Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Bruce Morrow
Bruce Morrow was a judge of the Michigan 3rd Circuit Court. He left office on January 31, 2022.
Morrow ran for re-election for judge of the Michigan 3rd Circuit Court. He won in the general election on November 8, 2016.
Biography
Morrow received his undergraduate degree from Eastern Michigan University and his J.D. from Howard University.[1]
Elections
2016
Michigan held general elections for local judicial offices on November 8, 2016. A primary election occurred on August 2, 2016. The candidate filing deadline for incumbents was March 21, and the deadline for non-incumbents was April 19.[2] The following candidates ran in the 3rd Circuit general election (16 open seats).[3]
| 3rd Circuit, 16 open seats, General Election, 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Candidate | ||
 Eric Cholack Incumbent | ||
| James Chylinski Incumbent | ||
| Patricia Fresard Incumbent | ||
| Alexis Glendening Incumbent | ||
| David A. Groner Incumbent | ||
| Cynthia Hathaway Incumbent | ||
| Susan L. Hubbard Incumbent | ||
| Muriel Hughes Incumbent | ||
| Timothy Kenny Incumbent | ||
| Sheila Ann Gibson Manning Incumbent | ||
| Bruce Morrow Incumbent | ||
| John A. Murphy Incumbent | ||
| Lita Masini Popke Incumbent | ||
| Mark Slavens Incumbent | ||
| Martha Snow Incumbent | ||
| Brian Sullivan Incumbent | ||
| Source: Michigan Department of State, "2016 General Election Official Results," November 28, 2016 | ||
2010
- See also: Michigan judicial elections, 2010
Morrow was re-elected to the 3rd Circuit Court in the general election on November 2, 2010, along with 18 other judges.[4]
Noteworthy events
Complaint filed by the judicial tenure commission; suspension (2013)
The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission filed a formal complaint against Morrow on March 7, 2013, and alleged he committed judicial misconduct in 10 cases.[5][6]
Misconduct investigation report forwarded to judicial tenure commission
Retired Oakland County judge Edward Sosnick held a public hearing on the misconduct charges against Morrow. The hearing took place June 10, 11, 13, 17, and 19 in 2013.[7] Sosnick found that Morrow had committed misconduct in only two of the cases under review.[8] Sosnick forwarded his findings to the Michigan's Judicial Tenure Commission for review. The commission was responsible for making a recommendation to the state supreme court regarding what discipline, if any, to impose on Morrow. Possible sanctions included: censure, suspension or permanent removal from the bench.[9]
Suspension recommended by judicial tenure commission
Attorneys for the parties offered oral arguments in the case on October 14, 2013. A 35-page report, released by the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission on December 9, 2013, recommended Morrow be suspended for 90 days, without pay. The commission based the decision on the evidence offered at the formal hearing and the oral arguments of the parties.[7]
Although Sosnick determined after the hearing that Morrow was guilty of judicial misconduct in two of the ten cases which were at issue in the investigation, the commission disagreed and found Morrow guilty of misconduct in eight of the ten cases.[8]
The report noted,
| “ | Respondent's misconduct involved repeated failures to follow the law and proper legal procedures in the handling of cases, the failure to maintain impartiality and to avoid the appearance of impropriety in the handling of cases, and the failure to maintain appropriate security in the courtroom.[10][11] | ” |
A brief submitted to the commission, by Morrow's attorney, Donald Campbell, argued that Morrow's actions were not serious enough to warrant his suspension because there was a "legal and factual basis for everything Morrow did."[8] However, the commission ultimately determined Morrow committed misconduct violations in the following eight cases.[7]
- People v. Orlewicz
- While presiding over a murder trial in early 2009, Morrow closed the courtroom to the victim's family, in violation of the state constitution. The court of appeals ruled Morrow failed to give a reason for closing the proceedings and did not state his reasons for doing so in a written order. Although Morrow later placed his reasons for closing the court on the record, outside the presence of the parties, the court ruled he offered no valid reason for the courtroom to be closed. The court also overruled Morrow's decision to grant a motion for a new trial.[7]
- According to the judicial tenure commission, Morrow's justifications for his actions in the case were outweighed by the need to protect the public's perception of the judiciary.
- People v. Lamiya Fletcher
- Morrow sentenced a drunk driver to five years probation and community service, not the 30-day minimum jail sentence that was required for a third offense. During sentencing, the prosecutor in the case requested that the defendant's sentence include the jail time required under state law.
- The commission found Morrow's "willful refusal" to comply with the law a concern. Since he was informed by the prosecutor that the sentence required in the case was mandatory, Morrow's refusal to sentence the defendant to the mandatory term could not be considered an error made in good faith.[7]
- People v. McGee
- After being convicted of charges involving the rape of a minor in a jury trial, Morrow refused to order that the defendant to be placed in jail while waiting to be sentenced. The prosecutor in the case informed Morrow that Michigan law required a defendant convicted of criminal sexual conduct to be taken into custody,
- Subsequently, the prosecutor asked the court of appeals to reverse Morrow's decision and place the defendant in custody. The appellate court agreed with the prosecutor and found the trial court had a "clear legal duty" to order the defendant to be taken into custody after he was convicted. According to the commission, Morrow's actions demonstrated a "blatant disregard for the law."[7]
- People v. Wilder
- The defendant in the case was charged with possession and intent to distribute marijuana. On the day of trial, two of the three officers who were appearing as witnesses in the trial failed to appear in court. At the request of the defendant's attorney, Morrow dismissed the case against the defendant. However, the order dismissing the case was issued without prejudice, allowing prosecutors to refile the case in the future.
