As one branch of government gaveled back into session this week, Oklahoma’s courts have kept busy with high-profile cases.
In one courtroom, a former Tulsa attorney swapped the defense table for the defendant’s chair, pleading no contest to five felony sexual assault charges on the brink of trial.
Elsewhere, several financial cases reached conclusions. A bank employee who exploited insider access to siphon off hundreds of thousands of dollars received a federal prison sentence. A former state legislator is heading to state prison for embezzlement. Meanwhile, corporate defendants opened their checkbooks, agreeing to multimillion-dollar settlements tied to health care billing and pricing practices.
Elsewhere, judges continue to wrestle over who gets to prosecute crimes involving tribal citizens in Indian Country, years after a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision upended criminal jurisdiction across eastern Oklahoma.
Meanwhile, the Council on Judicial Complaints has released its review of a controversial juvenile prosecution in Logan County. The panel concluded the judge’s sentence stayed within lines drawn by the Legislature, even as public outrage simmered.
Before legislators seeking reelection fully reclaim the spotlight, here’s a look at Oklahoma courtroom news you may have missed in recent weeks.
Jeffrey Price Krigel sentenced on 5 sex offenses
After two days of courthouse trial preparation, attorneys representing former Tulsa attorney Jeffrey Price Krigel struck a plea agreement with assistant attorney generals before jury selection could be finalized. The deal, read aloud to a courtroom with about two dozen observers Jan. 28, saw Krigel plead no contest to two charges of first-degree rape, two charges of rape by instrumentation in the first degree, and one count of attempted rape.
“I find you guilty,” Canadian County District Judge Paul Hesse, overseeing the case after Tulsa County’s judges all recused, said after Krigel’s plea.
Krigel was sentenced to 10 years for each count running concurrently, with the later five years suspended and credit given for time served. After his release, Krigel will be on probation and have to register as a sex offender. The plea agreement specifies the state will not object to Krigel leaving the state or country during his probation, a point his defense attorneys emphasized for the record.
While Krigel spent much of his first day in court silent and somber, he smiled and laughed as he talked with his attorneys before the plea agreement was announced the next. He returned to being somber while victim statements were read before sentencing.
Seven women presented statements to the courtroom, describing their wait for justice and how Krigel’s sexual abuse effected their lives.
“I’ve waited since 2018 to have you admit some form of guilt,” one woman said before continuing. “You, Jeff Krigel, are a rapist and the world knows it.”
After victim remarks concluded, Krigel was sentenced and escorted out of the courtroom by deputy sheriffs.
Krigel waived his right to appeal in his plea agreement, and he has 10 days to withdraw his plea if he would like to file an appeal.
Former Rep. Wes Hilliard receives prison sentence
Calvin “Wes” Hilliard, who represented House District 22 as a Democrat in the Oklahoma Legislature from 2004 to 2012, was sentenced to three years in prison — with the first year deferred — after entering a blind plea on several felony counts.
On March 12, 2025, Murray County District Attorney Melissa Handke charged Hilliard with 10 felony counts of embezzlement, two counts of uttering a forged instrument and one count of pattern of criminal offenses in two or more counties. Prosecutors also named him as the defendant in two misdemeanor cases: one for leaving the scene of an accident and another for one count of petty larceny, two counts of misdemeanor embezzlement and five counts of unauthorized use of a debit card.
On Jan. 23, Hilliard was sentenced after he entered a blind plea. Murray County District Judge Wallace Coppedge sentenced Hilliard to serve the first three years of a five-year sentence — with the first year deferred — in the custody of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections on eight of the 10 embezzlement counts and the two counts of uttering a forged instrument. Coppedge also sentenced Hilliard to serve two years in DOC custody for the remaining felony counts, with all sentences to run concurrently.
The plea came weeks after Hilliard was also arrested and charged in January with misdemeanor counts of driving under the influence of alcohol, possession of a firearm while intoxicated, and transporting an open container of liquor. The court imposed a one-year deferred sentence for the DUI charge and two six-month deferred sentences for the remaining charges.
