NEALON LEO DUMAS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A judge must be disqualified when he prejudges a case by making specific comments expressing a predetermined belief about the defendant's guilt before any evidence is introduced.
[1] A judge must be disqualified when he makes specific comments before any evidence is introduced expressing a predetermined belief about a defendant's guilt, as such prejud…
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“While a judge may form mental impressions and opinions during the course of hearing evidence, he or she may not, as it appears the presiding judge did here, prejudge the case.”
Court explaining the distinction between permissible judicial reasoning and impermissible prejudgment
Nealon Leo Dumas was charged with a crime. At a scheduling conference, the presiding judge commented that he believed Dumas intended to commit the cri…
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 Prejudgment Of Case cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
NEALON LEO DUMAS,
Petitioner,
v. Case No. 5D21-2748 LT Case No. 2019-CF-001123-A
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent.
________________________________/
Opinion filed December 30, 2021
Petition for Writ of Prohibition, Richard A. Howard, Respondent Judge.
J. Michael Blackstone, Crystal River, for
Petitioner.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Roberts J. Bradford, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
Nealon Leo Dumas petitions this Court for a writ of prohibition following the denial of his motion to disqualify the presiding judge. Because the motion
2 to disqualify was legally sufficient and timely, we grant the writ. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330.
A party may seek disqualification of the assigned trial judge when “the party reasonably fears that he or she will not receive a fair trial or hearing because of specifically described prejudice or bias of the judge.” Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(e)(1). To be legally sufficient the motion to disqualify must establish a “well-grounded fear on the part of the movant that he will not receive a fair hearing,” and such fear must be objective rather than subjective. Lynch v. State, 2 So. 3d 47, 78 (Fla. 2008) (quoting Arbelaez v. State, 898 So. 2d 25, 41 (Fla. 2005)). Here, Petitioner has met that burden. Petitioner alleges that at a scheduling conference the presiding judge commented—before the State had offered evidence in the case—that he believed Petitioner intended to commit the crime he was being charged with. Specifically, Petitioner alleges in his motion to disqualify that the presiding judge opined that Petitioner traveled to Volusia County to “molest that little girl.” While a judge may form mental impressions and opinions during the course of hearing evidence, he or she may not, as it appears the presiding
3 judge did here,1 prejudge the case. Minaya v. State, 118 So. 3d 926, 929 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013). We find that the specific comments made by the presiding judge, before evidence was ever introduced in this case, would put a reasonably prudent person in well-founded fear of not receiving a fair or impartial hearing or trial. Wargo v. Wargo, 669 So. 2d 1123, 1125 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of prohibition and remand this case for assignment to a different judge.
PETITION GRANTED.
EISNAUGLE, HARRIS and NARDELLA
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Arbelaez v. State, 898 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 2005)
- Lynch v. State, 2 So. 3d 47 (Fla. 2008)
- Wargo v. Bettina Li Belles Wargo and Julie Koenig, 669 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Tanisha Roebuck v. State, 118 So. 3d 926 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)