- After prosecutors recharged defendant with the same crimes, the defendant's attorney informed Morrow during a calendar conference, that the defendant wished to accept a plea agreement. Morrow accepted the plea, but noted the plea would be "conditional" until a hearing was conducted. Morrow then conducted a plea hearing to determine why the two officers failed to appear for the previous trial.
- Defense counsel never asked Morrow to make the plea conditional or hold a hearing to look into why the officers failed to appear for the previous trial. After the hearing, Morrow dismissed the case, claiming the officers had not offered an acceptable reason for why they failed to appear at the first trial. Morrow claimed he held the hearing because he was frustrated with officers who did not show up for court when required. The commission found that Morrow considered his need to reach a certain result in a case more important than following proper legal procedures.[7]
- People v. Jason Boismier
- Morrow granted a new trial in a case involving criminal sexual conduct toward a minor. The decision was allegedly based on an off-the-record, sidebar conversation. However, the court of appeals reversed Morrow's decision to grant a new trial, stating that he had abused his discretion.
- The commission found Morrow failed to place the substance of the sidebar conversation on the record. Although he claimed he granted the new trial because the prosecutor did not follow his instructions, nothing in the record showed Morrow ever gave the prosecutor any instructions. Morrow also failed to rule on a request made by defense counsel.
- Morrow was ordered by the court of appeal to hold a hearing to determine whether there was a good faith basis for the prosecutor's questions. However, Morrow never held a hearing. Instead, he simply noted his own reasons for his actions on-the-record, without either side being present. The commission indicated Morrow committed misconduct because he did not observe the correct legal procedures in handling the case.[7]
- People v. Edmund Redding
- Morrow sentenced a man to probation in 2004 for assault with intent to murder. In 2007, the same man appeared before him, facing charges which included assault with intent to murder and child abuse. During the trial, Morrow left the bench and walked over to shake hands with the defendant. He then gave the defendant's attorney a package of documents that included school records for one of the defendant's sons. Morrow stated the defendant had given the documents to a court deputy several months before and asked that they be given to Morrow. However, Morrow indicated he never spoke with the defendant outside the presence of the parties or read the documents.
- In this case, the commission found Morrow's actions were improper since the parties and others in the court may have viewed him as being partial to the defendant in the case. Morrow violated the state's code of judicial conduct because he failed to maintain the appearance of impartiality before the parties and the public.[7]
- People v. Moore
- In an armed robbery case, Morrow subpoenaed the medical records of the defendant, without the knowledge or consent of any of the parties. After accepting a plea in the case, Morrow presented information he had learned from the medical records.
- The commission found Morrow committed misconduct in the case. He should have informed the parties he had requested the medical records and involved himself in the case in a manner that made it appear as if he favored one of the parties. By doing so, the parties could have taken the opportunity to ask Morrow to recuse himself.[7]
- People v. Brandon Hill
- During a sentencing hearing for a defendant charged with armed robbery, carjacking and felony firearm, Morrow brought the defendant into and out of the courtroom from the prisoner's lockup area. There were no security officers present while Morrow was moving the defendant or during the hearing. Morrow also failed restrain the defendant while he was in the courtroom.
- According to the commission, Morrow disregarded his responsibility to keep his courtroom safe and maintain order. He also exposed those in the courtroom, and the courthouse, to unnecessary risks by failing to follow proper security procedures.
Suspension
The Michigan Supreme Court gave Judge Morrow a 60-day, unpaid suspension in June 2014.
| “ | In our view, the totality of the evidence in this case paints a portrait of a judicial officer who was unable to ‘separate the authority of the judicial office he holds from his personal convictions.'[11] | ” |
| —Majority opinion, Michigan Supreme Court[12] | ||
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Martindale, "Bruce U. Morrow - Lawyer Profile," accessed April 16, 2014
- ↑ Michigan Secretary of State, "2016 Michigan Election Dates," accessed December 7, 2015
- ↑ Michigan Secretary of State, "2016 Michigan Unofficial Candidate Listing," April 19, 2016
- ↑ Michigan Department of State, "2010 Michigan Official General Election Results," November 2, 2010
- ↑ Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission: Press Releases, accessed March 2013
- ↑ Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission, "Formal Complaint No. 92," March 7, 2013
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 State of Michigan Before the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission, "Formal Complaint No. 92, Decision and Recommendation," December 9, 2013
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 Detroit Free Press, "Wayne County judge may be disciplined over misconduct," March 4, 2014
- ↑ Deadline Detroit, "Misconduct: State Report Cites Violations By Judge Bruce Morrow of Wayne County," August 11, 2013
- ↑ The Detroit News, "Suspension recommended for Wayne County Judge Morrow over misconduct," December 10, 2013 (dead link)
- ↑ 11.0 11.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Detroit Free Press, "Supreme Court suspends Wayne County Judge Bruce Morrow for 60 days," June 23, 2014
Federal courts:
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Eastern District of Michigan, Western District of Michigan • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Eastern District of Michigan, Western District of Michigan
State courts:
Michigan Supreme Court • Michigan Court of Appeals • Michigan Circuit Court • Michigan Court of Claims • Michigan District Courts • Michigan Municipal Courts • Michigan Probate Courts
State resources:
Courts in Michigan • Michigan judicial elections • Judicial selection in Michigan
| ||||||||||
