Tulsa County District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler tried to bench Judge Sharon Holmes in six criminal cases, arguing that a string of alleged off-the-record interactions had eroded confidence in the proceedings. Judge David Guten rejected the request, while Holmes made clear she was not planning to step aside simply because the DA’s office kept asking.
The DA’s office alleged Holmes privately spoke with criminal defendants and their supporters without disclosing what was discussed, according to News On 6. Prosecutors also alleged that Holmes discussed the possibility of a defendant performing construction work at her home, accepted another defendant’s offer to bring her lunch, and spoke privately with a jury without revealing the substance of that conversation.
Why The DA Says The Conduct Matters
Oklahoma’s Code of Judicial Conduct generally bars judges from initiating, permitting or considering communications about pending cases outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers. The rule allows narrow exceptions for matters such as scheduling, emergencies and certain specialized court proceedings, while a separate provision requires disqualification when a judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, according to the Oklahoma Council on Judicial Complaints.
The DA’s argument is less about one isolated conversation than about a pattern, with prosecutors saying the alleged interactions could undermine a fair outcome for victims and the public. Holmes, however, has maintained that the incidents cited by the DA do not require her to withdraw from every case assigned to her.
The Fight Has Already Removed Holmes From One Case
This is not the first time the dispute has forced a change in Holmes’ courtroom assignments. In June 2025, Presiding District Judge Dawn Moody disqualified Holmes from the murder case of Noe Cruz after Holmes met privately with Cruz in her chambers without the attorneys present, a move Kunzweiler described as improper in an account by KJRH.
That earlier removal gave the DA’s office a concrete precedent for seeking Holmes’ disqualification again, but it did not create an automatic rule requiring her removal from unrelated cases. The latest request therefore turned on whether the allegations were legally sufficient to justify taking six cases away from her at once.
Judge Guten Rejects The Blanket Removal Request
Guten ruled that there was no legal basis and not enough reason to remove Holmes from the six cases, News On 6 reported. Holmes also said she does not intend to recuse herself from cases simply because the DA’s office continues to request it, framing the conflict as an ongoing dispute with Kunzweiler rather than a reason to abandon her docket.
The ruling does not resolve the underlying disagreement over what happened in the courtroom or chambers. It does mean that, for now, Holmes remains assigned to the six criminal cases unless a later ruling, appeal or separate disciplinary process changes that outcome.
What Happens Next
The Tulsa County DA’s office has signaled that it will keep challenging Holmes’ participation when it believes her conduct could compromise a case. For defendants, victims and attorneys, the practical question is whether each new recusal request will be judged on the facts of that individual case—or become another round in a much larger fight over confidence in Tulsa County’s criminal courts.