Details about the early-January arrest were requested by phone from the Murray County Court Clerk’s Office, but an employee said the office does not e-mail documents.
In addition to his prison sentence, the court ordered Hilliard to pay $29,088 in restitution. Court records show he paid $20,000 on the day of his sentencing. Following his release, he must pay $100 per month until he pays the balance in full.
A probable cause affidavit filed in the embezzlement case said Hilliard improperly transferred thousands of dollars from the Murray County Junior Livestock Association, triggering a criminal investigation.
According to the affidavit written by arresting officer Ben Flowers, the investigation began after the MCJLA Board of Directors unanimously requested a review of possible misappropriation of funds. Flowers noted that one board member, Tanner Hilliard, appears to be a relative of Wes Hilliard.
Flowers reported that he identified more than $48,000 in suspicious transactions from MCJLA accounts at Vision Bank, where Hilliard served as president. Over the span of roughly a year, Hilliard allegedly transferred funds to his personal account, often noting “reimbursement” on checks. Association leaders told Flowers that Hilliard was not authorized to make the transfers and, in some cases, sought repayment for expenses already paid.
“As we went over the accounts, Mr. Hilliard admitted to fraudulently taking money from the MCJLA accounts,” Flowers wrote in the affidavit.
Federal Judge denies Iski, Ballard motions to dismiss tribal jurisdiction suit
U.S. Senior District Judge Claire Eagan issued a pair of orders in the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Northern Districts denying motions to dismiss a lawsuit challenging prosecutions against tribal citizens filed by District Attorneys Carol Iski and Matt Ballard. The order is the latest in an ongoing jurisdictional dispute between eastern Oklahoma district attorneys and federal and tribal attorneys.
In December 2024, toward the tail end of President Joe Biden’s administration, the U.S. Department of Justice filed two federal lawsuits against Ballard and Iski seeking an injunction to prevent their offices from prosecuting Indians for crimes committed within Indian County. After brief speculation that President Donald Trump would have the DOJ dismiss the suits, the cases continued and the Muscogee Nation filed an additional lawsuit against Tulsa County District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler.
The tribe’s suit against Kunzweiler was dismissed under agreement by both parties Dec. 30, 2025, after federal District Judge Gregory Frizzell issued an opinion denying the nation’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The Muscogee Nation filed to appeal Frizzell’s ruling to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on Jan. 28.
Frizzell found the proper jurisdictional analysis should be derived from Oklahoma v. Castro Huerta and also said the Muscogee Nation failed under its factors.
“After reviewing its precedents, the court stated: ‘[i]n short, the court’s precedents establish that Indian Country is part of a state’s territory and that, unless preempted, states have jurisdiction over crimes committed in Indian Country.’ State jurisdiction may be preempted ‘(i) by federal law under ordinary principles of federal preemption, or (ii) when the exercise of state jurisdiction would unlawfully infringe on tribal self-government.’ Accordingly, this court shall address the nation’s likelihood of success pursuant to the preemption analysis contained in Castro-Huerta,” Frizzell wrote.
While Eagan’s orders did not grant an injunction in the cases against Ballard and Iski, her analysis, which cited a 2025 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that federal courts lack jurisdiction over Indian-on-Indian misdemeanor assault cases and that “only tribal courts” have jurisdiction in such cases. But Eagan’s order hints toward the opposite conclusion Frizzell reached.
“(Under Castro Huerta) states have criminal jurisdiction over all of the territory within their state, including Indian reservations, except to the extent that such jurisdiction is preempted by federal law,” Eagan wrote. “However, the Supreme Court requires a ‘clear expression of the intention of Congress’ before the state or federal government may prosecute crimes committed by Indians on tribal lands, as the power to punish tribal members and enforce tribal laws is part of a tribe’s retained sovereignty. Ballard’s arguments that the United States and the Indian tribes have not suffered an injury are meritless, as the 10th Circuit has repeatedly rejected similar arguments. The invasion of tribal sovereignty by the illegal assertion of state jurisdiction over an Indian defendant constitutes an injury that can be redressed by a federal court.”
