SAN ANTONIO – A state judicial oversight agency has issued a public warning to Bexar County District Court Judge Stephanie Boyd after concluding she violated multiple standards of judicial conduct, including improperly involving herself in plea negotiations and making comments during a live-streamed hearing that the commission said showed bias and lacked dignity.

In a public warning issued June 3, 2026, the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct said it reviewed allegations against Boyd, the judge of the 187th Criminal District Court in San Antonio, during its meeting on April 8-9, 2026.

The commission said Boyd was advised by letter of its concerns and provided a written response.

The commission’s findings include concerns about Boyd’s use of a court YouTube channel provided by the Office of Court Administration.

The commission said Boyd live-streams her court proceedings on the channel and engages in extrajudicial activities with viewers, including hosting a book club.

The commission also found that viewers were allowed to leave comments and messages in real time about proceedings and participants.

In one case, the commission cited a July 6, 2023, plea hearing in State of Texas v. Willberth Villamil.

The commission said that after rejecting a plea agreement submitted by the parties and being informed Villamil was withdrawing his plea, Boyd “improperly injected herself into the plea bargaining process by asking if Villamil ‘was willing to accept the 20 years in prison offered by the court.’” The commission also said Boyd remarked that the case against Villamil was “a life-sentence worthy case.”

In her sworn responses to the commission, Boyd stated she has never reviewed or responded to viewers’ comments or messages during proceedings and that she has never “relied upon or considered” such comments or messages when performing her judicial duties. Boyd represented to the commission that all her decisions are “based solely on the evidence presented and the law” and that she has “never been influenced by any outside source when ruling on any case.” The commission said Boyd confirmed she participated in a book club with viewers through the court’s YouTube channel, but indicated she no longer does so.

The commission also cited an October 28, 2024, probation revocation hearing in State of Texas v. Thomas Henson.

The commission said that after explaining to Henson that he was facing 20 years in prison, Boyd directed the court reporter to go “off the record” while continuing to live stream and then stated:

“So it appears that you want to go to prison to be passed around for cigarettes or dessert. Because that’s what’s going to happen to you. Because you’re young. And they will think you are attractive at the prison. And I’m just being real with you…And no matter the commissary money that your parents and grandparents can put on the books for you is gonna save you from being passed around at the prison…Do you want to be passed around for ramen noodle? Because that’s what’s going to happen…And that’s what happened at the Bexar County jail, people would get passed around for dessert. Someone was sitting in this court for murder and the first thing he did at the Bexar County jail was go have sex with somebody. Whether it was consensual or not, that case hasn’t been brought to me. And I can tell you right now that your grandparents, your mother, probably doesn’t have enough money to put on your books so you won’t be passed around for ramen noodles, cigarettes, oranges, or whatever at the jail. And it appears to the court that that’s what you want to happen to you, doing all these little crazy little tattoos you got here, trying to be Billy Bad with gang tattoos and everything.”

In her sworn responses about that matter, the commission said Boyd noted the seriousness of the charge Henson was facing and believed Henson “was not taking the charges or the potential probation seriously.”

The commission concluded Boyd should be publicly warned for four areas of misconduct: “(1) failing to comply with nor maintain professional competence in the law when she inserted herself into the plea bargaining process during the Villamil Case; (2) failing to be patient, dignified and courteous towards Villamil and Henson; (3) performing her judicial duties with bias/prejudice and manifesting, by words and conduct, such bias/prejudice towards Henson during the probation revocation hearing; and (4) making public comments through the Court’s YouTube Channel about pending or impending proceedings in a manner which suggests to a reasonable person her probable decision in any particular case.”

The commission said Boyd’s conduct violated Canons 2A, 3B(2), 3B(4), 3B(5) and 3B(6) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct and Article V, Section 1-a(6)A of the Texas Constitution. The warning was issued under the authority of Article V, Section 1-a(8) of the Texas Constitution, the commission said, “in a continuing effort to promote confidence in and high standards for the judiciary.”

FULL PUBLIC WARNING: