Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Smith
78 So. 3d 889
| Miss. | 2011Background
- Judge Smith acknowledged contempt powers were abused and demeanor was confrontational; Commission recommended public reprimand, $1,000 fine, and $100 costs, which the Court imposed.
- 2006: Becton failed to appear for arraignment; upon appearance with no counsel, judge made harsh remarks and instructed bail bondsman to pressure attendance, ultimately jailing him for a week but releasing after three days.
- 2009: Two DUI appeals; after discovery issues and a continuance, state sought dismissal for lack of discovery; judge ordered contempt against counsel Graves and Little, and jailed Graves for several hours without proper due process.
- Graves appealed; appellate court reversed, holding due process rights were violated and contempt was improper; Commission charged judge with misconduct.
- September–October 2009: Commission formally charged judge with willful misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; they reached an Agreed Statement of Facts and Proposed Recommendation.
- The record included joint filings and a motion to approve the recommendation; Judge Smith filed arguments disputing portions of the agreed record, leading to the Court striking those portions as improper supplementation of the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Judge Smith’s conduct violated Canons and constitutional provisions | Smith violated Canons 2A, 3B(4), 3B(2), 3B(8) | Smith agreed to the facts; conduct not contested; sanctions appropriate | Yes; violations found and sanctions imposed |
| Whether the sanctions were appropriate given the agreed facts | Sanctions warranted for contempt-power abuse | Mitigation due to agreement and absence of aggravating factors | Public reprimand, $1,000 fine, $100 costs affirmed |
| What standard of review applies when facts are agreed | Independent inquiry not needed when facts are agreed | Independent review required; dispute over standard | The court sustains sanctions under agreed-facts framework (majority view) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Blake, 912 So.2d 907 (Miss.2005) (judge's inappropriate temperament may warrant discipline)
- Mississippi Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Spencer, 725 So.2d 171 (Miss.1998) (judicial temperament matters; misconduct can lead to removal)
- Mississippi Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Gunter, 797 So.2d 988 (Miss.2001) (abuse of contempt powers; sanctions upheld)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Byers, 757 So.2d 961 (Miss.2000) (misuse of contempt powers; sanctions imposed)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Boone, 60 So.3d 172 (Miss.2011) (reaffirms independent record review in misconduct cases)
- In re Removal of Lloyd W. Anderson, Justice Court Judge, 412 So.2d 743 (Miss.1982) (early articulation of independent review standard)
- Graves v. State, 66 So.3d 148 (Miss.2011) (contempt law and due process context on review)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Sanford, 941 So.2d 209 (Miss.2006) (joint recommendations; scrutiny of factual bases)