Miss. Comm'n on Judicial Performance v. Sutton
| Docket Number: | 2007-JP-01956-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-05-2008 Opinion Author: LAMAR, J. Holding: PUBLIC REPRIMAND AND ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1900.89 |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Judicial discipline - Willful misconduct in office - Public reprimand Judge(s) Concurring: WALLER, P.J., CARLSON, DICKINSON AND RANDOLPH, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): SMITH, C.J., DIAZ, P.J., AND EASLEY, J. Concurs in Result Only: GRAVES, J. Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-31-2007 Appealed from: MISSISSIPPI COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE Judge: Frank M. Coleman Case Number: 2005-303/2006-003 |
|
| Note: | Judge Frank L. Sutton, Sr., Justice Court Judge for Hinds County, District Three, shall be publicly reprimanded in open court when the venire panel meets by the Presiding Judge of the Hinds County Circuit Court on the first day of the next term of that court after this decision becomes final and is assessed costs in the amount of $1900.89. Judge Frank L. Sutton, Sr., taxed with costs of appeal. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | MISSISSIPPI COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE |
LUTHER T. BRANTLEY, III,
AYANNA N. BATISTE |
||
| Appellee: | FRANK L. SUTTON, SR. | SORIE S. TARAWALLY |
|
|
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 discipline - Willful misconduct in office - Public reprimand |
| Summary of the Facts: | The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance filed a formal complaint charging Frank L. Sutton, Sr., justice court judge for District Three of Hinds County, with willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the office into disrepute. A three-member committee found that Judge Sutton’s conduct warranted a public reprimand and assessment of costs in the amount of $1,900.89. The full Commission adopted the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation of the committee. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Proper grounds for sanctioning a judge include willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the judicial office into disrepute. Intentional misconduct is not required; rather, a judge may through negligence or ignorance not amounting to bad faith, behave in a manner prejudicial to the administration of justice so as to bring the judicial office into disrepute. Sutton failed to observe high standards of conduct by engaging in ex parte communications with litigants, creating the perception that his decisions were not made independently and that he would not deal honestly with all litigants in his court. The Commission’s finding that Sutton issued orders based on information obtained from ex parte communications with tenants, supports its finding of a violation of Canon 2A. The Commission’s findings that Sutton failed to appear at the apartment inspection which he had scheduled, leaving an attorney and four apartment employees waiting without notification, and that Sutton loudly and publicly chastised an attorney in open court, evince a violation of Canon 3B(4). Sutton violated Canon 3B(7) by speaking with an evicted tenant and using information from this ex parte conversation in making his decision to stay the warrant of removal. Sutton’s behavior in the cases calls into question his competence, diligence, and impartiality in carrying out his administrative responsibilities. Sutton previously received a private reprimand for conduct unrelated to this case. Judge Sutton’s conduct evidences a pattern of conduct which must immediately cease. The Commission recommends that Sutton be publicly reprimanded and assessed costs in the amount of $1,900.89. The Commission’s recommendation is appropriate for Sutton’s misconduct and consistent with other similar cases. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
