Southfield man's drug conviction tossed over judge's comment: ‘This guy looks like a criminal to me’

DETROIT (FOX 2) - In March 2022, Leron Liggins was convicted on drug charges and sentenced to a decade in prison, ending a several-year long fight in court after his arrest in 2018. But as it turns out, a comment made by the judge during those four years has now led to his release.

Liggins had his conviction vacated in a ruling by the appellate court on Thursday after he appealed that the judge shouldn't have overseen his case.

Liggins, a Black man from Southfield, was indicted in February 2018 on one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin. His case eventually went in front of U.S. District Court Judge Stephen J. Murphy, who is white, after several months of appeals. In January 2020, Murphy commented from the bench that he was ‘tired of the case’ and that "This guy looks like a criminal to me. This is what criminals do."

Liggins was indicted on Feb. 6, 2018, and had a previous indictment from Kentucky for intent to distribute. He had said he planned to plead guilty and requested the case be transferred to the Eastern District of Michigan, which was approved. Liggins then started a lengthy appeals process and extension of the speedy trial clock to explore the resolution of both cases.

On March 26, 2019, he filed to terminate his attorney and one was appointed for him – attorney Joseph Arnone – a month later. Liggins' trial was pushed back three months but two weeks before the trial was to start, in September 2019, the government filed a superseding indictment that added a count of aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute heroin. Liggins then said he planned to plead guilty.

Ten days after that, he said he no longer planned to plead guilty and a new trial date was set for March 2020. 

Liggins then filed another motion to seek a new attorney and Arnone moved to withdraw. In court on Jan. 30, 2020, Arnone and Liggins stood before Judge Murphy where he made several disparaging comments about Liggins and the case after summarizing the history of the case:

"I’m tired of this case. I’m tired of this defendant. I’m tired of getting the runaround. This has been going on since February 6, 2018. We’ve got a case out of Kentucky that came here under Rule 20. Rule 20 says the reason for the transfer was the defendant has agreed to plead guilty. I feel as if the Court has been misled. I’ve been told in an official pleading and informally the defendant was going to plead guilty. We cancelled jurors. We got a trial date. Now we got this," Murphy said. 

READ NEXT: Michigan brother and sister charged with $3.5M unemployment fraud

When Liggins asked to speak, Murphy denied it because he was represented by an attorney. Liggins and Murphy argued in court about representation when Murphy turned to Arnone, who was still his attorney at the time, and told him that he was "being misled and messed with" before saying this: 

"This guy has got my attention, Mr. Arnone. What do you want me to do? This guy looks like a criminal to me. This is what criminals do. This isn’t what innocent people, who want a fair trial do. He’s indicted in Kentucky. He’s indicted here. He’s alleged to be dealing heroin, which addicts, hurts and kills people, and he’s playing games with the Court. Do you agree?" Murphy said.

Arnone said he couldn't argue with the judge's logic and Liggins asked to speak again but was denied.

Murphy then transferred the case to Kentucky and LIggins was represented by another attorney. 

The case was then delayed due to COVID, the attorneys need to get familiar with the case, and joint stipulations to continue. In March 2021, Liggins' third attorney was replaced again and the trial was set for October 2021.

The day before the trial, Liggins moved for recusal of the judge based on the remarks in the January 2020 hearing. The judge denied the motion yet issued an apology.

"Now, having said that, I would say two things. Number one, Mr. (Arnone) in that transcript agreed with my underlying concerns, and number two, just because I got mad does not mean I’m biased against Mr.—Mr. Liggins. I’m not, trust me. I give Mr. Liggins the same rights and opportunities here to demonstrate his innocence or lack of guilt as any other litigant, and I believe that my conduct at the final pretrial conference, in ruling on the motions in limine and in today’s hearing do not evidence any bias. In fact, they—they evidence lack of partiality," Murphy said. "I was mad, I was hostile, I was disapproving, and I regret it. I made a mistake by yelling like that, but I wasn’t upset or concluding that Mr. Liggins was—was guilty of an offense or hostile or partial toward him. I concluded he was acting in a manner which was frankly obstructionist and making me mad."

The trial proceeded and Liggins was convicted on both counts and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

That prompted Liggins appeal based on Murphy's comments, which the court of appeals agreed that Murphy should have recused himself from the case.

"(As) difficult as the recusal standard may be to reach, we find that the district judge’s unacceptable remarks at the January 30, 2020 hearing satisfy it. Among the many disparaging remarks about Liggins that the district judge made, the most troubling is that Liggins ‘looks like a criminal to me’," the court wrote in its ruling.

The court also acknowledged Murphy's apology but said it did not resolve the problem since it had been 18 months since the comment was made.

Liggins' conviction was vacated but charges have not been dropped. Instead, his case will start over and he was remanded for a new trial under a new judge.