This matter began in General Sessions Court but became legally complex when the original General Sessions judge recused herself after the Circuit Court took up the case to review whether the underlying conviction was void. The Circuit Court found a colorable claim under Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1 and assumed jurisdiction to evaluate the legality of the sentence. Judge Michael King then took over the General Sessions case following that recusal. During the Circuit Court’s review, it was verbally indicated that I was not to be arrested on further probation violations while the legality of the sentence was pending. Despite this, Judge King proceeded in a way that directly conflicted with the Circuit Court’s handling of the case. Specifically, Judge King: * Exercised jurisdiction over a case that was already under review and on appeal before the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals * Allowed probation enforcement to continue in conflict with the Circuit Court’s directive while the legality of the sentence was unresolved * Approved a consent order modifying the charge to Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-11-154, a statute that was not in effect at the time of the alleged conduct, raising ex post facto concerns Additionally, the original charge under Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-113 was applied despite there being no valid order of protection or bond condition in place, which calls into question whether the charge was legally valid. Conduct in court: When I objected to the court’s authority and rulings, Judge King told me that if I did not apologize, he would hold me in contempt and put me in jail. This response discouraged me from raising further legal objections. In a separate proceeding involving a defendant I was also litigating against in another matter, I personally heard Judge King instruct that defendant not to speak and state that he would “help her,” which raised concerns for me about neutrality. Additional observation: After one court appearance, I was in a police transport van driven by a sheriff’s department officer when another vehicle abruptly cut in front of us at a light, nearly causing a collision. The officer stated words to the effect of, “that’s the judge,” identifying the driver as Judge King. While separate from the legal issues, this contributed to my overall perception of conduct and professionalism. From my perspective, this case reflects: * A lower court acting in conflict with a higher court’s handling of the case * Enforcement of probation tied to a conviction under active legal challenge * Courtroom conduct that discouraged legal objections and raised concerns about neutrality This matter is currently pending before the appellate court, including whether the consent order is lawful or must be vacated. Legal Knowledge: he blatantly ignores, substantive law that outweighs procedural law. This is basic Civil courses taught in middle school that appeals courts can’t be overruled by lower courts Fairness & Impartiality: he literally said to the person I was suing “ Don’t say anything I’m going to help you” Judicial Temperament: if you challenge his authority, he will threaten you with jail time And have you handcuffed and force an apology from you So that you don’t have to be held in contempt. Communication: he’s right and everybody else is wrong Timeliness: he does reply fast, though I will give him that he will draft up a judicial order pretty quickly It will be violation of a lot of laws, But he has judicial immunity so and he’ll let you know he has judicial immunity.