Stand With Big Bend Times Against Corruption!
A fourth judicial conduct complaint has been filed against Justice of the Peace Mary Ann Luedecke, intensifying scrutiny on the judge whose actions are now at the center of a broader legal and press freedom controversy in far West Texas.
The newest complaint, mailed this week to the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct, focuses on Luedecke’s conduct in Cause No. 20240067, a traffic citation case involving journalist David Flash, publisher of Big Bend Times and Texas Reporter. The complaint outlines a series of procedural irregularities, conflicts of interest, and misrepresentations in court records that Flash argues reflect either bias, incompetence, or both—and directly undermine the credibility of unrelated criminal charges Luedecke later brought against him.
According to the filing, Luedecke presided over the traffic case despite being on notice of a civil tort claim filed against her by Flash, and despite the county having retained outside counsel to represent her in that matter. She also declined to recuse herself after filing separate criminal allegations against Flash—harassment and terroristic threat—that led to his arrest earlier that same month, in April 2024. One of those charges has since been dropped by the Texas Attorney General’s Office; the remaining charge is still pending.
The complaint argues that Luedecke’s refusal to step aside, combined with procedural obstacles she imposed on the case, raises serious concerns about judicial impartiality and proper conduct.
Timeline of Concern
The traffic citation at issue was issued by Jeff Davis County Deputy King Merritt on April 27, 2024. By that point, Flash had already been arrested based on charges filed by Luedecke herself. Despite claiming in court records that she feared Flash, Luedecke continued to oversee the traffic case, ignoring multiple formal requests from Flash for her to recuse.
Flash’s bond conditions prohibited him from contacting Luedecke directly, yet she continued to oversee a case requiring communication with the court. Flash says he carefully complied by communicating only through court channels and filing documents, while repeatedly requesting a different judge be assigned. Those requests went unanswered.
“This was not just a procedural oversight,” the complaint states. “It placed me in a legal catch-22 and fundamentally compromised my ability to defend myself.”
The case was ultimately appealed to county court, but not before a series of complications. Flash submitted his appeal bond and plea by UPS on December 2, well ahead of the December 11 trial date, and emailed both the court and County Attorney. Instead of allowing him to correct a minor issue with the plea form, the court returned his check via certified mail—received by Flash on December 10, just one day before trial. He then drove overnight to hand-deliver the corrected documents, taping them securely to the courthouse door in a clearly labeled sleeve. Despite this effort, Luedecke’s certified transcript states he had “wholly failed to appear.”
Flash called the transcript “deliberately misleading” and included evidence in the complaint to show that his filing was valid, timely, and properly documented. He also notes that the charge was modified after his appeal was filed—from “Failure to Maintain a Single Lane” to “Failure to Drive on the Right Side of the Roadway”—a move he says raises due process concerns.
Broader Pattern and Undermined Charges
The filing joins three previous judicial complaints made by Flash, which together document a broader pattern of alleged abuse of power. Those complaints involve Luedecke’s attempt to detain Flash without authority, the creation and mailing of a false contempt warrant, and the intentional locking of her court office during posted business hours—an act she later confirmed was done specifically to exclude Flash.
All of these incidents occurred before Luedecke filed criminal charges against Flash—charges he and his legal team describe as retaliatory and politically motivated. One of those charges, terroristic threat, has already been dismissed by state prosecutors. The remaining harassment charge, also filed by Luedecke, is pending in county court but now under the purview of the Texas Attorney General’s Office.
“The misconduct documented in these complaints completely undermines the foundation of those charges,” Flash said. “They’re using the legal system to retaliate against a journalist who asked too many questions.”
Records show that Jeff Davis County has spent more than $14,000 in taxpayer funds to block the release of documents related to its investigations into Flash and his media outlets. Despite at least eight separate investigations, only Luedecke’s charges ever resulted in an arrest—and those are now unraveling under scrutiny.
Flash’s GoFundMe campaign, “Stand with David Flash Against Corruption,” has raised more than $5,200 toward legal costs. He has pledged to reimburse donors or redirect any settlement funds to civil liberties organizations.
The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct has not yet issued any public responses to the complaints.
1 Comment