The Arkansas Supreme Court has ordered a partially-stayed suspension without pay of a circuit court judge

Judge Carroll has served as circuit court judge for Division Four of the Thirteenth Judicial District, which is composed of Calhoun, Cleveland, Columbia, Dallas, Ouachita, and Union Counties, since 2013. The report and amended report of uncontested sanctions arise from complaints filed with the Commission in JDDC cases #21-284 and #22-192. The Commission alleged three separate fact patterns of judicial misconduct in its report. The first fact pattern summarized Judge Carroll’s dismissal of cases without due process, his actual bias, and his failure to recuse himself. Specifically, prior to August 2021, Judge Carroll told the county sheriff to remove a particular deputy sheriff from the courtroom and advised the sheriff in chambers that he needed to fire the deputy. Next, on August 18, 2021, Judge Carroll contacted a public defender by phone and stated that he would dismiss cases involving the deputy sheriff that day if the public defender made the motions to dismiss in court. Judge Carroll then prompted the public defender to move for dismissal in open court, over the objection of the prosecuting attorney, and stated that the cases would be dismissed
because the deputy sheriff had “zero credibility with myself or the prosecutor’s office” and that any other private counsel who had cases based on the deputy’s testimony would have their cases dismissed on motion. As a result, two private attorneys came forward, and Judge Carroll dismissed those cases as well.

The second fact pattern discussed in the Commission’s report pertained to Judge Carroll’s attempts to exert improper influence over cases involving the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission (“AGFC”) in other courts. In April 2021, Judge Carroll spoke with a district court judge assigned to an AGFC case that involved a violation of regulations on turkey hunting and discussed the case in detail. The district court judge recused himself due to that conversation, and another judge had to be assigned. In January 2022, Judge Carroll called the Colonel of the AGFC enforcement division and referenced two separate cases, stating that “one more ticket needs to go away before trial.” Judge Carroll claimed that the case would be embarrassing for the agency and vouched for the defendant. He then contacted multiple people, including the (1) former director of the AGFC, (2) the Colonel of Enforcement, (3) the special prosecuting attorney, (4) defense counsel, and (5) the defendant, and provided the attorneys with a case citation that he believed pertained to the
legality of the AGFC’s authority to search. During the trial, the defense made arguments related to the agency’s authority to search, and the defendant was ultimately acquitted by the assigned judge.

Finally, in the third fact pattern, the Commission alleged that Judge Carroll, over the course of several months, repeatedly failed to call his full docket on the record and canceled court numerous times without appropriate prior notice to litigants, attorneys, witnesses, or law enforcement. This would occur even after the defendants had been transported and housed at the local jail at the individual counties’ expense. Additionally, deputy prosecutors or public defenders would have to request that Judge Carroll’s trial court assistant mail notices to defendants with the new court dates because official orders to appear were not always provided to defendants in court or on the record. Judge Carroll also routinely failed to make clear docket entries.

The court also required an assessment by the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. (Mike Frisch)