Navigation Disclosure, recusal discretionary for judges who previously served as sheriff’s counsel
A judge’s prior employment as chief legal counsel for the sheriff’s office does not, by itself, require disqualification from presiding over criminal cases where the deputies appear only as investigative witnesses; as such, disclosure is not mandatory and remains within the judge’s discretion, is the conclusion of the Judicial Ethics Advisory Council.
Acting September 12 in JEAC Opinion 2025-15, the panel answers an inquiry as to whether a judge’s recusal or self-disqualification is required “from presiding over criminal cases where the deputies from the sheriff’s office are appearing as investigative witnesses, not as a party, when the judge was previously employed as chief legal counsel for the sheriff’s office.”
The inquiry also addresses “[w]hether a judge must disclose in every criminal case over which they preside that the judge was previously employed as counsel for the sheriff wherein the sheriff’s office is the investigating entity, meaning that the sheriff’s office employees are not ‘litigants’ but rather agents of the State or witnesses.”
