In re Brown

484 S.E.2d 875, 326 S.C. 138, 1997 S.C. LEXIS 86
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Brown. Read the opinion of the Court — 333 S.C. 414
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided April 28, 1997·No. No. 24612·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Respondent formerly served as a Greenville Municipal Court Administrative Judge. In this judicial disciplinary matter, respondent admits that while serving as a municipal court judge, he committed ethical violations. He consents to a public reprimand. We accept respondent’s admission and publicly reprimand him.

The misconduct is based on an arrest warrant served on respondent charging him with assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature. Respondent admits to the allegations in the arrest warrant. Respondent has committed misconduct under Rule 501, SCACR, Code of Judicial Conduct ’Canons 1, 2, and 2(A). Since he no longer holds judicial office, the most severe sanction available is a public reprimand. Matter of Gravely, 321 S.C. 235, 467 S.E.2d 924 (1996). Accordingly, we publicly reprimand respondent for his conduct.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Brown, 484 S.E.2d 875, 326 S.C. 138, 1997 S.C. LEXIS 86 (S.C. 1997).

484 S.E.2d 875 (In re Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Gravely
467 S.E.2d 924 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1996)