MILPITAS — A male inmate at the Elmwood Correctional Complex who died from a second-story fall in an apparent suicide was a former attorney disbarred for “frivolous litgation” and who clashed with law enforcement in at least two high-profile incidents, authorities said.

Patrick Missud, 48, was found early Saturday on the floor of a common area in the men’s wing, according to the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office, who added that his injuries were consistent with a fall from the upper level.

About an hour after the fall, which was reported at 4:48 a.m., Missud was pronounced dead at a local hospital. A Sheriff’s news release said all available evidence suggests Missud jumped with the “purpose of taking his own life.”

Missud had been in custody for 50 days since being remanded to jail during a Feb. 16 court appearance, on suspicion of attempted threats against a public official.

Two days earlier, Missud — a vocal critic of the county court system who routinely feuded with judges and other legal officials — caused the evacuation of the South County courthouse in Morgan Hill when he mailed court documents from an ongoing case and assorted medical equipment that raised the alarm of court deputies when tubes were detected by the X-ray scanner, according to the sheriff’s office.

Reading this on your phone? Stay up to date with our free mobile app. Get it from the Apple app store or the Google Play store.

In September, Missud was involved in a six-hour standoff with police in front of San Francisco City Hall after calling 911 on himself and telling dispatchers he was carrying a “semi-automatic weapon,” which was later determined to be an air pistol. During the stalemate, Missud reportedly tried to goad officers into shooting him in public, according to police.

Missud, who practiced intellectual-property law, was disbarred in 2015 on the grounds of “moral turpitude” based on frivolous litigation, using abusive language when addressing judges and tying up judicial resources. Undeterred, he went on to appeal his disbarment, and even sought damages from the judges who disbarred him, equating their decision with libel.

The appeal was rejected, after appellate judges called his filing “incomprehensible” and an “unintelligible compilation of disjointed historical facts, accusations and claims.”