NEW ORLEANS (WVUE) – The Louisiana Supreme Court denied a request for a rehearing and further reprimanded a St. John the Baptist Parish judge it suspended without pay for his mishandling of warrant applications.

Judge Vercell Fiffie had asked the state’s high court to reconsider sanctions imposed last month, after the court found on Oct. 25 that he had “caused substantial harm” through his conduct as a judge.

Fiffie, who was sworn in on January 1, 2021, was accused of showing bias against law enforcement by refusing to sign search warrants in a timely manner and recalling warrants issued by another judge , thus delaying criminal investigations into child pornography, child abuse, domestic violence. violence and more.

The complaints were filed by Judge Nghana Lewis and St. John Sheriff Mike Tregre, and were validated by a lengthy investigation by the Louisiana Judicial Commission.

After hearings in September 2023 and June 2024, this commission recommended that Fiffie be suspended for six months, with three months of deferral. But in a rare move demonstrating the depth of its discontent, the Supreme Court voted to impose a harsher punishment: a six-month suspension without pay and an order that Fiffie repay the Judicial Commission a total of $9,125.29 $ for the cost of his investigation. .

“This is willful misconduct in connection with his official duties and persistent public conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, which has brought his judicial office into disrepute,” the Supreme Court ruled this month last. “He demonstrated a lack of knowledge or a poor understanding of the law and stepped outside his role as a neutral arbiter. He demonstrated a repeated unwillingness or inability to heed the advice of others. His mishandling of warrants extended to numerous cases, including situations where there was a legitimate concern for the safety of others.

In one case cited, Fiffie waited 11 days before signing just one of five search warrants for cell phones and email addresses sought by a detective working a child sex abuse and pornography case. Meanwhile, the alleged minor victim decided not to cooperate with the investigation and the alleged perpetrator left the jurisdiction for a military mission.

In another case, a search warrant for a home where authorities believed a minor had hidden weapons and stolen items remained unapproved by Fiffie for 28 days, although records indicated the judge had consulted with him 18 times before finally signing it.

Fiffie also recalled two arrest warrants issued by another judge without the knowledge of this lawyer. And data shows that Fiffie in 2021 rejected 27 percent of the warrants presented to him, while two other judges rejected less than 2.5 percent of the warrants submitted for their approval.

Fiffie asked the Supreme Court for a new hearing to reconsider the sanctions imposed, but the judges were not impressed. In a ruling issued Friday, the court denied Fiffie’s request and Judge Scott J. Crichton further reprimanded the St. John judge.

“Despite this clear rejection of his conduct, in his request for rehearing made on his own behalf, Judge Fiffie continues to stubbornly refuse to take responsibility for the underlying conduct that brought him before the Commission in the first place , acknowledging in broad and vague language only that he acted with “admittedly excessive deliberation and care” and that he did not “bend” to the will of his colleagues.

“Throughout his candidacy, he continues to offer excuses and purported justifications for his actions, claiming he is a ‘difficult person to read’ and implying that the Judicial Commission’s conclusion was the result of a misunderstanding. He also appears to place blame for the outcome of the case on the lawyer who ably represented him during the argument before the Supreme Court.

“In short, Judge Fiffie’s continued pointing the finger at the rehearing and his failure to take ownership of the various violations that this court has now determined warrant the imposition of disciplinary action, confirms my view that the initial sanction was justified.”

See a spelling or grammar error in our story? Click here to report it. Please include the title.

Subscribe to Fox 8 YouTube channel.

Copyright 2024 WVUE. All rights reserved.