State v. Lister (In re Knece)
This text of 130 N.E.3d 306 (State v. Lister (In re Knece)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
*1337{¶ 1} Defendant Travin Lister has filed an affidavit with the clerk of this court pursuant to R.C. 2701.03 seeking to disqualify Judge P. Randall Knece from presiding over any further proceedings in the above-referenced case.
{¶ 2} Mr. Lister claims that Judge Knece is biased against him based on the judge's rulings throughout the underlying case and a comment that the judge allegedly made at the defendant's 2013 sentencing. Judge Knece has responded in writing to the affidavit and denies any bias against Mr. Lister.
{¶ 3} It is well established that "[a]dverse rulings, without more, are not evidence that a judge is biased or prejudiced." In re Disqualification of Russo ,
{¶ 4} Further, it is also well established that an affidavit of disqualification must be filed "as soon as possible after the incident giving rise to the claim of bias and prejudice occurred," and failure to do so may result in waiver of the objection, especially when "the facts underlying the objection have been known to the party for some time." In re Disqualification of O'Grady ,
{¶ 5} Finally, "absent extraordinary circumstances, a judge will not be subject to disqualification after having presided over lengthy proceedings in a pending case." In re Disqualification of Celebrezze ,
{¶ 6} The affidavit of disqualification is denied. The case may proceed before Judge Knece.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
130 N.E.3d 306, 2019 Ohio 3247, 156 Ohio St. 3d 1337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lister-in-re-knece-ohio-2019.