UPDATE: Former Dallas County Judge Amber Givens has taken the stand in her judicial misconduct trial, vehemently denying allegations that she allowed a staff member to impersonate her during a critical court hearing nearly five years ago. The trial, held at the Texas Supreme Court in Austin, concluded its final day on November 1, 2023.
Givens’ testimony comes in response to claims made by two prosecutors and two probation officers who testified that the former judge failed to appear during a bond hearing on August 3, 2021. Instead, they reported hearing her court coordinator, Arceola Warfield, take her place. Givens, who was publicly reprimanded last year by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, contends her absence was due to car trouble and technical difficulties while trying to attend the hearing remotely.
During her testimony, Givens stated, “I would have never asked [Warfield] to pretend to be me. I’m going to put my degree on the line? My license on the line? For a bond hearing? No.” Her lead attorney, Chip Babcock, presented phone records to the panel that he claimed supported her version of events. However, the prosecutors insisted they did not hear Givens speak during the hearing, leading to a significant clash of testimonies.
The implications of the trial are significant. If the panel upholds the public reprimand—the most severe sanction available—Givens would be barred from serving as a visiting judge, a common post-retirement role for former judges. The justices have not yet issued a ruling, and a decision could take weeks.
Givens resigned from her position as the presiding judge of the 282nd District Court in December 2022 to run for Dallas County District Attorney, challenging incumbent John Creuzot in the upcoming March 3, 2024 primary. Since no Republican candidates have filed for the position, the primary winner is expected to secure the role in the November general election.
Witness testimony painted a troubling picture of Givens’ courtroom conduct. A former bailiff claimed he heard her voice over the phone during the bond hearing. In contrast, the prosecutors and probation officers expressed their concern about the incident, leading them to report it to their supervisors. This sparked a complaint from the Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, which alleged Givens demonstrated disrespect towards attorneys in her court.
The trial revealed a stark divide in perspectives. Amanda Branan, a former president of the defense lawyers’ association, described Givens as acting like a “queen” and suggested she prioritized fame over justice. This criticism adds another layer of urgency to the proceedings as Givens fights to clear her name.
The case has drawn attention not just for its allegations but also for its implications for judicial integrity in Texas. As the panel deliberates, the legal community watches closely, awaiting a decision that could have lasting consequences for Givens’ career and her political aspirations.
Tomorrow, the justices are expected to begin their discussions on the evidence presented. All eyes remain on the outcome, which is poised to influence not only Givens’ future but also set a precedent for judicial conduct in the state.
