State v. Kraus (In re Crawford), 2017 Ohio 9428

Steven Kraus, convicted in July 2015 of theft from an elderly person, filed postconviction motions asserting newly discovered e-mails showing possible selective prosecution and political interference; Sixth District affirmed the conviction on appeal.
Kraus alleges prosecutorial communications with his 2014 election opponent, Chris Redfern, and claims a close social relationship between Redfern and Judge Dale Crawford predating the conviction.
Kraus mailed his new filings to Judge Crawford’s home; the judge refused personal mail and the filings were returned, and Crawford had not been informed of those filings by local court staff.
Kraus filed a second affidavit of judicial disqualification under R.C. 2701.03, arguing Crawford’s refusal to accept filings, delay in ruling, and social ties to Redfern demonstrate bias and require disqualification.
Judge Crawford explained he routinely refuses pro se mail at home, relied on local clerk to forward filings, had socialized with Redfern several times since the trial but never discussed the case, and was unaware of the filings until after they were filed.
The court evaluated appearance-of-impropriety concerns given Crawford’s social familiarity with Redfern and the nature of Kraus’s allegations involving public officials and prosecutorial integrity.

Issue	Kraus's Argument	Crawford's Argument	Held
Whether Judge Crawford must be disqualified for bias/prejudice	Crawford’s refusal to accept filings, delay, and social ties to Redfern show bias and appearance of impropriety	Refuses pro se mail as policy, unaware of filings due to clerk breakdown, socializing did not involve case discussions	Granted: Crawford disqualified from further proceedings to avoid appearance of impropriety and preserve public confidence
Whether actual bias shown by facts alleged	Emails and alleged collusion with Redfern and prosecutors indicate partiality	No evidence of actual bias; explanations provided for actions and lack of knowledge	No finding of actual bias, but appearance concerns justify reassignment
Whether reassignment implies misconduct	N/A (Kraus seeks disqualification)	Reassignment will be procedural, not an assertion of misconduct by judge	Reassignment ordered without suggesting Crawford committed misconduct
Proper procedure for assigned judges to receive filings	N/A	Local clerks should forward filings; breakdown noted	Court admonishes local clerks to implement procedures to support visiting judges

In re Disqualification of Crawford, 152 Ohio St.3d 1201 (2016) (prior affidavit denial involving same judge)
State v. Kraus, 74 N.E.3d 880 (6th Dist. 2016) (appellate decision affirming conviction)
In re Disqualification of Saffold, 981 N.E.2d 869 (Ohio 2010) (appearance of bias can be as damaging as actual bias)
In re Disqualification of Murphy, 850 N.E.2d 712 (Ohio 2005) (appearance-of-impropriety standard for disqualification)
In re Disqualification of Lewis, 884 N.E.2d 1082 (Ohio 2004) (objective-observer test for appearance of impropriety)
State ex rel. Pratt v. Weygandt, 132 N.E.2d 191 (Ohio 1956) (importance of avoiding suspicion of judicial fairness)
Haslam v. Morrison, 190 P.2d 520 (Utah 1948) (quoted on the duty to avoid suspicion of fairness)