A district judge in Alabama, who handles cases in juvenile court, particularly those related to child abuse or neglect, has been suspended following a lengthy state-led investigation. The investigation, which spanned over a year and examined hundreds of cases, has led to this action.
An ethics complaint has been filed against Dale County District Judge Stuart Smith by the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission. The commission alleges that Smith has been neglecting his docket and failing to take action on cases assigned to him, some of which have been left unresolved for years.
Smith handled a variety of cases, including small claims, child support, civil court cases, and juvenile court cases related to abuse, neglect, or parents seeking to reunite with their children. At the start of the investigation in May 2023, Smith had a hefty workload of over 300 cases. The investigation examined cases dating back to Smith’s initial term, which commenced in 2017.
Smith failed to respond to multiple attempts to contact him for comment.
In a recent complaint, a disturbing case came to light involving the Dale County Department of Human Resources. They were forced to take action and file for custody of a 6-year-old child due to serious allegations of sexual abuse and drug use. According to the complaint, Smith failed to take action for 18 months and neglected to appoint a court guardian as required by law to advocate for the child during the proceedings.
Another case mentioned in the complaint involves a grandparent of an 8-month-old child who filed a petition describing the parent as “unstable.” The parent expressed their support for the petition in a written letter.
The complaint alleges that it took Smith over 18 months to process the order, which would have enabled the grandparent to pursue a dependency petition.
According to Alabama law, judges must conduct reviews of dependency hearings within six months of the petition, and transfer hearings within nine months. Certain situations may necessitate judges to accelerate that timeline.
Smith took action in both cases only after being notified of the Judiciary Investigations Committee’s investigation, as stated in the complaint.
The complaint alleges that both of these cases were indicative of a broader trend in Smith’s professional conduct.
The complaint states that these delays have caused significant hardship for the litigants, attorneys, families, children, foster parents, and relative caregivers involved in these cases. Additionally, they have eroded public trust in the judicial system.
The lawyers representing the Judicial Inquiry Commission have stated that they are unable to provide any comments due to the confidential nature of the commission’s proceedings. All proceedings and documents will be available to the public.
In 2022, the most recent year for which data is available, the Judicial Inquiry Commission brought charges against just two judges. As a result, one judge received a 120-day suspension without pay, while the other judge agreed to a 45-day suspension without pay along with other conditions.
If no agreement is reached, a trial date will be scheduled to decide whether Smith should be charged.