Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Skinner
2013 Miss. LEXIS 391
| Miss. | 2013Background
- Judge William L. Skinner II presided in Hinds County Youth Court matters involving six minor siblings and issued a no-contact order between Mr. Cooper and the children.
- On February 25, 2011 Judge Skinner formally recused himself from the Cooper matters; a special judge was appointed March 3, 2011.
- Despite recusal, on March 21, 2011 Skinner signed bench warrants for Mr. and Mrs. Cooper for contempt, ordering them held without bond; Mrs. Cooper was arrested before her children, who were placed with DHS. Both were held ~72 hours without notice or hearing.
- The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance filed a formal complaint; Skinner and the Commission submitted an Agreed Statement admitting violations of the Constitution and Canons and recommending a public reprimand, $1,000 fine, and $100 costs.
- The Supreme Court reviewed the Commission’s files (including prior discipline), found willful misconduct (recusal violation and abuse of contempt power), modified the Court’s approach to the "moral turpitude" factor, and imposed a public reprimand, 30-day suspension without pay, a $1,000 fine, and $100 in costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Skinner’s post-recusal actions violated judicial canons and constitution | Skinner knowingly acted after recusal and issued improper bench warrants; conduct violated Canons and Section 177A | Skinner acknowledged facts in agreed statement and sought dismissal earlier, but did not dispute violations in the agreement | Court: Violations established; judge committed willful misconduct and brought office into disrepute |
| Whether issuing bench warrants without notice/hearing abused contempt power and denied due process | Commission: warrants amounted to abuse of contempt power and deprived Coopers of procedural rights | Skinner did not contest the factual admissions in the Agreed Statement | Court: Abuse of contempt power established; due process protections violated |
| Appropriate sanction (adequacy of Commission’s recommended sanction) | Commission & Skinner: public reprimand, $1,000 fine, $100 costs | Skinner agreed to joint recommendation | Court: Joint recommendation inadequate; imposes harsher sanction (30-day suspension without pay plus reprimand, fine, costs) |
| Role and standard of “moral turpitude” in sanction analysis | Commission relied on established factor list including moral turpitude | Court and parties disputed consistent application; prior case law inconsistent | Court: Abandons ‘‘moral turpitude’’ label; replaces with inquiry into willfulness and whether judge exploited office for personal desires; applies that standard here |
Key Cases Cited
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Osborne, 16 So.3d 16 (Miss. 2009) (a judge may not take action in a case after recusal; repeated post‑recusal action warrants severe sanction)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Boykin, 763 So.2d 872 (Miss. 2000) (definition of willful misconduct and conduct bringing judicial office into disrepute)
- Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. McGill, 890 So.2d 859 (Miss. 2004) (due process protections required for contempt incarceration)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Byers, 757 So.2d 961 (Miss. 2000) (abuse of contempt power is a serious charge and supports significant sanction)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Darby, 75 So.3d 1037 (Miss. 2011) (misuse of contempt power violates canons; moral turpitude not always implicated)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Roberts, 952 So.2d 934 (Miss. 2007) (post‑recusal participation and procedural errors; sanctions including suspension and fine)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Thompson, 80 So.3d 86 (Miss. 2012) (appellate review standard and weight given to Commission findings)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Boone, 60 So.3d 172 (Miss. 2011) (factors for sanctions and purpose of sanctioning judiciary)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Smith, 78 So.3d 889 (Miss. 2011) (divided treatment of moral turpitude where contempt abuse occurred)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Sanders, 749 So.2d 1062 (Miss. 1999) (contumacious conduct and misuse of contempt power meriting sanction)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Cowart, 71 So.3d 590 (Miss. 2011) (ex parte communications and personal relationships can implicate moral turpitude)
- Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Patton, 57 So.3d 626 (Miss. 2011) (various abuses of judicial authority found to implicate moral turpitude)