Smith v. Mississippi State Bar
| Decision Date | 21 August 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 201,201 |
| Citation | 475 So.2d 148 |
| Parties | Eddie Ray SMITH v. MISSISSIPPI STATE BAR. Misc. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Eddie Ray Smith, Parchman, for appellant.
Andrew J. Kilpatrick, Jr., Jackson, for appellee.
Before ROY NOBLE LEE, P.J., and ROBERTSON and ANDERSON, JJ.
This matter is before the Court upon the motion of the Mississippi State Bar (MSB) to docket and dismiss. That motion presents the question of whether this Court should hear an appeal by Eddie Ray Smith from a decision of the MSB Committee on Complaints dismissing Smith's complaint against his former attorney wherein Smith had charged unprofessional conduct in the course of his (the attorney's) representation of him (Smith). We grant the motion to docket and dismiss.
The record in this matter reflects that Petitioner Smith was formally charged with the crime of forgery in an indictment returned by the Grand Jury of Forrest County, Mississippi. After consultation with his attorney, Smith entered a plea of guilty to the charge and was sentenced to a term of years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Smith is presently housed at Unit 29, K Building, at the Mississippi State Penitentiary at Parchman, Mississippi.
On March 4, 1985, Smith filed with the Mississippi State Bar a complaint wherein he charged his attorney with unprofessional conduct in the course of that attorney's representation of Smith on the forgery charge. See MSB Confidential Case No. 84-250-2. The matter was referred to MSB's Committee on Complaints. The record reflects that the committee investigated Smith's complaint against his former attorney and on May 6, 1985, announced that it had found "no conduct of said attorney which would warrant any action under the disciplinary statutes governing lawyers practicing in this state: and the complaint has, therefore, been dismissed."
Rule 7 of the Rules of Discipline for the Mississippi State Bar provides for the actions which may be taken by the Committee on Complaints in considering a complaint filed against any attorney practicing law or rendering legal services in this state. The MSB asserts that its Committee on Complaints has strictly adhered to and followed those requirements in its disposition of Complaint No. 84-250-2. That complaint was dismissed by the committee pursuant to Rule 7(b)(i), as a result of which the complaint was deemed expunged and is not to be considered a charge touching upon the conduct or character of the attorney.
On June 14, 1985, there was filed with the Clerk of this Court a notice from Petitioner Smith that he sought an appeal to this Court from the decision of the MSB Committee on Complaints dismissing the complaint he had filed. Presumably, Smith would have this Court adjudge that his former attorney had committed a violation of some disciplinary rule and reverse the decision of the committee. The Mississippi State Bar has responded by filing a motion to docket and dismiss Smith's appeal, suggesting there is no procedure by which such an appeal may be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Attorney U v. Mississippi Bar
...cause, thus without merit, and was not forwarded to a Complaint Tribunal to pursue formal charges as required by Smith v. Mississippi State Bar, 475 So.2d 148, 149-50 (1985) and Rule of Discipline 7.1. As the Court is "bound by its own disciplinary rules," The Mississippi Bar v. Attorney G,......
-
Mississippi State Bar v. Nixon, 231
...State Bar, this Court has authority with respect to all holding licenses to practice law in this state. Smith v. Mississippi State Bar, 475 So.2d 148, 149 (Miss.1985). Indeed, in the first sentence of our Rules of Discipline we have stated the license to practice law in this state is a cont......