In re Disqualification of Lucci, 2014 Ohio 2044

Perry filed an affidavit under R.C. 2701.03 seeking to disqualify Judge Lucci from presiding over resentencing in Lake County case 10CR00730.
Perry alleges the underlying case was improperly steered to Lucci and that Lucci’s comments during trial and failure to disqualify Perry’s counsel show bias.
Lucci responded denying any bias or prejudice.
Disqualification proceeding is limited to whether a pending judge has bias or a disqualifying interest warranting removal; Perry’s arguments are asserted as grounds for disqualification.
The court finds no bias or disqualifying interest; the assignment to Lucci followed a local rule, and the alleged comments and rulings do not establish bias; issues raised are better addressed on appeal or in other proceedings; the affidavit is denied and resentencing may proceed before Lucci.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the assignment to Lucci evidence of bias?	Perry argues the local rule stacking cases to the same judge shows bias against him.	Lucci argues adherence to the local rule is procedural, not bias; rule compliance does not prove prejudice.	No bias shown; assignment per local rule does not warrant disqualification.
Do Lucci’s comments during proceedings show bias?	Perry claims the judge attempted to intimidate him and displayed hostility.	Lucci contends comments were to inform about self-representation risks, not hostility.	No bias demonstrated; statements do not prove disqualifying prejudice.
Does Lucci’s refusal to disqualify counsel indicate bias?	Perry argues improper suitability of court-appointed counsel warrants disqualification.	Disagreement with rulings is not bias and not a basis for disqualification.	No bias shown; issue is a matter for appeal, not disqualification.
Is the affidavit of disqualification itself warranted given the record?	Perry asserts grounds for disqualification exist.	Arguments are not sufficient to show bias or disqualifying interest.	Affidavit denied; disqualification not warranted.

In re Griffin, 101 Ohio St.3d 1219 (2003-Ohio-7356) (limits disqualification issues to bias or disqualifying interest; scope of proceedings)
In re O’Neill, 100 Ohio St.3d 1232 (2002-Ohio-7479) (defines bias as hostile or prejudicial attitude toward party or attorney)
Pratt v. Weygandt, 164 Ohio St. 463 (1956) (establishes standard for bias concepts in disqualification)
In re Floyd, 101 Ohio St.3d 1217 (2003-Ohio-7351) (disqualification rulings reviewable; dissatisfaction with rulings alone not bias)