STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
RACHEL LYNN SCHARLEPP
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida First District Court of Appeal granted the State's petition for a writ of prohibition to disqualify a trial judge who attempted to refute charges of partiality in denying the defendant's motion to disqualify, thereby exceeding the proper scope of judicial inquiry.
A trial judge must be disqualified when the judge attempts to refute charges of partiality rather than merely determining the legal sufficiency of a suggestion of prejudice.
[1] A trial judge exceeds the proper scope of judicial inquiry and establishes grounds for disqualification by attempting to refute charges of partiality rather than merely d…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“When a judge has looked beyond the mere legal sufficiency of a suggestion of prejudice and has attempted to refute the charges of partiality, he has then exceeded the proper scope of his inquiry and on that basis alone established grounds for his disqualification.”
Bundy v. Rudd, 366 So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 1978), establishing the controlling standard for judicial disqualification based on attempted refutation of partiality charges.
The State sought a writ of prohibition to disqualify the trial judge in a pending criminal matter against Rachel Lynn Scharlepp. The trial judge denie…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Judicial Disqualification cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The state seeks a writ of prohibition disqualifying the trial judge in a pending criminal matter. We agree that in denying the state’s second motion to disqualify, the trial judge attempted to refute the charges of partiality. This created an independent basis for disqualification. See Bundy v. Rudd, 366 So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 1978) (“When a judge has looked beyond the mere legal sufficiency of a suggestion of prejudice and has attempted to refute the charges of partiality, he has then exceeded the proper scope of his inquiry and on that basis alone established grounds for his disqualification.”); accord Lee Mem’l Health Sys. v. State, Agency for Health Care Admin., 910 So. 2d 892, 893 (Fla 1st DCA 2005); Martin v. State, 820 So. 2d 403, 404 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2002). We grant the petition but withhold formal issuance of the writ as we are confident the judge will promptly issue an order of disqualification.
RAY, OSTERHAUS, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jason W. Rodriguez, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Petitioner.
Thomas M. Findley of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blalock v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)
-
Wagner v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Sanford Freed, 366 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 1978)
- LEE Mem'l Health Sys. v. State, 910 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
- Bundy v. Rudd, 366 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 1978)
- Martin v. State, 820 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Wilfredo Delgado v. State, 820 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)