NATCHEZ — A Mississippi judicial commission has recommended a local judge be publicly reprimanded for alleged judicial improprieties.

The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance filed a recommendation with the Supreme Court that Justice Court Judge Charlie Vess be publicly reprimanded, fined $2,000 and assessed costs in the amount of $100 Monday.

The Monday filing is not the last word in the matter.

“It is a recommendation, and the Supreme Court will make the final decision,” MCJP Executive Director Brant Brantley said.

Vess, who is in New Mexico at a conference, said he has not read the finding and could not fully respond to it.

The investigation was initiated by a citizen complaint by Glennese Scott, who said she is pleased with the recommendation.

The commission found that Vess acted improperly in October 2007 when he allowed Scott’s mother to enter a “not guilty” plea in the Scott’s stead.

Scott’s mother reportedly went to the court to inform the judge that her daughter could not be present because she had been hospitalized.

Scott was hospitalized because she had had a serious panic attack after being arrested, she said.

Vess said he was trying to show compassion when he allowed Scott’s mother to enter the plea.

“The fact that the mother came in on behalf of her child, and we are called the people’s court, I didn’t see any problem with allowing her to enter a ‘not guilty’ plea on behalf of her daughter because it would not have recriminated (the daughter) in any way,” Vess said.

“I wouldn’t have accepted a ‘guilty’ plea.”

Because Scott’s mother was not an attorney, however, the commission found the action improper.

Scott was later convicted of the crime of disturbing the peace, but at the behest of the prosecutor Vess set aside the conviction pending one year good behavior and five hours of anger management training attendance.

During the hearing Vess indicated he had spoken with parties with an interest in the case outside the courtroom.

The commission found that — at Scott’s request — Vess wrote a hand-drafted letter to the defendant’s employer explaining his ruling, which the commission ruled created an appearance of impropriety.

Another finding of the commission was that Vess had a conversation with Scott following the ruling that may not have been as restrained as is judicially appropriate.

“He told me he did not like the people I brought to the courtroom with me,” Scott said.

The commission also found that Vess told Scott to pay fines on an old conviction that was incompletely entered in 1997, rendering it improper.

The filing states that Vess has since taken measures to correct and prevent any such future problems.

No date has been set for a final Supreme Court ruling.