Status reports from the parties in both Ballard’s and Iski’s lawsuits are due Feb. 16.
Dispute continues between Stitt, Drummond over wildlife laws
Oklahoma’s highest court is being asked to resolve an ongoing dispute between the state’s attorney general, the governor and wildlife officials, with implications for how hunting and fishing laws are enforced across much of eastern Oklahoma.
In a lawsuit filed Jan. 27 with the Oklahoma Supreme Court, the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, director Wade Free, Gov. Kevin Stitt and special counsel Russell Cochran are challenging Attorney General Gentner Drummond’s formal opinion that said federal law preempts Oklahoma from enforcing its Wildlife Conservation Code against tribal citizens who hunt and fish within the reservations of the Cherokee Nation, Chickasaw Nation and Choctaw Nation.
The suit argues that Attorney General Opinion 2025-19 improperly resolves constitutional questions and attempts to bind state officials to a legal conclusion that only courts may decide. They also contend the opinion interferes with active federal litigation involving the same issue.
Drummond issued the opinion Dec. 18 while Cherokee Nation et al v. Free remains pending in federal court. In that case, the three tribes seek a preliminary injunction blocking Oklahoma from applying or enforcing state wildlife laws against tribal citizens hunting and fishing within reservation boundaries. The attorney general released his opinion one day before the state’s response briefs were due in federal court.
According to governor’s new filing with the Oklahoma Supreme Court, treating Drummond’s opinion as binding would amount to granting the tribes the “practical equivalent” of the injunctive relief they seek, while exposing state officials to potential personal liability if they fail to comply.
The petition also challenges the substance of Drummond’s opinion, which relied on the U.S. Supreme Court’s White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker balancing test to conclude that state law is preempted. The lawsuit argues that Bracker balancing is inherently fact-specific and cannot be resolved through a generalized legal opinion without a developed factual record.
Stitt and his fellow petitioners are asking the Oklahoma Supreme Court to declare Drummond’s opinion to be advisory only and prohibit its enforcement against state officials, or alternatively, to affirm the state’s authority to enforce wildlife laws on all non-trust lands regardless of tribal citizenship.
A stay of Drummond’s opinion was also requested until the lawsuit is resolved.
Council on Judicial Complaints releases report on Susan Worthington
The Oklahoma Council on Judicial Complaints took the rare step of releasing its report on complaints filed against Payne County Special District Judge Susan Worthington in the criminal case against Jesse Butler. The report, released Jan. 22, found Worthington “exercised her discretion (in the case) exactly as the Legislature mandated.”
On March 4, 2025, Butler — then 17 — was charged by Payne County prosecutors as an adult with 10 counts, including seven sexual offenses and three domestic violence offenses. Worthington was assigned his preliminary hearing, according to the CJC report. On June 12, Butler’s attorney moved to charge him as a juvenile.
On July 24, both the prosecutor and the defense attorney agreed to charge Butler as a juvenile, and Jessica Goodwin, an attorney representing Butler’s victims, did not object to the change. On Aug. 11, Worthington signed off on the parties’ order. On Aug. 25, Associate District Judge Michael Kulling was assigned the case, and Butler was given a rehabilitative sentence without incarceration, typical for juvenile cases.
The change in charges drew local, national and international criticism of the local officials involved in Butler’s case. The CJC report ultimately found the decision whether to charge as a juvenile or an adult was solely within the discretion of Payne County District Attorney Laura Thomas.
