Tulsa County District Judge Sharon Holmes violated multiple judicial ethics rules, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled, but will keep her seat on the bench.

The court issued a public reprimand of Holmes on Monday, Sept. 28, calling her conduct "indefensible" in a ruling designated 2026 OK 67. The Council on Judicial Complaints had recommended removal proceedings, but the court rejected that step.

Holmes, 67, has served as a Tulsa County district judge since 2014. She was reelected after drawing no opponent in April and holds her seat through January 2030. The reprimand does not remove or disqualify her from office.

The investigation began in June 2025 after Tulsa County District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler filed a complaint with the Council on Judicial Complaints. The Council issued subpoenas, interviewed nearly 20 witnesses and received testimony from Holmes herself.

Among the findings: Holmes held private, off-the-record conversations with a criminal defendant and with jurors during active cases. In one instance, a defendant asked in open court to speak with her about a personal matter. Holmes agreed, stepped into a hallway for a private conversation, then declined to recuse herself when the district attorney's office objected.

In another case, Holmes spoke privately with jurors for roughly five to 10 minutes. She declined to tell defense counsel what was discussed. She initially refused to recuse but stepped aside the next day.

The court also found Holmes directly received emails from incarcerated defendants and their families without sharing them with the parties. Her staff told investigators she "reads every email sent by family members," according to the court order.

The court found Holmes ignored sentencing limits under state law in three cases. She allowed defendants into the Arise Program, a 24-month outpatient substance abuse treatment program, despite the state filing memoranda advising those defendants did not qualify. Holmes testified she did not know she was required to make findings on the record under the Justice Safety Valve Act.

Investigators found Holmes left the bench and approached an agitated defendant with her fists raised, as if preparing to fight him, according to the Council on Judicial Complaints report. Separately, witnesses described her yelling at an assistant public defender in a hallway as "very hostile and very nasty."

Investigators also questioned Holmes's honesty during the probe. Her testimony was contradicted by evidence the Council collected, the court found, a violation of Rule 2.16.

Chief Justice Dustin Rowe, writing for the five-justice majority, said the violations threatened public confidence in the judiciary. Three justices dissented, arguing the case should have gone to a full removal trial. Special Justice Scott Rowland concurred in part and dissented in part, advocating for a suspension without pay.

No justice wrote in Holmes's defense, NonDoc reported.

Kunzweiler said in a statement that the ruling "validates the concerns we originally raised." He added, "We are confident that moving forward these concerns will no longer affect our efforts to bring fair and equal justice to the rights of victims."

Holmes declined to comment on the reprimand through her county clerk, The Oklahoman reported.

The reprimand is final. No further disciplinary proceedings are scheduled.