Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Boone
60 So. 3d 172
| Miss. | 2011Background
- Commission filed formal complaint against Lincoln County Justice Court Judge Ralph Boone for willful misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice under Section 177A, Mississippi Constitution.
- Hearing conducted by a three-person committee; committee issued findings of fact and recommendation; Commission issued findings and recommendation for removal and costs.
- Commission found Boone violated Canons 1, 2A, 2B, 3B(2), 3B(4), and 4A; College concluded conduct warranted removal, but the Court ultimately imposed lesser sanctions.
- Allegations included Boone's April 15, 2009 handling of Christina Twaddle’s public drunkenness case, including riding with her in his truck, alleged fondling, and a proposed exchange of sexual favors for a reduced fine.
- Evidence included recorded phone conversations, witness testimony from Twaddle, her attorney, Boone’s clerk, and law-enforcement officers; Boone admitted some portions but denied others; later recordings contradicted initial statements.
- Court concluded Boone violated Canon 1, 2A, 2B, 3B(2), 3B(4), and 4A, but was divided on whether sexual misconduct with Twaddle was proven by clear and convincing evidence; sanctions imposed: 90-day suspension, public reprimand, and costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Boone’s conduct violated Canons 1, 2A, 2B, 3B(2), 3B(4), 4A, constituting misconduct under 177A. | Commission: conduct violated multiple canons and brought judiciary into disrepute. | Boone contested the findings of clear and convincing evidence on some sexual conduct allegations. | Boone violated Canons 1, 2A, 2B, 3B(2), 3B(4), 4A; willful misconduct established. |
| Whether ex parte communications and fine reduction constitute misconduct under Canon 2B and 3B(2). | Ex parte contact and coercive conduct violated Canon 2B and compromised impartiality. | No improper motive or improper influence; actions were to assist enforcement or due to requests. | Canon 2B and 3B(2) violations established; improper ex parte communications found. |
| Whether the sexual conduct findings were proven by clear and convincing evidence sufficient for removal. | Clear and convincing evidence supported removal due to moral turpitude and public confidence impact. | Findings inadequate on sexual misconduct; evidence insufficient for removal. | Court split on sexual findings; sanctions imposed did not include removal. |
| What sanctions are appropriate given the findings (non-removal sanction). | Removal from office and cost assessment warranted. | Suspension without removal appropriate given circumstances and mitigating factors. | Imposed ninety-day suspension without pay, public reprimand, and costs of $1,907.05. |
| What standard of review governs appellate consideration of Commission recommendations (Anderson framework). | Court should independently review the record while giving weight to Commission findings. | Maintain independent review with deference summarized; realign with Anderson standard. | Court reaffirmed Anderson-based independent fact-finding and returned to new standard of review consistent with 177A proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Anderson, Justice Court Judge, 412 So.2d 743, 412 So.2d 743 (Miss.1982) (mandates independent judicial review of Commission findings)
- Miss. Comm'n on Judicial Performance v. Hartzog, 904 So.2d 981 (Miss.2004) (great deference to Commission findings based on clear and convincing evidence)
- Miss. Comm'n on Judicial Performance v. Gibson, 883 So.2d 1155 (Miss.2004) (guidance on sanctions and moral turpitude considerations)
- Miss. Comm'n on Judicial Performance v. Peyton, 645 So.2d 954 (Miss.1994) (trier of fact with deference to Commission findings)
- Miss. Comm'n on Judicial Performance v. Britton, 936 So.2d 898 (Miss.2006) (sanctions framework in ex parte communications cases)