“In 2022, Senate Bill 217 substantially changed the Youthful Offender Act by giving the district attorney ‘sole discretion’ to determine whether a person 15, 16, or 17 years old charged with rape or attempt thereof may be held accountable for their acts as either an adult or a youthful offender — even if the defendant was initially charged as an adult,” the report found. “In addition to granting the district attorney sole discretion on both the charging and accountability levels of a 15, 16, or 17 year old charged with rape or the attempt thereof, the Legislature left intact a provision that allows a district attorney to dismiss an adult charge in favor of filing a youthful offender charge, again at their sole discretion and without any approval from a reviewing judge.”
Thomas, who has yet to form a campaign committee for District 9’s election cycle this year, defended her office’s actions in December.
“We discussed these factors at length on multiple occasions with each family, including advising them from the beginning that this matter was likely to end up as a youthful offender prosecution and could even end up in juvenile court. We believed we were doing the right thing by making it possible for these allegations to come to light, something we could have declined to do under these circumstances. We understand these families are not happy with the disposition and we respect their right to feel as they feel,” Thomas said. “Both victims and their families had the opportunity to address the court with victim impact statements at the time of the pleas. One of the victims and family members of both victims used that opportunity to express their feelings. We would much prefer that all victims of the crimes we prosecute be pleased with the outcome but we have to make decisions based upon the law and the available evidence, even when it is contrary to their desires.”
Former Payne County Assistant District Attorney Jeremiah Gregory has launched a campaign for Thomas’ seat. Kulling has also formed a campaign committee for his reelection as associate district judge.
Drummond: ‘National criminal operation’ indicted
Attorney General Gentner Drummond announced Tuesday that more than a dozen people have been arrested as part of Operation Blunt Force, a multi-agency effort to bust an alleged Chinese syndicate that used straw owners to grow marijuana in Oklahoma and perpetrate other crimes, like human trafficking.
“The scope of this criminal enterprise went well beyond the diversion of marijuana into the black market,” Drummond said. “It also included money laundering, large-scale conspiracies and other racketeering activities.”
Drummond called Hao Tong Chen a “kingpin” and said he is being detained at the Rikers Island prison in New York where he was arrested. Drummond said Chen’s operation involved people in eight states across four time zones and that “money flowed to and from 12 states.”
In all, the 18-count indictment brought charges against 19 people in Oklahoma County District Court. Investigators allege that Chen’s organization cultivated more than 1 million pounds of illegally grown marijuana worth about $1.5 billion. Chen orchestrated a “straw owner” scheme, the likes of which have been under investigation and prosecution for years since voters broadly passed State Question 788 in 2018 to legalize medical marijuana.
“Investigators uncovered multiple bank accounts used to launder proceeds from illegal drug trafficking,” Drummond said. “Records show large cash deposits, regular wire transfers, funds moving from New York to Oklahoma and payments made to straw owners and criminal associates. This was a national criminal operation exploiting Oklahoma.”
Drummond repeatedly emphasized that the investigation was “not done.” Asked whether Operation Blunt Force has investigated rumors that agents of the People’s Republic of China have been operating a so-called “overseas police station” in Oklahoma City as they have elsewhere, Drummond revealed evidence to that effect.
“In some of these arrests and busts, we’ve discovered Chinese uniforms and Chinese badges — law enforcement badges,” Drummond said. “At this point it would only be speculation on our behalf, but it appears as though the [Chinese Communist Party] has embedded law enforcement in their criminal organizations, principally to enforce their organizations.”
Drummond attempted to “allay concerns to the citizenry” about what that means.
“Any Chinese law enforcement that we’ve discovered — any activity in Oklahoma — is directed toward the Chinese,” Drummond said. “It’s not directed toward citizens. It’s nascent in our investigation, so we have much more investigation to go.”
Drummond’s office announces staff changes
Just before snow began to fall across the state in January, Attorney General Gentner Drummond’s office sent out a short press release announce staffing changes, including the hiring of his former gubernatorial campaign manager as his deputy chief of staff.
Stephanie Alexander, who was most recently listed as the media contact for Drummond’s campaign on a Jan. 13 press release, joined the attorney general’s office proper as deputy chief of staff under Rob Johnson.
