A Georgia judge will remain on hundreds of DeKalb cases after a bid to remove her fails

Superior Court Judge Yolanda Parker-Smith will remain on more than 400 DeKalb County criminal cases and related matters after a fellow judge rejected District Attorney Sherry Boston’s effort to remove her from cases involving the district attorney’s office.

The ruling, reported Aug. 15, 2026, rejects Boston’s request for a broad recusal. It does not decide whether Parker-Smith committed judicial misconduct, and it does not resolve the separate disciplinary case pending before the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission.

What the judge decided

Another DeKalb Superior Court judge denied Boston’s effort to remove Parker-Smith from the affected criminal cases and associated proceedings. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that Parker-Smith can continue handling more than 400 DeKalb matters involving the district attorney’s office.

Boston’s earlier filing identified more than 430 pending criminal cases. The newer report uses the broader description of more than 400 matters, which includes criminal cases and related proceedings. Those figures are not necessarily contradictory because they may reflect different categories or methods of counting the affected matters.

The available reporting indicates that Boston argued Parker-Smith’s alleged conduct toward her office created actual bias or, at minimum, an appearance of partiality. Boston also argued that members of her staff could be witnesses in the JQC proceeding, making it difficult for the public to have confidence in Parker-Smith’s impartiality in cases prosecuted by the office.

Why Boston sought recusal

Boston’s request followed formal charges filed July 20, 2026, by the JQC. The charges arise from three complaints involving an attorney, the DeKalb district attorney’s office and a grand jury.

In the first matter, the JQC alleges that Parker-Smith ordered deputies to take attorney Gerald Griggs into custody when he arrived late for a DeKalb pretrial calendar on Aug. 15, 2024. The filing says Griggs had first attended an 8:30 a.m. hearing in Henry County and that his assistant had emailed Parker-Smith’s staff the previous day about the scheduling conflict. The JQC alleges that Griggs was taken to a courthouse holding cell, later released and brought to Parker-Smith’s chambers, where the judge discussed punctuality but did not address the detention in open court.

The second matter concerns a May 18, 2023, criminal calendar call. The JQC alleges that Parker-Smith threatened to jail Boston and two assistant district attorneys after a nolle prosequi — a formal decision not to continue prosecuting a case — was not submitted by the deadline the judge expected. The filing says Parker-Smith later issued a show-cause order accusing the prosecutors of lying to the court and failing to submit the dismissal as stated. A separate judge denied a recusal request connected to that contempt proceeding, and Parker-Smith later rescinded the show-cause order and canceled the hearing.

The third matter concerns Feb. 3, 2026, when Parker-Smith was presiding over a DeKalb grand jury. The JQC alleges that she refused to take the bench to receive indictments in open court after objecting to the presence of an assigned DeKalb County Sheriff’s Office corporal. According to the filing, another judge ultimately completed that duty.

What changes for active cases

The immediate effect of the ruling is that Boston’s broad request to remove Parker-Smith from more than 400 matters was denied. Defendants, prosecutors, victims and witnesses may therefore continue to encounter Parker-Smith in criminal cases and related proceedings involving the DeKalb district attorney’s office.

The ruling does not establish that every affected case will proceed on the same schedule or without further litigation. Any separate motion, later order or case-specific recusal issue must be evaluated under the applicable court record and rules. The available report does not identify a new blanket removal, appeal deadline or other specific remedy.

The JQC case remains unresolved

The Supreme Court of Georgia’s case index lists the matter as S26Z1811. The formal charges say the JQC investigative panel found reasonable cause to believe misconduct occurred and directed the filing of charges so the hearing panel can determine whether the alleged acts occurred, violated the Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct and warrant a recommendation for discipline.

Those charges are allegations, not findings that Parker-Smith committed misconduct. Parker-Smith’s attorney, Gabe Banks, said she was working to respond fully and fairly and remained committed to carrying out her judicial responsibilities impartially.

The disciplinary case remains separate from the recusal decision. The denial of Boston’s broad recusal request neither resolves the JQC allegations nor determines what discipline, if any, may ultimately be recommended or imposed.

For DeKalb residents, the practical issue is continuity in the courts: Parker-Smith remains eligible to handle the matters covered by the denied request while the judicial-discipline case proceeds on its own track.

Sources

Look for updates to this story

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.