Phillip Floyd, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee — Baker, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Baker dissented from the affirmance of the circuit court's disqualification of Crow as Floyd's counsel, concluding that Crow did not substantially participate in either issuing the arrest warrant or presiding over the brief plea-and-arraignment hearing. She reasoned that the warrant process required a neutral and detached magistrate and that the arraignment consisted of largely administrative actions, so disqualification unnecessarily impaired Floyd's choice of counsel without proof of an actual or serious potential conflict. Justice Hart, dissenting, would likewise have reversed and remanded, while Chief Justice Brill, concurring, supported affirmance based in part on the appearance of impropriety.