Phillip Floyd, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed the circuit court’s interlocutory order disqualifying Gerald Crow from representing Phillip Floyd because Crow had personally and substantially participated in Floyd’s criminal matter while serving as the judge who issued the arrest warrant and presided over the plea-and-arraignment hearing. Under Rule 1.12, Floyd’s written consent was insufficient because the State also had to give informed written consent, which it refused to do, and no showing of prejudice was required. Chief Justice Brill concurred on appearance-of-impropriety grounds, while Justices Hart and Baker dissented and would have reversed the disqualification.