In the Matter of Former Abbeville County Magistrate George T. Ferguson , 409 S.C. 261 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                    THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
    In The Supreme Court
    In the Matter of Former Abbeville County Magistrate
    George T. Ferguson, Respondent.
    Appellate Case No. 2014-001385
    Opinion No. 27428
    Submitted July 9, 2014 – Filed August 6, 2014
    PUBLIC REPRIMAND
    Lesley M. Coggiola, Disciplinary Counsel, and Joseph P.
    Turner, Jr., Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, both of
    Columbia, for Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
    Billy J. Garrett, Jr., Esquire, of The Garrett Law Firm,
    PC, of Greenwood, for Respondent.
    PER CURIAM: In this judicial disciplinary matter, respondent and the Office of
    Disciplinary Counsel have entered into an Agreement for Discipline by Consent
    (Agreement) pursuant to Rule 21 of the Rules for Judicial Disciplinary
    Enforcement (RLDE) contained in Rule 502 of the South Carolina Appellate Court
    Rules (SCACR). In the Agreement, respondent admits misconduct and consents to
    the imposition of a public reprimand and agrees never to seek nor accept a judicial
    office in South Carolina without the express written permission of this Court after
    written notice to ODC. We accept the Agreement and publicly reprimand
    respondent, the most severe sanction we are able to impose under these
    circumstances.1 The facts, as set forth in the Agreement, are as follows.
    1
    Since respondent no longer holds judicial office, a public reprimand is the most
    severe sanction which can be imposed. In the Matter of O'Kelley, 
    361 S.C. 30
    , 
    603 S.E.2d 410
    (2004).
    Facts
    Respondent was indicted on two counts of Misconduct in Office. The first
    indictment alleged respondent offered and gave Jane Doe #1 money and/or other
    benefits for the handling and disposition of legal matters involving Jane Doe #1
    before him in his official capacity as Magistrate in return for Jane Doe #1 allowing
    respondent to have sexual contact with her from 1996 to 2009. The second
    indictment alleged respondent offered and gave Jane Doe #2 money and/or other
    benefits for the handling and disposition of legal matters involving Jane Doe #2
    before him in his official capacity as Magistrate in return for Jane Doe #2 allowing
    respondent to have sexual contact with her from 2001 to 2011.
    On May 16, 2014, respondent entered a guilty plea to Misconduct in Office on the
    first indictment. He was sentenced to one (1) year imprisonment provided that,
    upon service of ninety (90) days, the balance would be suspended with probation
    for a period of five (5) years. On the same day, respondent entered a guilty plea to
    Misconduct in Office on the second indictment. He was sentenced to one (1) year
    imprisonment, suspended with probation for a period of five (5) years.
    Law
    Respondent admits that by his conduct he has violated the following provisions of
    the Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 501, SCACR: Canon 1 (judge shall uphold
    integrity and independence of judiciary); Canon 1A (judge should participate in
    establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct, and shall
    personally observe those standards so that integrity and independence of judiciary
    will be preserved); Canon 2 (judge shall avoid impropriety and appearance of
    impropriety in all of judge's activities); Canon 2A (judge shall respect and comply
    with the law and shall act at all times in manner that promotes public confidence in
    integrity and impartiality of judiciary); Canon 2B (judge shall not allow social or
    other relationships to influence judge's judicial conduct or judgment; judge shall
    not lend prestige of judicial office to advance private interests of judge or others;
    judge shall not convey or permit others to convey impression that they are in
    special position to influence judge); Canon 3 (judge shall perform duties of judicial
    office impartially and diligently); Canon 3B(2) (judge shall be faithful to law);
    Canon 3B(7) (judge shall accord to every person who has legal interest in
    proceeding, or that person's lawyer, right to be heard according to law; judge shall
    not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other
    communications made to judge outside the presence of the parties concerning
    pending or impending proceeding); Canon 3E(1) (judge shall disqualify himself in
    proceeding in which judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned); Canon
    4A(1) (judge shall conduct his extra-judicial activities so as to minimize risk with
    judicial obligations); Canon 4(A)(2) (judge shall conduct all of his extra-judicial
    activities so that they do not demean judicial office); and Canon 4A(3) (judge shall
    conduct all of his extra-judicial activities so that they do not interfere with proper
    performance of judicial duties).
    Respondent also admits he has violated the following Rules for Judicial
    Disciplinary Enforcement, Rule 502, SCACR: Rule 7(a)(1) (it shall be ground for
    discipline for judge to violate Code of Judicial Conduct).
    Conclusion
    We accept the Agreement for Discipline by Consent and issue a public reprimand
    because respondent is no longer a judge and because he has agreed not to hereafter
    seek nor accept another judicial position in South Carolina without first obtaining
    express written permission from this Court after due notice in writing to ODC. As
    previously noted, this is the most severe sanction we can issue, given the fact that
    he has already resigned his duties as a judge. See In the Matter of O'Kelley, 
    id. Accordingly, respondent
    is hereby reprimanded for his conduct.
    PUBLIC REPRIMAND.
    TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ.,
    concur.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 27428

Citation Numbers: 409 S.C. 261, 762 S.E.2d 385

Filed Date: 8/6/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023