Appearance Of Impropriety
The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals reversed an order disqualifying the entire District Attorneys Office from prosecuting a bribery case where the bribee is a part time judge who reported the offer to criminal authorities
The Defendant is alleged to have offered a bribe to a part-time Bledsoe County General Sessions Court judge, who reported the Defendant’s alleged conduct to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation. The general sessions judge also maintains a private criminal defense practice in the Twelfth Judicial District. The general sessions judge is a member of the board of directors of a local bank, as is an assistant district attorney general. The district attorney general has outstanding secured loans with the bank. Because the general sessions judge was the target of the Defendant’s alleged bribery, he is a State’s witness in the present case.
The trial court erred
In the present case, the trial court disqualified the district attorney general’s office based upon an appearance of impropriety, not based upon a finding of an actual conflict of interests, and the parties’ appellate arguments have focused on the appearance of impropriety, rather than on the existence of an actual conflict of interests. Further, the State conceded at oral argument that if disqualification of the district attorney general himself was appropriate, the record had not been developed to establish how the remaining staff of the district attorney general’s office might proceed with appropriate screening measures. We will limit our consideration to whether the trial court erred in determining that an appearance of impropriety exists.
Bledsoe County is a small place but there are those that love it
The statements and arguments of counsel at the hearing reflect that the venue of the present case is a small community in which attorneys in private practice, judges, and prosecutors know one another and are involved with each other in multiple capacities, both related and unrelated to the law. This court knows that the United States Census Bureau reported in 2020 that the population of Bledsoe County, Tennessee was 14,913.
It lies just northwest of Dayton, scene of the Scopes trial.
As to the bank
No evidence suggests that the district attorney general or his staff would prosecute the Defendant in a way that was inconsistent with the special duties conferred upon a prosecutor merely because the district attorney general had outstanding indebtedness to a bank whose board of directors included a member of the district attorney’s staff and the general sessions judge, who was the State’s witness. In the context of this community and these facts, a reasonable layperson with knowledge of the facts of this case would not conclude that an appearance of impropriety existed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to disqualify the district attorney general’s office based upon the banking relationship.
(Mike Frisch)