Miss. Bar v. Cofer
| Docket Number: | 2004-BD-00568-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-19-2004 Opinion Author: Carlson, J. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Bar discipline - Miss.R.Disc. 6 - Pretrial Intervention Program - Voluntary statement Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley, Graves, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. |
|
| Note: | Cofer's motion to stay, granted. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | The Mississippi Bar |
|||
| Appellee: | Christopher Cofer |
|
||
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: | Bar discipline - Miss.R.Disc. 6 - Pretrial Intervention Program - Voluntary statement |
| Summary of the Facts: | The Mississippi Bar has filed a formal complaint seeking the disbarment of attorney Christopher Cofer, who was accepted into the Pretrial Intervention Program after being indicted by the Madison County Grand Jury. Cofer admitted to possessing 100 dosage units of ketamine, a Schedule III controlled substance. Cofer filed a Response to the Formal Complaint and a Motion to Stay. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The Bar argues that this admission is the type of crime contemplated by Rule 6 of the Rules of Discipline, since the crime was a felony. Rule 6(a) states that if an attorney enters a plea of guilty to any felony, the judgment shall be conclusive evidence of that attorney's guilt. Cofer did not plead guilty under oath before a judge to any felony. The voluntary statement made by Cofer does not constitute conclusive evidence of Cofer's guilt as required by Rule 6(a). While the Supreme Court has the power to render immediate sanctions for admitted felonious conduct under the non-adjudication of guilt statutory procedure of section 99-15-26 and Rule 6 of the Rules of Discipline, without a hearing by a complaint tribunal, that does not include admitted felonious conduct under the Pretrial Intervention Act. The critical difference between the non-adjudication statute and the Pretrial Intervention Act is that the former requires the entry of a sworn guilty plea before the circuit or county court while the latter does not. These proceedings are stayed until such time as there is a final disposition of the criminal charges pending against Cofer, and Cofer license to practice law is temporarily suspended until such time as a disposition of the pending criminal charges against him are entered. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
