On May 19, 2025, the Commission on Judicial Discipline entered a written order ending Justice of the Peace Michele Fiore’s suspension without salary but imposing an interim suspension with salary. Judge Fiore, Pahrump Justice Court, Nye County, remained prohibited from performing judicial duties pending disposition of the formal complaints filed in this matter. The order followed Judge Fiore’s April 23, 2025, presidential pardon for federal conspiracy and wire-fraud offenses. The Commission concluded that suspension without salary based on the federal guilty verdict was no longer warranted. However, it found that Judge Fiore’s return to judicial duties while additional complaints were pending posed a substantial threat of serious harm to the public and to the administration of justice. The Commission’s reasoning focused on what it characterized as continuing dishonesty and wrongful retention of charitable donations after Fiore became a judge. It concluded that the pardon did not preclude considering that conduct when determining her fitness to exercise judicial office. On May 21, 2025, Fiore, represented by attorneys Paola Armeni and Gia Marina of Clark Hill PLLC, appealed the order to the Supreme Court of Nevada in Case No. 90650. On June 16, 2025, Fiore's counsel also petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus and prohibition, challenging the Commission’s jurisdiction over the disciplinary complaint and arguing that it concerned conduct preceding her judicial service. On July 2, 2025, the Supreme Court directed the Commission to answer the petition and stayed the proceedings pending further order. That stay paused the disciplinary proceedings but did not lift Judge Fiore’s suspension. On August 13, 2025, the Commission, represented by attorney Richard Dreitzer of Fennemore Craig, filed its answer, arguing that Judge Fiore’s challenge was premature and that the complaint concerned alleged misconduct continuing after she became a judge. Judge Fiore filed her reply on August 25, disputing the asserted basis for jurisdiction and asking the Court to dismiss the complaint. On December 22, 2025, the Supreme Court agreed to expedite consideration of Judge Fiore’s suspension appeal to the extent its docket permitted but denied her request to stay the suspension. It also declined the Commission’s request to lift the stay of disciplinary proceedings because the Commission had raised that request in the suspension appeal rather than the writ proceedings. On April 10, 2026, the Supreme Court resolved the three consolidated matters. It dismissed Case No. 89037 as moot because the Commission had already rescinded the suspension without salary and in Case No. 90650, it affirmed Judge Fiore’s suspension with salary. The Supreme Court concluded that the Commission had jurisdiction because the suspension rested on alleged misconduct during her judicial service. It also concluded that Judge Fiore had not demonstrated an abuse of discretion. The Court distinguished the interim suspension from a final adjudication of disciplinary charges. In Case No. 90810, the Court denied Judge Fiore’s writ petition as premature. At that stage, the Commission had neither filed formal charges nor imposed final discipline. The denial did not resolve whether Judge Fiore ultimately committed the alleged judicial misconduct. On April 24, 2026, Prosecuting Officer Thomas Donaldson filed Formal Statement of Charges, accusing Judge Fiore of mishandling donations solicited before she became a judge and that it constituted misconduct continuing after she assumed judicial office. Judge Fiore moved to dismiss the charges on May 15, 2026 arguing that the Commission lacked jurisdiction over conduct occurring before she became a judge and that the charges failed to identify an enforceable obligation requiring her to notify donors or return their contributions. Donaldson opposed dismissal on May 26, and Fiore replied on June 2. On June 16, 2026, the Commission entered an order setting a public disciplinary hearing for October 19–22, 2026, at the State Bar of Nevada’s offices in Las Vegas designating the Honorable Kendra Bertschy as presiding officer. The Commission denied Judge Fiore’s motion to dismiss and her request for oral argument, concluding that the charges sufficiently alleged misconduct occurring after she became a judicial officer and provided adequate notice of the allegations. The Commission also granted the prosecuting officer permission to amend Count One to more specifically identify the legal grounds for the alleged obligation to notify donors, seek instructions on alternative uses of their donations, or return the money. The prosecuting officer filed First Amended Formal Statement of Charges on August 7, 2026 leveling accusations of violations of the Revised Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct. Count One alleged that, after becoming a judge, Fiore failed to comply with laws governing criminal embezzlement, civil conversion, or unjust enrichment by failing to notify donors, seek instructions, or return donations not used for their stated purpose. Count Two alleged that continuing to retain those donations violated legal requirements and undermined public confidence in the judiciary. Count Three alleged that the federal jury’s guilty verdict, returned while Fiore held judicial office, created an appearance of impropriety affecting public perceptions of her fitness to serve. Judge Fiore’s verified answer, dated August 27, 2026, disputed the allegations and requested dismissal. Her defenses included lack of jurisdiction, inadequate notice, limitations periods, and the effect of the presidential pardon. She maintained that the continuing consequences of alleged conduct before she became a judge did not constitute new misconduct during judicial service. Additional motions followed. On August 31, Judge Fiore sought to disqualify Commissioners Stefanie Humphrey, John Krmpotic, and Joseph Sanford based on alleged bias and the appearance of impropriety. On September 4, she moved to dismiss Count One of the amended charges. On September 30, she filed an amended motion to dismiss, alleging due process violations. On October 2, 2026, the Commission granted Judge Fiore’s unopposed request for witnesses Jason Gunnell and Maryian Ausiello to testify remotely. Both sides filed prehearing briefs on October 5. Judge Fiore maintained that the fundraising occurred before she assumed office and that no independent misconduct during judicial service had been established. The prosecuting officer argued that Judge Fiore’s alleged failure to notify donors or return funds continued after she became a judge and that the pardon did not foreclose judicial discipline. On October 9, 2026, the Commission excluded the proposed testimony and expert statement of Keith R. Fisher. Its order concluded that Fisher’s opinions on jurisdiction, the sufficiency of the charges, and procedural issues would not help the Commission decide whether Judge Fiore committed the alleged acts. The Commission denied her request to have Fisher testify remotely as moot. The public hearing is scheduled to begin October 19, 2026. Our Nevada Judges, Inc.'s request to deploy high-definition cameras was granted, with Founding Director Alex Falconi designated as pool coordinator.

On July 16, 2024, a federal grand jury indicted Justice of the Peace Michele Fiore, Pahrump Justice Court, Nye County, on charges related to an alleged charitable-donation scheme. Federal prosecutors filed the indictment in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada for conduct prior to Judge Fiore having taken the bench. According to the indictment, Fiore solicited more than $70,000 from donors while serving as a Las Vegas City Councilwoman, representing that the money would support a statue honoring slain Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Officer Alyn Beck. Prosecutors alleged that Fiore knew a private developer had already agreed to pay for the statue’s creation, installation, and shipping, but diverted the donations for personal benefit. The conspiracy and wire-fraud charges concerned the alleged use of interstate wire communications to carry out the scheme. The indictment concerned fundraising activity during 2019 and early 2020. On January 31, 2020, the City of Las Vegas unveiled the Alyn Beck statue at Alyn Beck Memorial Park. Following the indictment, the Commission on Judicial Discipline instituted interim suspension proceedings. On July 18, 2024, the Commission notified Judge Fiore of its intent to suspend her with salary. On July 23, attorney Michael W. Sanft advised the Commission that Fiore waived her right to a public hearing regarding that suspension. On July 24, 2024, the Commission unanimously ordered Judge Fiore suspended from exercising judicial office with salary, effective July 26. The order relied on the pending federal felony indictment. On September 23, 2024, the Commission rescinded and immediately reinstated Judge Fiore’s suspension without salary. The Commission’s order explained that the applicable statute required action within 60 days of a suspension. The Commission considered formal disciplinary charges premature while the indictment remained pending and concluded that the circumstances requiring suspension continued to exist. That order did not return Fiore to judicial duties. On October 3, 2024, a federal jury found Fiore guilty of one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and six counts of wire fraud. The verdict prompted the Commission to consider suspension without salary. It issued notice on October 4 and held a public hearing on October 18, at which attorney Paola M. Armeni represented Judge Fiore. On October 21, the Commission unanimously ordered Fiore suspended without salary, effective immediately. Through Armeni, Judge Fiore filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court of Nevada on November 4, 2024, challenging the October 21 suspension order. The Commission filed a certified copy of the notice with the Supreme Court on November 5. The Commission continued to review the suspension while federal sentencing remained pending. Following a December 13, 2024 hearing, at which Judge Fiore and Armeni presented her response, the Commission entered a December 18 order rescinding and immediately reinstating the suspension without salary, effective December 20. Judge Fiore filed an amended notice of appeal on December 27 challenging that order. The Commission filed a certified copy of the amended notice with the Supreme Court on December 30. On February 11, 2025, the Commission held another public hearing, at which attorney Gia Marina presented Judge Fiore’s response. On February 14, the Commission rescinded and immediately reinstated her suspension without salary, effective that day. On April 4, 2025, Judge Fiore’s attorneys, Paola Armeni and Gia Marina, filed an opening brief in Supreme Court Case No. 89037. The attorneys argued that suspending Judge Fiore without pay was premature because no judgment of conviction had been entered and her challenges to the federal jury verdict remained unresolved. They also contended that the Commission unfairly applied amendments to its suspension procedures against Judge Fiore and that withholding her salary caused financial hardship while judicial restrictions limited her ability to obtain other employment. On April 7, 2025, the Commission held a further public hearing, at which Marina again presented Judge Fiore’s response. On April 14, the Commission rescinded the suspension without salary order and immediately reinstated it, effective April 15. The order noted that Judge Fiore had requested three continuances of her federal sentencing hearing. On April 23, 2025, before sentencing could occur, President Donald J. Trump granted Judge Fiore a full and unconditional pardon for the federal conspiracy and six wire-fraud offenses. The pardon prompted another review of Judge Fiore’s judicial suspension. On May 2, 2025, Commission Chairwoman Stefanie Humphrey issued notice of a public hearing scheduled for noon on May 9. The notice identified Commission Case Nos. 2024-ADM-02 and 2025-108. The Commission served the notice on Armeni. The Commission would consider whether its April suspension order remained warranted following the pardon. If suspension without salary were no longer warranted, it would consider whether Judge Fiore posed a substantial threat of serious harm to the public or to the administration of justice, warranting suspension with salary under NRS 1.4675(4). Fiore remained suspended as the May 9, 2025 hearing approached. Our Nevada Judges, Inc.'s request to deploy high-definition cameras was granted.