Ark. Code Ann. » Title 16 Chapter 10
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 16-10-410 (2026)

Removal from office

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. The grounds for removal conferred by this subchapter shall be both alternative and cumulative to the power of impeachment provided by the Arkansas Constitution and removal otherwise provided by law.
  2. A judge may be removed from office on any of the following grounds:
    1. Conviction of any offense punishable as a felony under the laws of Arkansas or the United States;
    2. Conviction of a criminal act that reflects adversely on the judge's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a judge in other respects;
    3. The commission of conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation;
    4. The commission of conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;
    5. Willful violation of the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct or the Model Rules of Professional Conduct;
    6. Willful and persistent failure to perform the duties of office; or
    7. Habitual intemperance in the use of alcohol or other drugs.
  3. In considering recommending removal, the Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission may consider the frequency of the offense, the motivation of the conduct, the length of time since the conduct in question, and similar factors.
  4. [Repealed.]

History. Acts 1989, No. 637, § 6; 1995, No. 1296, § 58; 2001, No. 5, § 1; 2015, No. 939, § 2.

A.C.R.C. Notes. Acts 2015, No. 939, § 1, provided: “Legislative Intent. The intent of this act is to repeal § 16-10-410(d) as the Supreme Court has held this provision unconstitutional under Proctor v. Daniels, 2010 Ark. 206 (2010).”

Amendments. The 2015 amendment repealed (d).

Case Notes

Constitutionality.

In a judge's declaratory action, this section was held unconstitutional, as it added a qualification to the office of circuit judge, encroaching on the power of the judiciary to interpret the law. Proctor v. Daniels, 2010 Ark. 206, 392 S.W.3d 360 (2010).

Federal Review Barred.

Complaint was dismissed because each of the judge's asserted wrongs were either directly encompassed in the state supreme court's judgment, or, as the bar from seeking re-election, “inextricably intertwined” with those claims already adjudicated in state court. The relief the judge sought was, therefore, barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Proctor v. Hannah, 688 F. Supp. 2d 851 (E.D. Ark. 2010).

Removal Appropriate.

Removal of the judge from office was proper under subdivision (b)(5) of this section because he willfully violated the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct when he, in part, acted inappropriately with defendants under his jurisdiction and when he enforced the payment of civil fees, knowing that the funds would go to a probation-type program that he started. Ark. Judicial Discipline and Disability Comm'n v. Proctor, 2010 Ark. 38, 360 S.W.3d 61, cert. denied, isability Comm'n, 561 U.S. 1027, 130 S. Ct. 3516, 177 L. Ed. 2d 1093 (2010).

Cited: In re Switzer, 303 Ark. 288, 796 S.W.2d 341 (1990).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2021 · leading case: Proctor v. Daniels, 392 S.W.3d 360 (Ark. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Proctor v. Daniels, 392 S.W.3d 360 (Ark. 2010). · cites it 10× “He also sought a writ of mandamus directing the Pulaski County Election Commission to count all write-in votes cast in his favor. Appellee Pulaski County Election Commission filed an answer to the complaint, and appellees Charlie Daniels, in his official capacity as Secretary of…”
Jud. Discipline & Disability Comm'n v. Thompson, 16 S.W.3d 212 (Ark. 2000). · cites it 2× “(6) Judge Thompson violated Canons 1 and 2A and Ark. Code Ann. § 16-10-410 (b)(3) (Repl. 1999), when he violated Ark.”
Cherokee Nation Bus., LLC; & Arkansas Racing Comm'n v. Gulfside Casino P'ship, 2021 Ark. 183 (Ark. 2021). · cites it 4× “3d at 363 (holding section 16-10-410(d) unconstitutional because the statute imposed an additional qualification for judicial office in section 16-10-410(d)); Mississippi County v.”
Arkansas Jud. Discipline & Disability Comm'n v. Proctor, 360 S.W.3d 61 (Ark. 2010). “Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-10-410(b)(5) (Supp.2009) provides, in pertinent part, that “[a] judge may be removed from office .”
Rickey W. Thompson v. Lee Cnty. Democratic Party Exec. Comm., 227 So. 3d 1037 (Miss. 2017). “” Ark. Code Ann. § 16-10-410 (d) (Supp. 2009) (repealed by Acts of 2015, Act 939, § 2, eff.”
Arkansas Jud. Discipline & Disability Comm'n v. Simes, 329 S.W.3d 275 (Ark. 2009). · cites it 2× “The Commission found that Judge Simes violated Canons 2, 4E, and 4G of the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct and further found that the violations were willful and prejudicial to the administration of justice pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-10-410(b)(4)-(5) (Supp.2001).…”
Proctor v. Hannah, 688 F. Supp. 2d 851 (E.D. Ark. 2010). · cites it 6× “Plaintiffs complaint seeks an injunction to restore him to his judicial post; a declaratory judgment that defendants’ actions violated his constitutional rights; and that the “prohibition on a judge that is removed from seeking appointment or election be declared…”
In re Switzer, 796 S.W.2d 341 (1990). · cites it 2× “” See Ark. Code Ann. § 16-10-410 (b)(3) (Supp. 1989).”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 16-10-410(b)(4) — 1 case
Arkansas Jud. Discipline & Disability Comm'n v. Simes, 329 S.W.3d 275 (Ark. 2009). “The Commission found that Judge Simes violated Canons 2, 4E, and 4G of the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct and further found that the violations were willful and prejudicial to the administration of justice pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-10-410(b)(4)-(5) (Supp.2001).…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 16-10-410(b)(5) — 2 cases
Arkansas Jud. Discipline & Disability Comm'n v. Proctor, 360 S.W.3d 61 (Ark. 2010). “Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-10-410(b)(5) (Supp.2009) provides, in pertinent part, that “[a] judge may be removed from office .”
Proctor v. Hannah, 688 F. Supp. 2d 851 (E.D. Ark. 2010). “Plaintiffs complaint seeks an injunction to restore him to his judicial post; a declaratory judgment that defendants’ actions violated his constitutional rights; and that the “prohibition on a judge that is removed from seeking appointment or election be declared…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 16-10-410(d) — 3 cases
Proctor v. Daniels, 392 S.W.3d 360 (Ark. 2010). “He also sought a writ of mandamus directing the Pulaski County Election Commission to count all write-in votes cast in his favor. Appellee Pulaski County Election Commission filed an answer to the complaint, and appellees Charlie Daniels, in his official capacity as Secretary of…”
Cherokee Nation Bus., LLC; & Arkansas Racing Comm'n v. Gulfside Casino P'ship, 2021 Ark. 183 (Ark. 2021). “3d at 363 (holding section 16-10-410(d) unconstitutional because the statute imposed an additional qualification for judicial office in section 16-10-410(d)); Mississippi County v.”
Proctor v. Hannah, 688 F. Supp. 2d 851 (E.D. Ark. 2010). “Plaintiffs complaint seeks an injunction to restore him to his judicial post; a declaratory judgment that defendants’ actions violated his constitutional rights; and that the “prohibition on a judge that is removed from seeking appointment or election be declared…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.