Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Patton
2011 Miss. LEXIS 176
| Miss. | 2011Background
- Formal complaints filed February 19, 2009 alleging ex parte communications, improper contempt, notice failures, improper orders, and an unauthorized search warrant in three civil cases.
- A second complaint followed May 19, 2010 alleging further contempt and incarceration for debt in a fourth civil matter.
- The Agreed Statement of Facts (with one silent violation) established willful misconduct and prejudicial conduct under the Mississippi Constitution and Canons.
- The Commission proposed public reprimand, $1,000 fine, and $100 costs; Patton admitted the misconduct and joined the proposed sanctions.
- This Court conducted de novo review and upheld sanctions, increasing them to a 30-day suspension without pay in addition to the Commission’s sanctions.
- Dissenting and concurring justices debated severity, pattern finding, and the meaning of moral turpitude.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Patton's ex parte communications, contempt misuse, and related acts constitute willful misconduct under Section 177A. | Commission: misconduct was willful and prejudicial. | Patton: misconduct occurred but sanctions should mirror Commission findings. | Yes; conduct constitutes willful misconduct. |
| Whether the sanctions should be enhanced beyond the Commission's recommendations. | Commission recommended public reprimand, $1,000 fine, costs. | No additional sanctions warranted given first-time offense. | Sanctions enhanced to 30-day suspension plus public reprimand, $1,000 fine, and costs. |
| Whether moral turpitude was involved in Patton's misconduct. | Yes, misconduct crosses line to moral turpitude due to abuse of judicial process. | Moral turpitude not properly established; excessive labeling. | Yes, the conduct involved moral turpitude. |
| Whether the misconduct showed a pattern of conduct. | Yes; three incidents across cases indicate pattern. | No pattern; single egregious acts do not prove pattern. | Yes, court found a pattern of misconduct. |
| Whether Patton's imprisonment of a litigant for debt violated Article 3, Section 30 of the Mississippi Constitution. | Imprisonment without proper basis violated constitutional protection. | Argued as within contempt powers and sanctions framework. | Violates Article 3, Section 30. |
Key Cases Cited
- Miss. Comm'n on Judicial Performance v. Vess, 10 So.3d 486 (Miss. 2009) (ex parte communication and abuse of contempt while sanctioning judge)
- Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Britton, 936 So.2d 898 (Miss. 2006) (enhanced sanctions for ex parte misconduct and related acts)
- Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Gordon, 955 So.2d 300 (Miss. 2007) (enhanced sanctions for misconduct; pattern considerations in ticket fixing)
- Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Lewis, 913 So.2d 266 (Miss. 2005) (ex parte communications; extensive aggravating circumstances in some cases)
- Mississippi Judicial Performance v. Sanford, 941 So.2d 209 (Miss. 2006) (standard for de novo review and consideration of aggravating factors)
- Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Gibson, 883 So.2d 1155 (Miss. 2004) (identifies factors for determining moral turpitude and sanctions)