What procedure should a judge use after disclosing possible connections to a witness and victim in a pending case?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2015. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A judge in a criminal new-trial proceeding had disclosed a former landlord relationship with a witness and a possible church connection to the victim. The judge sought guidance about possible recusal.
The Commission quoted Trial Court Rule 17.02 on voluntary recusal without a filed motion. It directed the judge to send the Chief Justice a timely letter about whether recusal was needed under Trial Court Rule 17 et seq. The opinion gives that procedural direction rather than deciding the underlying recusal question.
In practice
The opinion directs a timely letter to the Chief Justice under the cited voluntary recusal procedure.
Common questions
Q: Did the Commission decide whether the judge was disqualified?
A: No. It directed the judge to seek the Chief Justice’s ruling under Trial Court Rule 17.
Q: What must the judge send?
A: A timely letter stating the possible basis for recusal under the cited procedure.
Background and rules framework
Trial Court Rule 17.02 describes voluntary recusal without a filed motion and referral to the Chief Justice under Rule 17.01. The opinion applies that procedure to the judge’s disclosed relationships.
Citations and references
West Virginia Trial Court Rules:
- Rules 17.02 and 17.01(b)–(d), voluntary recusal and Chief Justice review.
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 2015-12, redacted
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.
JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
City Center East - Suite i 200 A
4700 MacCorkle Ave,, SE
Charleston, West Virginia 25304
(304) 558-0169 • FAX (304) 558-0831
August 6, 2015
Re: JlC Advisory Opinion 2015-12
Dear
Your recent request for an advisory opinion was reviewed by the Judicial Investigation Commlsslon. The factual scenario giving rise to your request is as follows: At a hearing on a Defendant's Motion for a New Trial, you disclosed that a witness in the underlying trial was one of your former tenants. You also disclosed that certain testimony adduced at trial alluded to a personal and professional acquaintance. The Defendant then stated that the victim in the case had attended vacation bible school at your church and that you may have been the class instructor. You do not recall meeting the victlm.
According to you, after hearing such information from the defense counsel, you Indicated crn the record that you would seek guidance from the. West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals regarding a need for recusal, Before doing s0 1 you thought it prudent to seek a fom1al opinion from the Judicial Investigation Commission.
TriaLCourt Rule (hereinafter "TCR") 171 et seq, governs the disqualification and temporary assignment of Judges. TCR 17.02 provides in pertinent part:
In the absence of a disqualification motion having been filed ... a judge seeking voluntary recusal shall so inform the parties and shall proceed pursuant to the applicable provisions of TCR 17.0i(b), provided that in lieu of a motion and certificate, the judge shall transmit to the Chief
JIC Advisory Opinion 2015-12
August 6, 2015
Page 2
Justice a letter stating the reasons why the judge is requesting recusal with reference to the relevant section(s) of the Code of Judicial Conduct and the Chief Justice shall rule pursuant to TCR 17.0l(c) or TCR 17.0l(d).
Therefore, you should timely transmit your letter concerning whether or not you should be recused from the defendant's case to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia pursuant to TCR 17, et seq.
It is hoped that this opinion fully addresses the issues which you have raised. If there Is any further question regarding this matter do not hesitate to contact the Commission.
/
;;;~_,_____"
Ronald E. Wilson, Chairperson
....
Judicial Investigation Commission
REW/tat
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2015. 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