“Alexander has a wealth of political experience, most recently having served as campaign manager for Drummond’s gubernatorial bid, and the CEO of a political consulting firm. In 2020, she was chief of staff in President Donald Trump’s reelection bid,” the release stated. “Four years earlier, Alexander served as a battleground states director for then-candidate (Donald) Trump and coordinated hundreds of his rallies nationwide.”
Other staffing changes in the state’s top law enforcement office include Phil Bacharach leaving the role of director of communications. He was succeeded by Shauna Peters, a former deputy director for the Oklahoma Department of Human Services.
Hiring former campaign staff after winning office in Oklahoma is controversial, but not uncommon. Drummond’s former chief of staff, Trebor Worthen, was a close political adviser of Drummond’s campaigns before serving in the AG’s office. In Tulsa, Mayor Monroe Nichols hired his former campaign manager, Dana Walton, as his chief of staff.
Former Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters controversially hired campaign manager Matt Langston as a Texas-based employee of the State Department of Education.
Edmond man sentenced to 46 months in federal prison for bank fraud
Joseph Nicanor Isezaki San Nicolas was convicted of stealing more than half a million dollars through a bank fraud scheme. He used to purchase vehicles, invest in cryptocurrency and pay debts for himself and his family members, according to prosecutors.
San Nicolas pleaded guilty to the charges of bank fraud and money laundering brought against him in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. According to his indictment, San Nicolas gained access to account information during his employment at Tinker Federal Credit Union, which lasted from 2014 to 2022.
In 2022, San Nicolas was employed by a banking software company referred to as “Company 1” in prosecutors’ complaint. He conducted work for the company — which provides software to TFCU, Houston Federal Credit Union and the Bank of San Francisco — remotely from his residence in Edmond.
San Nicolas siphoned money from customers of each institution through unauthorized withdrawals and counterfeit checks.
“This defendant exploited his access to sensitive financial information to steal hundreds of thousands of dollars from unsuspecting customers,” U.S. Attorney Robert J. Troester said in a press release. “Today’s sentence sends a clear message that those who abuse the financial system for personal gain will be held accountable and face serious consequences.”
At a sentencing hearing Jan. 20, U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton ordered San Nicolas to serve 46 months in federal prison, followed by two years of supervised release, and ordered him to pay restitution in the amount of $242,385.98 — the amount of un-recouped losses.
In his plea agreement, San Nicolas agreed to forfeiture of his assets, including a 2022 Ford Bronco and 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E purchased with stolen funds.
Traditions Health settles False Claims Act allegations tied to McAlester location
Traditions Health LLC, a home health care provider with operations in Oklahoma and 14 other states, has agreed to pay $34 million to resolve civil allegations that its McAlester location billed Medicare for medically unnecessary services and improperly provided financial benefits to physicians in exchange for referrals.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, from 2021 to 2024, the company’s McAlesster location submitted claims to Medicare for home health services that were not medically necessary. The agreement also resolves allegations that, between 2019 and 2024, the company paid remuneration to physician-medical directors in Oklahoma and Texas who referred Medicare beneficiaries to Traditions for home health services.
Prosecutors said the financial arrangements potentially violated the Anti-Kickback Statute and the Physician Self-Referral Law, commonly referred to as the Stark Law. The settlement also resolves potential liability under the federal False Claims Act after Traditions self-disclosed the conduct to the government.
In announcing the settlement, the DOJ said Traditions received credit for cooperation following its voluntary disclosure. According to federal officials, the company conducted an independent internal investigation and provided detailed written disclosures to the government. Traditions also cooperated throughout the investigation and took remedial steps, including removing individuals identified as responsible for the misconduct, strengthening its compliance program and providing additional training to employees.
U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Wilson for the Eastern District of Oklahoma said the case underscores the government’s focus on protecting taxpayer-funded health care programs.
