In re Pryor

Supreme Court of South Carolina

In re Pryor

496 S.E.2d 630, 329 S.C. 400, 1998 S.C. LEXIS 30

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedFebruary 9, 1998

DocketNo. 24762

StatusPublished

This text of 496 S.E.2d 630 (In re Pryor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Pryor, 496 S.E.2d 630, 329 S.C. 400, 1998 S.C. LEXIS 30 (S.C. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In this judicial disciplinary matter, respondent and Disciplinary Counsel have entered into an agreement under Rule 21, RJDE, Rule 502, SCACR. In the agreement, respondent admits misconduct and consents to a public reprimand. We accept the agreement.

Respondent is a former Spartanburg County Magistrate. On or about October 10, 1997, respondent pled guilty to one count of misconduct in office pursuant to S.C.Code Ann. § 8-1-80 (Supp.1997). This is a serious crime as defined in Rule 2(z), RJDE. By his conduct, respondent has also violated Rules 7(a)(1) (violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct) and 7(a)(3) (conviction of a serious crime), RJDE, as well as the following provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 501, SCACR: Section 1A (failure to maintain and observe high standards of conduct to preserve the independence and integ[402]*402rity of the judiciary); Section 2(A) (failure to respect and comply with the law, and failure to conduct himself in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary); and Section 3(B)(2) (failure to be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it).

Because respondent is no longer a magistrate and because he has agreed to not hereafter seek nor accept any judicial position within the State of South Carolina, we have decided to accept the agreement for a public reprimand. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded for his conduct.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

BURNETT, J., not participating.

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

PER CURIAM:

In this judicial disciplinary matter, respondent and Disciplinary Counsel have entered into an agreement under Rule 21, RJDE, Rule 502, SCACR. In the agreement, respondent admits misconduct and consents to a public reprimand. We accept the agreement.

Respondent is a former Spartanburg County Magistrate. On or about October 10, 1997, respondent pled guilty to one count of misconduct in office pursuant to S.C.Code Ann. § 8-1-80 (Supp.1997). This is a serious crime as defined in Rule 2(z), RJDE. By his conduct, respondent has also violated Rules 7(a)(1) (violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct) and 7(a)(3) (conviction of a serious crime), RJDE, as well as the following provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 501, SCACR: Section 1A (failure to maintain and observe high standards of conduct to preserve the independence and integ[402]*402rity of the judiciary); Section 2(A) (failure to respect and comply with the law, and failure to conduct himself in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary); and Section 3(B)(2) (failure to be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it).

Because respondent is no longer a magistrate and because he has agreed to not hereafter seek nor accept any judicial position within the State of South Carolina, we have decided to accept the agreement for a public reprimand. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded for his conduct.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

BURNETT, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

496 S.E.2d 630, 329 S.C. 400, 1998 S.C. LEXIS 30, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-pryor-sc-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack