Jackson Pub. Sch. Dist., et al. v. Head, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2009-IA-02022-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-11-2011 Opinion Author: Chandler, J. Holding: Affirmed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Judicial discipline - Willful misconduct - Interference with orderly prosecution of case - Sanctions Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson and Dickinson, P.JJ., Randolph, Kitchens, Pierce and King, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Lamar, J. Procedural History: Interlocutory Appeal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-08-2009 Appealed from: MISSISSIPPI COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE Judge: Tomie Green Disposition: Denied motion to dismiss Case Number: 251-04-1315CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Jackson Public School District, Marilyn Minter, Michelle King, and the City of Jackson |
BETTY A. MALLETT
JOANNE NELSON SHEPHERD
PIETER JOHN TEEUWISSEN
CLAIRE BARKER HAWKINS |
|
|
| Appellee: | Latisha Head, a Minor, By and Through Shirley Russell, Her Mother and Next Friend; Ashley McCoy, a Minor, By and Through Shirley McCoy, Her Mother and Next Friend; and Shirley Russell, Individually | LYDIA ROBERTA BLACKMON DEBORAH MCDONALD |
|
|
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 - Interference with orderly prosecution of case - Sanctions |
| Summary of the Facts: | The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance filed two formal complaints against Alcorn County Justice Court Judge Jimmy McGee, alleging willful misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the office into disrepute. The Commission and Judge McGee submitted a joint motion for approval of the recommendation of a 120-day suspension from office without pay, a public reprimand, and assessment of costs of this proceeding in the amount of $100. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Willful misconduct Willful misconduct is the improper or wrongful use of the power of his or her office by a judge acting intentionally, or with gross unconcern for his conduct, and generally in bad faith. It involves more than an error of judgment or a mere lack of diligence. Judge McGee’s conduct constituted willful misconduct. In Count One, the Commission found that Judge McGee, “in his official capacity of Justice Court Judge, interfered with the orderly prosecution of the case against A.B.” Judge McGee interfered with A.B.’s attempt to post bond, interrupted a closed Board of Supervisors’ meeting, discouraged local attorneys from representing A.B., and made statements in open court encouraging others to engage in vigilante justice, as opposed to using the court system to pursue justice. Concerning count two, the Commission found that Judge McGee, on motion of the county prosecutor, “remanded, non-adjudicated, and ‘retired to the files’” twenty-one DUI charges. Based on the agreed statement of facts, as to count one, Judge McGee’s actions, in his official capacity as Justice Court Judge, Post 2, Alcorn County, violated Canons 1, 2A, 2B, and 4A(2) of the Code of Judicial Conduct. However, as to count two, there is no violation of our judicial canons. It is clear from the record that all twenty-one DUI cases were disposed of on motion of the Alcorn County Prosecuting Attorney, a lawyer. Judge McGee’s conduct depicted here is not akin to the conduct depicted by the judges in “ticket-fixing” cases. There is not even an inference that Judge McGee acted in a clandestine or sinister manner in disposing of these DUI cases. Even assuming, arguendo, that Judge McGee’s rulings were erroneous, a mistaken interpretation of governing law would not be sanctionable. However, Judge McGee’s conduct, as depicted in the joint agreed statement of facts in count one, constituted willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the judicial office into disrepute. Issue 2: Sanctions The appropriate sanction should recognize the misconduct, deter and discourage similar behavior, preserve the dignity and reputation of the judiciary, and protect the public. Factors to be considered in determining the appropriate sanction include length and character of public service; whether there is any prior caselaw on point; the magnitude of the offense and the harm suffered; whether the misconduct is an isolated incident or evidences a pattern of conduct; whether moral turpitude was involved; and the presence or absence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Judge McGee has served as a justice-court judge for eleven years. An informal Commission action was taken against Judge McGee shortly after he had taken office in a matter unrelated to today’s case. By encouraging others not to use the court system when resolving disputes, Judge McGee cast doubt on the judiciary as a whole. Judge McGee violated multiple canons of the Mississippi Code of Judicial Conduct. While all of Judge McGee’s behavior relating to A.B.’s criminal prosecution concerned the same criminal case, Judge McGee attempted to interfere with the case on more than one occasion. Judge McGee’s conduct in interfering with the criminal prosecution of A.B. unquestionably constituted moral turpitude. Judge McGee has acknowledged his errors and has cooperated fully with the Commission’s investigation. The criminal charges lodged against A.B. ultimately went to the grand jury, where a felony indictment was handed down; and, thereafter, the case was disposed of in circuit court by A.B.’s guilty plea to a reduced misdemeanor charge. Throughout the criminal process in A.B.’s case, Judge McGee interfered. He insisted that A.B. be allowed only a cash bond of $50,000, and not a property bond; he burst into the Board of Supervisors’ meeting room, disrupting an executive session of the Board, angrily berating the sheriff before the Board for allowing A.B. to be released from custody after posting a property bond; and he discouraged local attorneys from representing A.B., although A.B., like any other defendant indicted for a crime in Mississippi, had a right under our state and federal constitutions to be represented by competent counsel. All of these actions occurred in public. And finally, in another public display, Judge McGee stood up in open court during the circuit-court proceedings concerning A.B. and stated for all in the courtroom to hear that he (Judge McGee) was advising them if they were ever confronted with similar circumstances, they should not allow the courts to resolve the matter, but instead they should “handle it themselves.” Any person could appropriately question Judge McGee’s ability to fairly discharge his duties according to the constitutional oath which he has taken on at least two occasions. Looking only at the actions depicted in count one, the Commission’s recommendation of a thirty-day suspension without pay is insufficient. The appropriate sanction for Judge McGee’s conduct depicted in count one of the joint agreed statement of facts is, inter alia, suspension from office without pay for a period of 270 days. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