“Billing and receiving payments from Medicare for unnecessary and inappropriate medical care is a practice which cannot and will not be tolerated,” Wilson said. “The disclosure and settlement agreed to by Traditions Health LLC in this case demonstrates that early mitigation goes a long way toward addressing fraud and mitigating the loss of taxpayer dollars.”
Embezzlement charge against former McAlester coach dismissed
An embezzlement charge against a former McAlester football coach was dismissed Jan. 26 after his attorneys argued he was the one entitled to promotional rewards issued through Adidas for team purchases, not the school.
Forrest Mazey, who served as head coach and dean of students at McAlester High School from 2019 to 2025, was originally charged in Pittsburg County District Court with the single felony count in July 2025 after more than $4,000 in funds were alleged to be missing from the football program’s online Adidas account.
The charge came seven months after he entered an Alford plea to one count of pointing or aiming a gun or pistol at another and one count of reckless conduct with a firearm in McCurtain County District Court. He received a 90-day deferred sentence in that case.
The embezzlement charge was ultimately dismissed last month after attorneys for Mazey brought forth evidence about what had been spent.
“His attorney presented some evidence that suggested that in the contract, there were rewards points, basically bonus dollars (…) but that the school couldn’t actually receive them, and they went to the coach, and it was those bonus dollars that were used to buy the stuff,” District 18 District Attorney Chuck Sullivan said. “We didn’t feel it was clear enough, given our burden of proof — beyond reasonable doubt — that they were, in fact, stolen dollars.”
Mazey’s attorney, Brecken Wagner, wrote on Facebook that the DA’s office should never have filed the charge in the first place.
“The school cannot have an ownership over promotional credits according to the law. This was all known to the District Attorney’s Office prior to any charges being filed,” Wagner wrote.
The probable cause affidavit stated the school’s campus police were notified June 3, 2025, of missing funds from an Adidas sportswear account used by the McAlester High School football program. The school’s athletic director reported that the account, which should have contained about $6,000 in credit for team and coaching gear, was $4,000 short.
The report referenced account records showing multiple purchases were made using credentials tied to Mazey.
According to the report, Mazey’s employment with the district ended Dec. 16, 2024. The first purchase linked to his account occurred the following day, with additional orders placed through May 2025. All items were shipped to an address in McAlester that matched Mazey’s last known residence.
In all, 90 items worth $4,676.75 were ordered, including men’s and women’s clothing, shoes and football cleats, the affidavit stated. Investigators wrote that they attempted to contact Mazey but were unsuccessful before the report was turned over to Sullivan’s office.
After leaving MPS, Mazey became an assistant coach at Kilgore College in Texas, but he was let go from that position after the charge was filed. His Oklahoma teaching certificate was also suspended by the Oklahoma Board of Education in October 2025.
“I’ve always said there was more to this story, and today the facts were finally put where they belong — front and center,” Mazey said in a Facebook post.
Checotah woman’s lawsuit against Dollar General stayed after proposed settlement reached
Led by a Checotah woman, a class action lawsuit in federal court alleging that Dollar General routinely bilked Oklahoma customers by charging higher prices at the register than were advertised on store shelves has been stayed following a proposed settlement in a similar case in New Jersey.
The lawsuit, filed Sept. 20, 2023, in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, named Dollar General Corporation and Dolgencorp LLC as defendants. Lori Hartlinem, the plaintiff, alleges the company’s pricing practices violate the Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act and state common law.
According to the complaint, Hartline regularly shopped at the Dollar General store in Porum and began noticing price discrepancies in spring 2023. She claimed multiple purchases resulted in her being charged more at checkout than the prices listed on shelf labels. In one June 15, 2023, transaction, the lawsuit alleges Hartline was charged $3.15 per can for Bud Light Chelada, advertised at $3.00, resulting in a $0.45 overcharge on three cans. Additional alleged discrepancies involved bread, snack items, soft drinks and cat litter. Hartline filed complaints with the Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office after several of the transactions.
