Did an Illinois judge have to recuse from every prosecution because the elected State’s Attorney was a recent private-practice colleague?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1998. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The judge and newly elected State’s Attorney had worked at the same private firm less than three years earlier. Assistant prosecutors, rather than the elected official, typically appeared before the judge.
The Committee concluded that former Rule 63C(1)(c) required disqualification when the elected State’s Attorney personally argued a case, whether the prior firm relationship was as partner or associate. It did not extend that automatic bar to cases argued by assistants in the public prosecutor’s office.
For a required disqualification, posting a general notice was insufficient to remit it. Former Rule 63D required disclosure on the record, consideration by parties and lawyers outside the judge’s presence, and a recorded agreement.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1998 under the 1993 Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct. The Committee’s page says that Code was superseded on January 1, 2023, and does not assess the effect of the 2023 Code. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Code before relying on its analysis.
Common questions
Q: Did every criminal case require recusal?
A: No. Cases handled by assistant State’s Attorneys were not automatically barred on the former-colleague ground.
Q: What if the elected State’s Attorney personally appeared?
A: The Committee required recusal within the former rule’s three-year period.
Q: Was a posted notice enough to waive the conflict?
A: No. The opinion required the former Rule 63D record and agreement procedure.
Background and rules framework
The Committee applied former Illinois Supreme Court Rules 63C(1)(c) and 63D. It cited IJEC Opinions 93-10, 95-15, and 95-20 while distinguishing private-firm association from government-office colleagues.
Citations and references
- Illinois Supreme Court Rules 63C(1)(c) and 63D.
- IJEC Opinions 93-10, 95-15, and 95-20.
See also
Source
- Landing page: Illinois Judicial Ethics Committee Opinion 1998-07
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1998. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace