Ferguson v. State, 479 S.W.3d 25

Jacqueline Ferguson, a licensed foster parent, was adjudicated in juvenile court (dependency-neglect) for physical abuse of her child; the court found the child dependent-neglected after an adjudication hearing.
The State later charged Ferguson criminally with second-degree domestic battery based on the same underlying allegations; the same circuit judge who presided over the DHS adjudication was assigned to the criminal case.
Ferguson moved to recuse that judge, arguing the judge had previously presided over "the matter" and had personal knowledge/bias from the adjudication; she also sought a bench trial (waiver of jury), which the court initially accepted then refused.
The circuit court denied recusal and denied Ferguson’s waiver of jury trial after counsel expressed concern that the judge was biased; a jury convicted Ferguson of second-degree domestic battery and imposed an enhanced penalty for presence of a child.
On appeal Ferguson argued (1) the judge should have recused under Ark. Code Jud. Conduct Rule 2.11 and (2) the court abused its discretion by refusing her waiver of jury trial; the majority affirmed, a dissent would have reversed for recusal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Ferguson)	Defendant's Argument (State / Court)	Held
Recusal under Rule 2.11	Judge previously presided over the same matter (DHS adjudication), had personal knowledge of disputed facts and had prejudged guilt (comments at adjudication)	Prior DHS adjudication is a different proceeding (child-focused; lower burden); judge is presumed impartial; prior judicial participation alone doesn’t require recusal	Denial of recusal affirmed — no abuse of discretion; adjudication and criminal case were not "the same matter," and prior participation didn’t establish disqualifying bias
Denial of waiver of jury trial	Ferguson sought bench trial (State assented) believing judge would be fairer; court should have approved waiver	Court may refuse waiver; counsel had argued judge might be biased, so waiver would be inappropriate; court exercised discretion to require jury	Denial of waiver affirmed — not arbitrary or groundless; court reasonably denied bench trial after defense challenged judge's impartiality

Perroni v. State, 358 Ark. 17 (discusses duty to hear case unless disqualified)
Duty v. State, 45 Ark. App. 1 (judge presumed impartial; prior judicial participation does not automatically preclude presiding)
Porter v. Ark. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 374 Ark. 177 (appellate review of recusal is for abuse of discretion)
Irvin v. State, 345 Ark. 541 (an adverse ruling alone does not establish bias)
Gates v. State, 338 Ark. 530 (similar principle that adverse rulings are insufficient to show bias)
Smith v. State, 90 Ark. App. 261 (definition of abuse of discretion in context of trial-court rulings)
Owens v. State, 354 Ark. 644 (burden to demonstrate judicial bias/prejudice)
Farley v. Jester, 257 Ark. 686 (appearance of impartiality is essential)
Lofton v. State, 57 Ark. App. 226 (discussion of appearance of partiality and recusal principles)