Misss. Comm'n on Judicial Performance v. Brown
| Docket Number: | 2009-JP-02001-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-10-2010 Opinion Author: Presiding Justice Carlson Holding: Publicly reprimanded, suspended for thirty days without pay, fined $1500 and assessed costs of $1,955.20 |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Judicial discipline - Willful misconduct - Sanctions |
|
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 - Sanctions |
| Summary of the Facts: | The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance filed a formal complaint charging Quitman County Second District Justice Court Judge Joe M. Brown with judicial misconduct constituting willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brought the office into disrepute. All findings of misconduct were based on allegations that Judge Brown had touched a former deputy justice court clerk in an inappropriate manner and that Judge Brown had used a racially derogatory term in referring to an African-American MDOC employee. The Commission recommends that Judge Brown be publicly reprimanded, assessed a fine of $1,500, suspended for a period of thirty days without pay, and assessed costs of this proceeding in the amount of $1,955.20. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Willful misconduct The Commission’s findings that Judge Brown’s judicial conduct constituted willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, which brings the judicial office into disrepute, are based on clear and convincing evidence. Issue 2: Sanctions Judge Brown does not dispute that he touched the clerk in an inappropriate manner. Likewise, Judge Brown does not dispute having used racially derogatory language on prior occasions in private conversations, but he does deny having used a racial slur in his conversation with the clerk and others. Judge Brown has served as Justice Court Judge in Quitman County for eleven and one-half years. Prior to this incident, no complaints had ever been filed with the Commission. The testimony before the Committee showed that at all times Judge Brown had conducted himself in a professional manner in the courtroom. Moreover, testimony reflected that Judge Brown had never used racially biased language in the courtroom, nor did any of the witnesses opine that Judge Brown had ever rendered a racially biased decision. The manner in which Judge Brown touched the clerk was far more inappropriate than a touch on the shoulder. Judge Brown was said to have licked his finger and slid it down the clerk’s pants to her posterior. The clerk testified that, as a result of Judge Brown’s conduct, she felt uncomfortable around him. She stated that she experienced stress-related exacerbation of a pre-existing condition, ulcerative colitis. She eventually left her position as deputy justice court clerk. Following her complaint to the Commission, Judge Brown began complaining that she was not performing her duties to his satisfaction, despite the fact that Judge Brown had never complained about her abilities heretofore. The record shows that there may be a pattern of Judge Brown using racially disparaging language in private conversations, although the record does not support allegations of any public use of racially biased language, nor are there any complaints of racially biased judicial decisions being made by Judge Brown. However, when such language is used by a judge, in the private arena or in the public arena, such conduct reflects negatively on the judicial office, and could understandably give the appearance of an inability to render race-neutral decisions. Judge Brown’s acts did not rise to the level of moral turpitude. Judge Brown conducted himself with a gross unconcern for his conduct. Judge Brown’s failure to be forthcoming in his testimony before the Committee and his failure to take personal responsibility for his actions are aggravating circumstances. Accordingly, the recommendations for sanctions made by the Commission are adopted. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
