Former Arkansas Bar Official Charged With 65 Counts of Tampering With a Public Record

November 5, 2026

Nancie Michelle Givens, the former executive director of the Arkansas Supreme Court’s Office of Professional Programs, was charged on November 5, 2026, with 65 counts of tampering with a public record under Arkansas Code Annotated § 5-54-121. The Sixth Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney’s Office filed the charges in Little Rock District Court, No. LRCR-26-5292. The docket lists each count as a Class C felony. Status: Charged and Arrested. The charges are allegations. Givens is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.

The public docket shows that on November 5 she surrendered on an active warrant, entered a not-guilty plea to all 65 counts, and had bond set at $2,500. A $2,500 surety bond was entered the next day. The case remains open. A review hearing is set for January 4, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. Central (America/Chicago) in the Little Rock criminal courtroom. District Judge Jill Stewart Kamps sealed the investigative file; the docket lists no public documents.

Chief Justice Karen R. Baker issued a one-page press release the same day confirming that the prosecutor had filed the 65 counts, tying them to discrepancies in Arkansas Bar Examination scores from exams between July 2020 and July 2025, and declining further comment in order to preserve the investigation.

A separate joint press release from six members of the court — Associate Justices Courtney R. Hudson, Rhonda K. Wood, Shawn A. Womack, J. Cody Hiland, and Nicholas J. Bronni, and Special Associate Justice Cory A. Cox — said an internal review by Robert Brech, executive director of the Office of Professional Conduct and Programs, had uncovered irregularities in the Office of Professional Programs and in the administration of the bar exam. The joint statement says the matter was turned over to state and federal authorities, and that a criminal investigation by the Arkansas State Police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation began in April 2026. It also states that all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The joint statement says Givens resigned in February 2026. It states that Brech found a large number of files and electronic communications were modified or deleted in early January 2026, and that approximately 11,400 files were deleted or rendered unavailable, most of them examinee applications, profiles, and examination score sheets the office was required by court rules to retain for 25 years. After further review, the statement says, Brech identified discrepancies in bar examination scores across at least eight test administrations between July 2020 and July 2025.

The justices wrote that evidence exists Givens “harvested points from a number of examinees’ scores and then added them to other examinees’ scores within the same test administration,” raising some scores to the minimum passing score of 270 or greater. The statement also describes at least one instance in which score alterations may have reduced to failing a score that otherwise would have passed, and at least one instance in which the examinee who should have received the top score had that score reduced. “If these allegations are true,” the statement says, “these actions constitute an unprecedented breach of public trust.” It also says the vast majority of examinees previously told they had passed did, in fact, pass, and that those affected will be notified once their status is confirmed.

Separately from the criminal case, the Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct, Panel B, entered an order of interim suspension on November 5, 2026, in Case No. CPC-2026-036, immediately suspending Givens, Arkansas Bar No. 91055, from the practice of law in Arkansas. That order is a professional-discipline action, not a criminal judgment.

The charged count is 65, confirmed by the docket and by both court press releases. The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, citing a November 4 arrest affidavit, reported that an internal review identified at least 64 people whose bar exam scores were altered. That affidavit is not in the public docket, and the 64 figure has not been verified against a primary document. A 64-person figure, if accurate, would describe alleged score changes, not a second official charge count.

The Sixth Judicial District prosecutor’s own news release was quoted in news coverage but could not be located as a public document. The 10:00 a.m. arrest time reported from online booking records was also not independently verified; the docket records an arrest/disposition report filed at 10:46 a.m. Central (America/Chicago) on November 5 and a later entry stating that the defendant was surrendering on an active warrant.

Sources

All stories