It’s the 12 Days of Ballotpedia! Your gift powers the trusted, unbiased information voters need heading into 2026. Donate now!

Bill Pearson

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
This page was current at the end of the official's last term in office covered by Ballotpedia. Please contact us with any updates.
Bill Pearson
Prior offices:
Arkansas State Circuit Court District 5 Division 1

Education
Bachelor's
Arkansas Tech University, 1981
Law
University of Arkansas, 1985


Bill Pearson was an officeholder of the Arkansas State Circuit Court District 5 Division 1.

This office is outside of Ballotpedia's coverage scope and does not receive scheduled updates. Our scope includes all elected federal and state officeholders as well as comprehensive coverage of the 100 largest cities in America by population.

Biography

Pearson received his undergraduate degree from Arkansas Tech University in 1981 and earned his J.D. at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville in 1985. Before becoming a judge, Pearson had a private legal practice in Clarksville for 21 years. He worked as a public defender for Johnson County and Franklin County. He was admitted to the Arkansas Bar in February 1986.[1][2]

Elections

2014

See also: Arkansas judicial elections, 2014
Pearson ran for re-election to the Fifth Circuit.
General: He won without opposition in the general election on May 20, 2014. [3][4]

Noteworthy events

DWI arrest (2017)

On January 20, 2017, Judge Pearson was arrested for driving while intoxicated, reckless driving, fleeing, and refusing to take a chemical test. According to the Arkansas State Police, Pearson drove through a sobriety checkpoint and was chased by police for about 1.5 miles until he pulled over near a business. He then allegedly tried to drive back onto the highway but was blocked by a police car. Pearson was released on bond in the early hours of Saturday morning.[5]

Approach to the law

Pearson was quoted in The Courier Online:

I think it would be the function of a judge to interpret certain issues that the Constitution and parts of it - the amendments - would apply to a certain issue. So I would think in that context - from a judicial context - of whether something is constitutional or not, one would have to be able to interpret the Constitution. Now, if you're asking it in terms of whether a judge would legislate from the bench, absolutely not. A judge should interpret the laws and apply those to the facts in each case that he's presented. And, do I believe the original intent of our Legislature is the only means of legitimate interpretation? Well, once again, that's a legislative function. We are a judicial function. And if there is a judicial applicationable [sic] law that has been legislated by our Legislature that is unconstitutional, then it has to be dealt with accordingly.[6]
—Bill Pearson[2]

He added:

My judicial philosophy, basically, is that everybody deserves their day in court that has a controversy or a claim, or even a defendant who is accused of a crime deserves their day in court. Basically, my judicial philosophy is - kind of parallels due process and that those particular rights individuals have - those particular claims that people have - they need to be represented adequately and professionally by the attorneys that represent them, and that justice is blind until the facts come in and the case is decided, and the scales weigh in one favor or the other. But I don't know if I kind of danced around that, but, you know, I guess - kind of sum it up - my judicial philosophy is that everybody deserves to be treated fairly by the court and impartially by the court, and especially from the bench.[6]
—Bill Pearson[2]

See also

External links

Footnotes