Pulaski County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen can continue hearing cases involving state defendants, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled Thursday in rejecting arguments from Attorney General Leslie Rutledge that the longtime judge is biased against and rude toward her office's attorneys.
The 4-3 decision by the high court stems from a request Rutledge made in September, after her office received an unfavorable ruling in a state Medical Marijuana Commission case that had been placed on Griffen's docket.
Rutledge alleged that Griffen had acted rudely to one of her top deputies, Jennifer Merritt, and displayed a "pattern and practice of injudicious conduct" toward her office.
Griffen responded the next week by inviting reporters to his courtroom, where he played an audio recording of the hearing at question, which showed him interrupting Merritt dozens of times during her arguments. Griffen said that while he had a reputation as a tough judge, he disputed the notion that he mistreated any attorneys in his courtroom.
In one testy exchange from the hearing that prompted Rutledge's request, Merritt protested to Griffen, "Every time I go to answer your question, your honor, you won't let me finish."
"Well, I don't let you finish because I know you're not answering my question, and I'm going to do that until you answer me," Griffen responded. "So you either answer my question, or you're going to have me interrupt you."
In another example presented to the high court, Rutledge claimed that Griffen ridiculed one of her attorneys by saying that accepting the attorney's argument would amount to wearing a "Boo-Boo-The-Fool T-shirt."
The ruling from the justices on Thursday came without written explanation from any of the four justices in the majority: Chief Justice Dan Kemp and Courtney Hudson, Robin Wynne and Josephine "Jo" Hart.
Three justices, Karen Baker, Rhonda Wood and Shawn Womack, said they would have heard further arguments in the case.
In a statement released Thursday, Rutledge's office continued to assert that Griffen has "blatant and overt bias."
"The decision proves the Court is divided on this request with three of the seven justices agreeing that our request has merit," said the statement from Rutledge's spokeswoman, Rebecca Jeffrey.
Griffen declined to comment on the decision, noting that the underlying case still remained in his courtroom.
The Supreme Court has previously sided against Griffen in his disputes with Rutledge.
In 2017, the Supreme Court stripped Griffen of his ability to hear any death penalty cases after Rutledge appealed an order temporarily halting several planned executions, which Griffen had written shortly before participating in a public anti-death penalty protest at the Governor's Mansion. The justices upheld that decision earlier this year.
Had the Supreme Court further narrowed Griffen's caseload by stripping him of cases involving the attorney general's office as a party, it would have affected about 10% of Griffen's caseload, the judge had previously estimated.
Metro on 12/06/2019