WHY JUDGES OR ATTORNEYS MUST SOMETIMES RECUSE THEMSELVES

But as the public may talk about recusal when it is discussed in major news stories, many don’t understand what the term actually means or the greater implications it has on the judicial system. Here’s why someone may recuse themselves from a case and what happens if someone who should have recused themselves didn’t do so.

What Does Recuse Mean in Law?

A recusal occurs when a judge or prosecutor would would have normally taken a case does not participate in it. This can happen if they are removed from the case due to a motion on behalf of an attorney or due to the individual’s decision. Recusals usually take place due to a conflict of interest of some type that will result in the judge or prosecutor being too biased to fairly participate in the case. Some of the top reasons a recusal may take place include:

• Bias or prejudice concerning the party or their attorney. If a judge or prosecutor has a bias or prejudice against the defendant or their defense attorney, then they cannot take the case. Simply trying a case involving the person or their lawyer in the past isn’t enough, there must be evidence there is actual bias or prejudice preventing them from acting fairly in the trial.
• A personal relationship to the party or their attorney. Alternatively, if the judge or prosecutor has a personal relationship to either the defendant or their lawyer, they cannot be expected to be fair, it doesn’t matter if this means the defendant is a loved one or a neighbor the judge or prosecutor sued in the past, if the two have a relationship beyond a simple acquaintance (just being friends on Facebook isn’t enough), the judge or prosecutor needs to recuse themselves.
• An economic interest in the case. While this is more commonly a problem for judges handling civil cases, it can still affect criminal ones as well. For example, if the prosecutor’s wife holds a lot of stock in a company being tried for fraud (which would likely result in the stock plummeting if the company is found guilty), he might be, or at least seem, less likely to try very hard to prove the company’s guilt, which is why he would be expected to recuse himself in such a case.
• A judge’s personal knowledge of disputed facts. This is less of a problem for prosecutors, but often there is evidence uncovered during the investigation of a case that is not actually admitted in the factual record of the case or that conflicts with the evidence presented in court. If a judge knows about such evidence, it could stop her from being impartial and she should recuse herself. Similarly, if a judge was the prosecutor in a case years ago that is later appealed, she could not judge the appeal.

What Happens if Someone Refuses to Recuse Themselves

Most judges and prosecutors will automatically recuse themselves if they feel there is a conflict of interest. If they do not, the defendant’s criminal attorney can file a motion to have the either judge or prosecutor recused from the case and the prosecutor can file one to have the judge recused. The judge may then determine if the prosecutor should be recused and will also make the determination about whether or not he should be recused if it was against him. If he decides he should not be recused, the side that filed the motion can then be able to have the motion heard by a higher judge.

If it is discovered after the fact that the judge or prosecutor should have recused themselves and did not, the case can be appealed and the court may order a new trial. The judge or prosecutor may also face disciplinary measures, which could even include disbarment.

When Defense Lawyers Have Conflicts of Interest

It’s worth knowing that defense lawyers can be conflicted on cases but it is not the same as recusal. The usual grounds are that a defense lawyer shouldn’t represent more than one defendant on a case. Another conflict is the defense lawyer has previously represented a co-defendant or a witness in the case.

Anyone who believes their motion to recuse a judge or prosecutor was improperly denied should tell their lawyer and be sure to include all relevant details regarding why they believe the judge or prosecutor should recuse themselves.

source 

28 U.S. Code § 144 – Bias or prejudice of judge

Rule 2.3: Bias, Prejudice, and Harassment

(A) A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office, including administrative duties, without bias or prejudice.

(B) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, or engage in harassment, including but not limited to bias, prejudice, or harassment based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, and shall not permit court staff, court officials, or others subject to the judge’s direction and control to do so.

(C) A judge shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice, or engaging in harassment, based upon attributes including but not limited to race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, against parties, witnesses, lawyers, or others.

(D) The restrictions of paragraphs (B) and (C) do not preclude judges or lawyers from making legitimate reference to the listed factors, or similar factors, when they are relevant to an issue in a proceeding.

Tort Claims Form File Government Claim for Eligible Compensation

Complete and submit the Government Claim Form, including the required $25 filing fee or Fee Waiver Request, and supporting documents, to the GCP.

See Information Guides and Resources below for more information.

Tort Claims – Claim for Damage, Injury, or Death

• Federal –  Federal SF-95 Tort Claim Form Tort Claim online here or download it here or here from us

• California – California Tort Claims Act – California Tort Claim Form Here or here from us

• Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights (Non-Prisoner Complaint) and also UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT PDF

Taken from the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Forms source

GRANDPARENT CASE LAW 

Do Grandparents Have Visitation Rights? If there is an Established Relationship then Yes

Third “PRESUMED PARENT” Family Code 7612(C) – Requires Established Relationship Required

Cal State Bar PDF to read about Three Parent Law –
The State Bar of California family law news issue4 2017 vol. 39, no. 4.pdf

Distinguishing Request for Custody from Request for Visitation

Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) – Grandparents – 14th Amendment

S.F. Human Servs. Agency v. Christine C. (In re Caden C.)

9.32 Particular Rights – Fourteenth Amendment – Interference with Parent / Child Relationship

Child’s Best Interest in Custody Cases

When is a Joinder in a Family Law Case Appropriate? – Reason for Joinder

Joinder In Family Law Cases – CRC Rule 5.24

GrandParents Rights To Visit
Family Law Packet OC Resource Center
Family Law Packet SB Resource Center

Motion to vacate an adverse judgment

Mandatory Joinder vs Permissive Joinder – Compulsory vs Dismissive Joinder

When is a Joinder in a Family Law Case Appropriate?

Kyle O. v. Donald R. (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 848

Punsly v. Ho (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 1099

Zauseta v. Zauseta (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 1242

S.F. Human Servs. Agency v. Christine C. (In re Caden C.)

Ian J. v. Peter M

Can I Use Text Messages in My California Divorce?

Two-Steps And Voila: How To Authenticate Text Messages

How Your Texts Can Be Used As Evidence?

California Supreme Court Rules:
Text Messages Sent on Private Government Employees Lines
Subject to Open Records Requests

case law: City of San Jose v. Superior Court – Releasing Private Text/Phone Records of Government  Employees

Public Records Practices After the San Jose Decision

The Decision Briefing Merits After the San Jose Decision

Here is the Public Records Service Act Portal for all of CALIFORNIA Click Here

Rules of Admissibility – Evidence Admissibility

Confrontation Clause – Sixth Amendment

Exceptions To The Hearsay Rule – Confronting Evidence

Prosecutor’s Obligation to Disclose Exculpatory Evidence

Successful Brady/Napue Cases – Suppression of Evidence

Cases Remanded or Hearing Granted Based on Brady/Napue Claims

Unsuccessful But Instructive Brady/Napue Cases

ABA – Functions and Duties of the Prosecutor – Prosecution Conduct

Frivolous, Meritless or Malicious Prosecution – fiduciary duty

Police BodyCam Footage Release

Electronic Audio Recording Request of OC Court Hearings