Miss. Comm'n on Judicial Performance v. Williams
| Docket Number: | 2003-JP-02475-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-19-2004 Opinion Author: Cobb, P.J. Holding: PUBLIC REPRIMAND, FINE AND COSTS |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Judicial performance - Agreed recommendation - Public reprimand Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Nature of the Case: CIVIL - JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-09-2003 Judge: Clarence E. Morgan, III Disposition: Recommended a public reprimand, fine, and costs. Case Number: 2002-009 |
|
| Note: | Joint Motion for Approval of Recommendations filed by the Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance, granted. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance |
LUTHER T. BRANTLEY, III |
||
| Appellee: | Windell Williams | CARROLL RHODES |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Judicial performance - Agreed recommendation - Public reprimand |
| Summary of the Facts: | The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance filed a formal complaint against Jefferson County Justice Court Judge Windell Williams, setting forth eight counts of judicial misconduct. The conduct complained of in the first six counts took place on six separate occasions, involved six different defendants, and occurred between September 13, 2001, and May 24, 2002. Count three was not proven nor admitted and is not included in the agreed statement. The Commission and Judge Williams have filed a Joint Motion for Approval of Recommendations. They have agreed upon the imposition of a public reprimand, a $228.50 fine which represents the amount of fines that would have been imposed in the three speeding cases, and costs of $100. The only facts offered as mitigation were that Judge Williams now understands the significance of a properly executed waiver of attorney and that a criminal affidavit alone does not constitute evidence upon which a defendant may be convicted and that similar conduct similar will not recur in the future. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The Supreme Court may remove from office, suspend, fine or publicly censure or reprimand any judge of this state for willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the judicial office into disrepute. While a number of mitigating factors may be considered in the Court's determination of whether a public reprimand is a suitable sanction, Judge Williams made no submission related to any of these factors. Although there are unanswered questions regarding the mitigating facts in this case, the recommendation is accepted, because it comes as an agreed recommendation, and there is nothing to indicate a need to set aside that agreement. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