The suit alleges those incidents were not isolated, but part of a broader, systemic practice across Dollar General stores in Oklahoma. The complaint notes Dollar General operates more than 500 stores statewide and primarily serves low- and middle-income customers in rural and small-town areas. The company has announced plans to open 450 new stores across America this year.
Hartline alleged Dollar General’s conduct was deceptive and unconscionable and that the company knew or should have known consumers would be charged more than advertised.
The complaint also referenced similar lawsuits filed against Dollar General in New Jersey, Ohio and New York beginning in late 2022, as well as enforcement action brought by the Ohio Attorney General’s Office. Those cases also alleged the retailer charged customers more at the register than was advertised on shelves.
In a June 17, 2025, filing, attorneys for Hartline and Dollar General announced that a settlement in principle had been reached and that both parties were working cooperatively on a final settlement as part of a nationwide class action filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey for Middlesex County.
In that case, Dollar General agreed to pay at least $15 million to settle the claims. The settlement provides cash back to those with documented proof, a one-time in-store discount benefit for those without documented proof, and injunctive relief to customers.
A 90-day stay in the Oklahoma case was approved to allow for a final fairness hearing, with attorneys given an April 6 deadline to file a status report.
Stitt appoints Kristin Kristin Jarman to Murray County bench
The Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission presented Gov. Kevin Stitt with a final list of three candidates to succeed Murray County Associate District Judge Mark Melton, who resigned Sept. 30. When a judicial vacancy occurs in Oklahoma, the JNC vets applicants to fill the vacancy before presenting the governor with a list of three candidates from which to select a new judge.
While eight candidates initially applied to succeed Melton, the JNC narrowed the field to attorney Philip Anthony Hurtt, administrative law judge Kristin Ranell Jarman and Sulphur municipal judge Rebecca Brewer Johnson.
Stitt ultimately chose Jarman for the associate district judge post Jan. 30. She faces a quick decision on whether to file for reelection for her first full term in April.
Appellate court rules against Ryan Walters
Former Bixby Public Schools Superintendent Rob Miller — a candidate for state superintendent of public Instruction — will be continuing his lawsuit against former State Superintendent Ryan Walters after the Court of Civil Appeals ruled against the controversial battle tank commander.
Miller filed the lawsuit against Walters in August 2024 for defamation and slander after Walters called him a “liar,” “clown” and “true embarrassment” during a press conference in which he claimed Miller’s district was in financial trouble. Miller’s attorney, Rusty Smith of Smith Barkett Law Group, said they are pleased with the court’s review of the case and their decision.
“We look forward to proceeding with the discovery process and ultimately presenting the case to an Oklahoma jury,” Smith said.
Walters did not respond to a request for comment through his spokesperson, Madison Cercy.
The appellate court upheld the district court’s decision to deny Walters’ motion to dismiss the case. Walters argued the comments were made in the performance of his official duties and cited the Governmental Tort Claims Act to claim immunity. He also argued that Miller would be unable to establish a prima facie claim against him as required by the Oklahoma Citizens Participation Act.
In their per curiam ruling, the Court of Civil Appeals panel disagreed with Walters and affirmed Tulsa County District Judge Daman Cantrell’s denial of his motion to dismiss.
“Walters’ response to the reporter’s question about the Title I allocations at the July 31, 2024 press conference contained roughly 112 words,” the judges wrote. “In that 112 word space, Walters referred to Miller by name, as ‘Rob,’ three times and used singular pronouns of ‘he’ and ‘his’ 10 times. Walters claimed that Miller did not establish the statements could be reasonably perceived to be about Miller, but no other person was referenced in Walters’ statement.”
In December 2024, the lower court found that Miller had established a prima facie claim and that Walters’ defense did not surpass the preponderance of evidence threshold. Additionally, Walters is not subject to the immunity as he argued because “malice has been pled and any actions would be outside the scope of the GTCA,” which does not protect malicious or bad faith actions. The appeals court upheld the findings, ruling that no relief was warranted on any of the issues Walters raised in his appeal.
