On Wednesday, May 28, 2025, the Texas Special Court of Review issued an opinion in the appeal of Stephen Rogers, a district court judge from the 268th Judicial District Court in Fort Bend County, Texas. The court addressed a Public Admonition and Order of Additional Education issued by the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct on December 18, 2024, following complaints filed against Rogers in 2023. The Special Court of Review conducted a trial de novo on April 10, 2025, to evaluate four charges brought by the Commission, ultimately upholding one charge and issuing a Private Reprimand.

The case is entitled “In the Matter of Judge Stephen Rogers,” with case number SCR 25-0001.

The complaints stemmed from incidents on July 25, 2023, and September 25, 2023, involving criminal defense attorneys Annie Scott and Michael Elliott. On July 25, Scott and Elliott appeared in Rogers’ courtroom for pretrial matters in the case of State of Texas v. Amanda Lynn Vasquez. They informed Rogers of their client’s decision to appear in jail clothing as part of their trial strategy, citing legal precedent.

Rogers rejected this, ordering the attorneys to purchase civilian clothes for Vasquez and using profanity during a heated exchange, stating, “Don’t fuck with me in my court.” The incident, witnessed by others in the courtroom, prompted Scott to file a complaint and a motion to recuse Rogers, which he initially denied before referring it to the Regional Presiding Judge.

On September 25, Elliott returned to Rogers’ courtroom for unrelated cases but was escorted out by the bailiff, who informed him he was banned from the courtroom on Rogers’ orders. The court coordinator reset Elliott’s cases, and he was removed as counsel in one matter. Elliott filed a complaint, alleging retaliation for the earlier incident and the recusal motion.

The Commission charged Rogers with four violations: failing to comply with and maintain competence in the law (Canon 2A and 3B(2)), failing to treat attorneys with patience, dignity, and courtesy (Canon 3B(4)), performing duties with bias or prejudice (Canon 3B(5)), and engaging in willful and persistent conduct inconsistent with judicial duties, casting discredit on the judiciary (Texas Constitution, Article V, Section 1-a(6)A). The charges cited Rogers’ delay in referring the recusal motion, his rejection of the jail clothing strategy, his use of profanity, and the courtroom ban on Elliott.

The Special Court of Review, comprising Justices Leanne Johnson, Elizabeth Kerr, and Adrian A. Spears II, found that Rogers violated Canon 3B(4) by using profanity and displaying impatience during the July 25 hearing. However, the court dismissed the other charges. It determined that Rogers’ delay in referring the recusal motion was a minor error, not egregious or part of a pattern, and that legal precedent did not grant defendants a constitutional right to appear in jail clothing. The court also found insufficient evidence of bias or a pattern of misconduct in the September 25 incident, noting Rogers’ actions were motivated by a distraught court reporter rather than retaliation.

Instead of the Commission’s Public Reprimand, the court issued a Private Reprimand and ordered Rogers to complete two hours of continuing judicial education by December 31, 2025, focusing on judicial temperament under a mentor assigned by the Texas Center for the Judiciary.

Judge Rogers is a 7th generation Texan with roots among the original settlers. A Houston native, he has lived in Fort Bend for over a decade. With more than 20 years of legal experience, he has served as Senior Counsel and General Counsel for multinational companies, practicing in local and federal courts for civil and criminal clients. He holds degrees from Regent University School of Law and Trinity Law School.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.