State v. Wendy L. Shoob, Judge, Fulton Superior Court

Court of Appeals of Georgia

State v. Wendy L. Shoob, Judge, Fulton Superior Court

DecidedJune 22, 2015

DocketA15E0035

StatusPublished

This text of State v. Wendy L. Shoob, Judge, Fulton Superior Court (State v. Wendy L. Shoob, Judge, Fulton Superior Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Wendy L. Shoob, Judge, Fulton Superior Court, (Ga. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ June 10, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15E0033. IN RE KHASIN. A15E0034, A15E0035, A15E0036. THE STATE v. SHOOB (three cases).

A superior court has entered an order and filed it in a case styled, “In re Khasin,” Case Number 2015-EX-00741, in which the judge purports to recuse from matters handled by a particular assistant district attorney, but not from the cases themselves.1 The State has filed four emergency motions, one directly arising from the order in In re Khasin and three to stay specific criminal cases potentially affected by the Khasin order.2 These emergency motions, however, do not meet the requirements of Court of Appeals Rule 40 (b) because direction to the trial court is “not necessary to preserve jurisdiction of an appeal or to prevent the contested issue from becoming moot.”3 Accordingly, the emergency motions are DENIED.

1 Uniform Superior Court Rule 25 explains the procedures for recusal from a particular case or proceeding. See also In re Inquiry Concerning a Judge No.93-154, 263 Ga. 883, 884 (440 SE2d 169) (1994) (“Questions of recusal must be considered on a case-by-case basis, applying the pertinent laws of this State.”); Ga. Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 2.11 (A) (“Judges shall disqualify themselves in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned, or in which: (1) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer. . . .”) (emphasis omitted). 2 The State has styled the three emergency motions to stay in the criminal cases as against the superior court judge in her official capacity. 3 We note that the appeal of In re Khasin was docketed in this court on June 10, 2015. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 06/10/2015 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ June 10, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15E0033. IN RE KHASIN. A15E0034, A15E0035, A15E0036. THE STATE v. SHOOB (three cases).

A superior court has entered an order and filed it in a case styled, “In re Khasin,” Case Number 2015-EX-00741, in which the judge purports to recuse from matters handled by a particular assistant district attorney, but not from the cases themselves.1 The State has filed four emergency motions, one directly arising from the order in In re Khasin and three to stay specific criminal cases potentially affected by the Khasin order.2 These emergency motions, however, do not meet the requirements of Court of Appeals Rule 40 (b) because direction to the trial court is “not necessary to preserve jurisdiction of an appeal or to prevent the contested issue from becoming moot.”3 Accordingly, the emergency motions are DENIED.

1 Uniform Superior Court Rule 25 explains the procedures for recusal from a particular case or proceeding. See also In re Inquiry Concerning a Judge No.93-154, 263 Ga. 883, 884 (440 SE2d 169) (1994) (“Questions of recusal must be considered on a case-by-case basis, applying the pertinent laws of this State.”); Ga. Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 2.11 (A) (“Judges shall disqualify themselves in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned, or in which: (1) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer. . . .”) (emphasis omitted). 2 The State has styled the three emergency motions to stay in the criminal cases as against the superior court judge in her official capacity. 3 We note that the appeal of In re Khasin was docketed in this court on June 10, 2015. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 06/10/2015 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Wendy L. Shoob, Judge, Fulton Superior Court, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wendy-l-shoob-judge-fulton-superior-court-gactapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack