refuted any romantic relationship between the two of them.
“He was a friend,” she said. “We were never physically or romantically involved.”
“I was always just trying to get the story and be in the know,” she said.
The commission did not present evidence from Cass other than her text messages shared with MacLaren.
Texts between MacLaren and Cass, often conveyed in a friendly tone, were presented as evidence in the complaint and complicated some details.
“Happy Monday! You might wanna take a quick glance at tomorrow’s County Court docket ;)” MacLaren wrote to Cass before the Burris hearing.
When Cass asked about a condemnation of Burris, MacLaren responded: “No comment on any possible condemnation ;).”
In his letter to the commission, MacLaren said that after the Burris hearing, a court administrator had approached the judge, informing him that a photo of the courtroom had been posted to The Journal website and asking him if he had granted permission for it to be taken.
MacLaren said he told the administrator that he did not authorize the photo. MacLaren also said he was not entirely aware of the district’s specific policy. The administrator informed MacLaren that he would reach out to The Journal regarding the photo.
Along with a link to her article about the hearing, Cass sent MacLaren the photo she took in the courtroom, asking permission to use it.
Later, MacLaren responds: “Sorry, I just saw your texts! I like that picture! And great article! You captured things perfectly!”
Burris’ defense attorney, David Illingworth, reached out to The Journal via email to call for MacLaren’s resignation.
“I am shocked at the deep level of vulgar corruption revealed by the CCJD’s investigation into Ian MacLaren, and if the man had the smallest ounce of integrity he would have already resigned,” Illingworth wrote.
He also applauded DA Reed for addressing MacLaren’s alleged misconduct.
“I await the day Ian MacLaren no longer has the ability to abuse his office from within the Montezuma County courthouse,” he wrote.
An additional allegation in the complaint says that in June, MacLaren was stopped in his boat by Colorado Parks and Wildlife officers on McPhee Reservoir.
He was initially let off with a warning after having an expired boat registration license, but during a second stop the next day, MacLaren told the officers that he was a judge, according to the complaint.
The complaint alleges that MacLaren mentioned his status as a judge in an attempt to avoid being ticketed.
Proceedings against MacLaren will be heard by a panel of three – a district judge, a lawyer and a citizen – making up the Judicial Discipline Adjudicative Board. The panel, in turn, will decide on an “imposition of discipline,” according to a news release from the state’s Commission on Judicial Discipline on Monday.
The Commission on Judicial Discipline is an independent agency that addresses complaints of judicial misconduct.
The Adjudicative Board is tasked with handling the conduct of judges and deciding what future awaits MacLaren.
Editor’s note: Cameryn Cass was employed as a full-time reporter for The (Cortez) Journal from July 8, 2024, to May 16, 2025. Ian MacLaren was employed as a full-time sports editor and reporter for The Journal from June 4, 2013, to May 15, 2015, and subsequently freelanced for the paper.
