Motions for recusal of county judge dropped

The Harris County District Attorney’s office this week motioned to recuse a county criminal judge from roughly 140 misdemeanor cases, alleging he “has shed symbolic tears” over COVID-19’s effect on defendants while endangering prosecutors by making them come to court for jail dockets.

County criminal court Judge Franklin Bynum said he wanted his court staffed with one prosecutor during the dockets, as his own staff has become overburdened from taking on tasks that prosecutors can’t complete from afar, according to emails obtained by the Chronicle. Bynum added that all relevant state and county agencies have at least one person present in court, and defense attorneys often appear as well.

But after days of back-andforth with the district attorney’s office and an administrative judge who would have decided on the recusals, Bynum will allow prosecutors to continue working remotely, on the condition that the district attorney’s office rescind its motions to recuse the cases, in writing.

At the root of their complaints, District Attorney Kim Ogg and Assistant District Attorney Michael Eber claimed that Bynum displays enough favoritism toward defense attorneys — and antagonism toward the prosecution — that makes fair judgments impossible.

Based on the staffing issue, they filed recusals on cases that appeared on the two days of Bynum’s jail docket this week, according to the emails. .

“Antagonism does not get much deeper than intentionally exposing someone to death,” they wrote in the motions. “Judge Bynum’s animosity for the State and for the role it plays in the criminal justice system has now motivated him to intentionally and unnecessarily subject the State’s prosecutors, their families and their children, to high risk of contracting a deadly disease.”

Bynum on Friday assured that he values the safety and health of defendants and those who work in the courts.

“Our local judges have all been tirelessly committed to get our courts working for the people again,” he said in a statement. “We are working hard to restore capacity to hear cases while also protecting public health.”

The District Attorney’s Office did not respond to requests for comment.

The dispute began with a June 1 email that Bynum wrote to prosecutors in his court, telling them that his jail dockets will be on Wednesdays and Thursdays as the county courts begin transitioning back to a normal schedule. On those days, he wrote, the state can’t appear remotely.

“I will not answer any questions about this,” the email reads. “Do not make any inquiry of me or my staff about these procedures. This is very simple.”

Bynum’s request came as courts reopened to non-essential proceedings this week. A statewide court order has created guidelines for social distancing and maximum group size, and stipulates that courts must continue to use “all reasonable efforts” to conduct proceedings remotely.

In its motions, the DA’s office said that Bynum’s decision violated several of the state supreme court’s emergency orders regarding the COVID-19 state of disaster, as well as a county stay-at-home order and proposed operations for the local courts.

Through several letters of correspondence, Judge Susan Brown of the 11th Administrative Judicial Region of Texas, which oversees courts in a six-county region, repeated that Bynum was violating the state order.

The district attorney’s office appeared to view Bynum’s June 1 email as an official “order,” which Bynum denied. But the prosecutors also rejected an alternative solution Bynum offered, which would have prevented them from coming to court.

State civil District Judge Robert Schaffer, who oversees the administrative office of the district courts, responded to the exchange on Wednesday as well, saying “He can’t tell the DA’s office how to staff cases. Why is he doing that?”

Bynum offered to speak to Schaffer, who gave his number. They exchanged no further emails, according to the thread.

On Thursday, assistant district attorney Joshua Reiss offered to withdraw the recusals verbally — and Bynum insisted on a written filing because of his court’s protocol. Reiss forwarded the exchange to Brown, saying he believed Bynum was acting in a “retaliatory manner.”

The state successfully motioned to recuse Bynum from another case in April. He had originally found the case to be without probable cause, but a grand jury indicted the man arrested on a 2017 theft case.

He conducted a video conference with Eber, condemning the state for pursuing the charge and calling the case a waste of resources during a pandemic. He canceled the defendant’s upcoming trial setting because he was able to be released from jail, and he posted the video to Youtube.

Brown, the judge over the administrative region, ultimately ordered Bynum’s recusal from that case.

The DA’s office then asked Bynum to voluntarily step off the cases cited in their motions this week, or to refer the motions to Brown. After days of negotiating, he and the DA’s office reached their agreement, resulting in the motions being withdrawn on Friday.

Bynum, a member of Houston Democratic Socialists of America, was elected to Harris County Criminal Court at Law No. 8 in 2018.