GLENN WILLIAM PINFIELD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Pinfield appeals a circuit court's denial of his petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to disqualify a successor county court judge. The court reversed, holding that the circuit court applied an incorrect legal standard when reviewing a successor judge's denial of a disqualification motion under Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.160(g).
A successor judge is entitled to pass on the truth of facts alleged in support of a disqualification motion. On appellate review, the test is not whether the successor judge explicitly ruled that he is unfair and partial, but whether the record clearly refutes the judge's decision to deny the motion.
[1] A successor judge may pass on the truth of the facts alleged in support of a motion to disqualify.
[2] A successor judge is not disqualified on a successive motion unless the successor judge rules that he or she is in fact not fair or impartial in the case.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“If a judge has been previously disqualified on motion for alleged prejudice or partiality under subdivision (d)(1), a successor judge shall not be disqualified based on a successive motion by the same party unless the successor judge rules that he or she is in fact not fair or impartial in the case.”
States the rule governing disqualification of successor judges and the conditions under which they may be disqualified
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAfter county court judge A.B. Majeed was disqualified upon Pinfield's motion, a successor judge, John C. Adkins, was assigned to the case. Pinfield fi…
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 Disqualification Of Judge cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
The appellant appeals from an order denying his petition for writ of prohibition.1
This case involves a motion by the appellant to disqualify a successor county court judge, John C. Adkins, after the originally assigned county court judge, A.B. Majeed, had also been disqualified upon appellant’s motion. Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.160(g) provides:
Determination — Successive Motions. If a judge has been previously disqualified on motion for alleged prejudice or partiality under subdivision (d)(1), a successor judge shall not be disqualified based on a successive motion by the same party unless the successor judge rules that he or she is in fact not fair or impartial in the case. Such a successor judge may pass on the truth of the facts alleged in support of the motion.
After Judge Adkins denied the motion to disqualify, the appellant petitioned the circuit court for a writ of prohibition. The circuit court denied the petition, explaining:
The Court hereby denies the petition or complaint for writ of prohibition, because Judge John Adkins is a successor judge and the record does fail to indicate that Judge John Adkins ruled that he was in fact not fair and impartial in the case. Rule 2.160(g) of the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration. The circuit court appears to have construed Rule 2.160(g) as insulating from further review a decision of a successor judge denying disqualification so long as the judge does not actually rule that he is unfair and partial.
A successor judge is entitled by rule to pass on the truth of the facts alleged in support of a motion to disqualify. Fogan v. Fogan, 706 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). On review of the successor judge’s denial of a motion to disqualify, the test is not whether said judge explicitly ruled that he is in fact not fair and impartial but whether the record clearly refutes the successor judge’s decision to deny the motion.
The circuit court applied the wrong legal standard in considering the appellant’s petition for writ of prohibition. We reverse and remand for reconsideration based upon the correct legal standard.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
THOMPSON and ANTOON, JJ., concur. . A petition for writ of prohibition is the proper vehicle for obtaining review of a lower tribunal’s denial of a motion for disqualification. See Bundy v. Rudd, 366 So. 2d 440 (Fla.1978). An order of the circuit court ruling on a petition for writ of prohibition is a final order reviewable by appeal. See Guzzetta v. Hamrick, 656 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), rev. denied, 663 So. 2d 630 (Fla.1995).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sutton v. State, 975 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. 2008)…LEWIS, C.J. We have for review Sutton v. State, No. 1D05-5922 (Fla. 1st DCA Apr. 20, 2006), which expressly and directly conflicts with the decisions in Housing Authority of Tampa v. Burton, 873 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), Pinfield v. State, 710 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), and Guzzetta v. Hamrick, 656 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution.1 We approve the decision [*1075] under review for the reasons provided in our…
-
Kokal v. State, 901 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 2005)…ion, properly used the more stringent standard for a successive disqualification motion, and this Court’s standard of review of that denial is “whether the record clearly refutes the successor judge’s decision to deny the motion.” Pinfield v. State, 710 So. 2d 201, 202 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); see also King v. State, 840 So. 2d 1047, 1049 (Fla.2003) (“An order denying a motion pursuant to rule 2.160(g) is reviewed for abuse of discretion.”); Quince v. State, 732 So. 2d 1059, 1062 (Fla.1999) (“A court’s ruling on…
-
Ardis v. Ardis, 130 So. 3d 791 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…fy a successor judge is reviewed for abuse of discretion, see King v. State, 840 So. 2d 1047, 1049 (Fla. [*796] 2003), and should only be disturbed if “the record clearly refutes the successor judge’s decision to deny the motion.” Pinfield v. State, 710 So. 2d 201, 202 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); see also Quince v. State, 732 So. 2d 1059, 1062 (Fla.1999) (“A court’s ruling on a discretionary matter will be sustained unless no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the court.”). Ar-dis’s motion to disqualif…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Sanford Freed, 366 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 1978)
- Guzzetta v. Hon. Pope Hamrick, Jr., 656 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Fogan v. Fogan, 706 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)