Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Reforming Recusal Rules: Reassessing The Presumption Of Judicial Impartiality In Light Of The Realities Of Judging And Changing The Substance Of Disqualification Standards To Eliminate Cognitive Errors, Melinda A. Marbes
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
In recent years, high profile disqualification disputes have caught the attention of the public. In each instance there has been an outcry when a presiding jurist was asked to recuse but declined. Unfortunately, even if the jurist explains his refusal to recuse, the reasons given often are unsatisfying and do little to quell suspicions of bias. Instead, litigants, the press, and the public question whether the jurist actually is unbiased and doubt the impartiality of the judiciary as a whole. This negative reaction to refusals to recuse is caused, at least in part, by politically charged circumstances that cause further …
Judicial Disqualification And Recusal In Criminal Cases, Edward L. Wilkinson
Judicial Disqualification And Recusal In Criminal Cases, Edward L. Wilkinson
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
The United States Supreme Court has recognized circumstances in which the probability of judicial bias requiring disqualification or recusal is “too high to be constitutionally tolerable.” At the same time, the Texas Constitution contains a number of provisions barring a judge from presiding over a case under specific circumstances, while statutes and procedural rules either disqualify a judge or require him or her to be recused. Thus, whether a particular judge may preside over a given criminal case may be questioned under the Due Process Clause, the Texas Constitution, statue, or the rules of procedure. This Article will examine the …