A significant development has emerged in Kalamazoo: the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board is on the cusp of resolving the disciplinary proceedings against St. Joseph County Prosecutor Deborah Davis.
Perhaps they have finally gotten the memo that taxpayers want them to do their taxpayer funded jobs, and end the rampant misconduct happening in Michigan?
One can dream.
Here’s a breakdown of the events and what this could mean for Deborah Davis and the local legal landscape.
What’s the Situation?
On June 3, the Attorney Discipline Board approved a request to cancel a planned June 5 prehearing conference.
The reason?
Both sides reached a “consent resolution.” Meaning, they’ve found common ground on how Davis should be disciplined for her dishonesty.
The Board’s chair, David Peterson, noted that final details of the discipline are being finalized and will soon be presented to the board for its approval.
There’s no firm timeline set yet, but the proceedings are clearly in the final stage.
A Quick Timeline
The first prehearing was scheduled for March 24, but Davis requested more time to secure legal representation and coordinate with St. Joseph County on coverage of her legal defense.
What’s incredibly disheartening is that Davis was fired for misconduct…and somehow voters still thought it was a good idea to elect her.
This was followed by a rescheduled virtual hearing on June 5, which was again postponed now that a settlement is in progress.
The Allegations
At the heart of this case is a serious charge: Davis is accused of deliberately lying to Judge Jeffrey Middleton about why a stalking victim didn’t appear at a preliminary hearing in January 2024.
The Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission (MAGC) claims she lied about the subpoenaed victim’s absence. Davis defends her conduct, saying the investigating team, led by former Prosecutor David Marvin, acted biased and neglected due process.
Except her dishonest actions got her into this mess. Why does due process only matter for her and her alone?
What’s at Stake?
The potential disciplinary outcomes range from a reprimand, probation, or suspension of her law license, to disbarment, the most severe option.
To have a prosecutor with a penchant for lying, there is no guarantee of justice, and it is worth examining how many cases and lives she’s destroyed with her dishonesty.
Any penalty will have major implications for Davis’s legal career (and rightfully so). This will also be significant for how Michigan Courts manage internal integrity and public trust.
For the community, this could reshape conversations around prosecutorial misconduct and the accountability crisis in plain sight.
What Happens Next?
The agreed-upon resolution must be crafted into a formal document and submitted to the Discipline Board.
The board will scrutinize and ultimately approve or reject the agreement, and a public statement will likely follow, outlining the terms and consequences.
Depending on the outcome, Davis may continue in office under certain conditions or potentially appeal the decision.
My hope? I want to see her removed, preferably disbarred. Prosecutors have far too much power and there are far too many prosecutors lying and ruining lives in Michigan for their own political gain.
This is an excellent first step in accountability, and I hope more prosecutors are pursued.
Final Thoughts
This case highlights the delicate balance in prosecutorial roles, and the problems that occur when you can’t trust your prosecution to be truthful.
Whether Deborah Davis receives a moderate reprimand or a harsher sanction, the resolution will send a broader signal about the standards expected of those enforcing the law.
In the coming weeks, legal observers and the public should expect a formal announcement, which will be critical for understanding the full ramifications of this settlement.
As soon as the Discipline Board releases its official decision, I’ll dive deeper into the fallout for Davis and what it means for prosecutorial ethics in Michigan.
