In re Disqualification of Farmer
139 Ohio St. 3d 1202
| Ohio | 2014Background
- Affidavit filed under R.C. 2701.03 by defense counsel Kenneth W. Frame seeking to disqualify Judge Kristin G. Farmer from Stark C.P. No. 2013CR1718.
- Frame's claim: Judge Farmer’s husband, a sergeant in the Alliance Police Department, supervised the officers who arrested the defendant and are witnesses at trial.
- Judge Farmer admits spouse is an Alliance PD sergeant, says she routinely recuses when he’s involved, but denies he supervised the arresting officers in this matter.
- Judge Farmer submitted her husband’s affidavit, payroll record for the time in question, and police reports identifying the arresting officers; those documents show the incident occurred on the midnight shift while her husband worked the afternoon shift and was off that day.
- Frame submitted only his affidavit; he provided no independent evidence that the judge’s husband supervised the arresting officers or that he is a material witness.
- Judge Farmer affirmed she can be fair and impartial; court evaluated automatic-disqualification rules and the objective appearance-of-impropriety standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whether automatic disqualification applies because judge’s spouse is likely to be a material witness | Frame: spouse supervised arresting officers who are witnesses, so spouse is likely a material witness | Farmer: spouse was not involved in investigation or arrest and is not listed as a witness | Denied — no evidence spouse was a material witness; Jud.Cond.R. 2.11(A)(2)(d) not triggered | |
| Whether judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned (appearance of impropriety) | Frame: spousal relationship with an Alliance PD sergeant creates appearance of bias | Farmer: spouse not connected to this arrest; submitted records showing no supervisory role at time; she can be impartial | Denied — objective observer would not harbor serious doubts given facts and lack of supporting evidence | |
| Burden of proof in affidavit-of-disqualification proceedings | Frame: alleged bias based on spouse’s department role | Farmer: produced documentary evidence contradicting allegations | Court: burden on affiant to produce evidence beyond bare affidavit; affiant failed to meet it | Denied — unsubstantiated affidavit insufficient |
| Whether precedent requires recusal when judge’s spouse is employed by police or prosecutor’s office | Frame: implies department connection is disqualifying | Farmer: contends mere employment is insufficient absent involvement in case | Court: follows precedent that spousal employment alone does not automatically disqualify; case-by-case inquiry required | Denied — consistent with prior Ohio authority |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Disqualification of Baronzzi, 135 Ohio St.3d 1212 (2012) (affiant must submit evidence beyond the affidavit to warrant disqualification)
- In re Disqualification of Walker, 36 Ohio St.3d 606 (1988) (vague, unsubstantiated allegations insufficient for finding of bias)
- In re Disqualification of Lewis, 117 Ohio St.3d 1227 (2004) (objective test: would a reasonable observer harbor serious doubts about impartiality)
- In re Disqualification of Carr, 105 Ohio St.3d 1233 (2004) (judge married to prosecutor’s office member not automatically disqualified absent participation in the case)
- In re Disqualification of Bates, 134 Ohio St.3d 1249 (2012) (denial where affiant offered no evidence spouse participated in preparation or presentation of the case)