Case Title: In re Disqualification of Piper

Citation: 2020-Ohio-5362

Docket Number: 20-AP-100

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2020-11-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Piper, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2020-Ohio-5362.] 
 
 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF PIPER. 
THE STATE OF OHIO v. STEPP. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Piper, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2020-Ohio-5362.] 
Judges—Affidavits of disqualification—R.C. 2501.13 and 2701.03—Affidavit 
dismissed as moot. 
(No. 20-AP-100—Decided November 17, 2020.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Twelfth District Court of Appeals Case 
No. CA-2020-05-0062. 
____________ 
O’CONNOR, C.J. 
{¶ 1} Appellant, Brian T. Stepp, has filed an affidavit pursuant to R.C. 
2501.13 and 2701.03 seeking to disqualify Judge Robin N. Piper, a judge of the 
Twelfth District Court of Appeals, from the above-referenced case. 
{¶ 2} Mr. Stepp alleges that Judge Piper, while serving as the Butler County 
Prosecuting Attorney, had a significant role in prosecuting Mr. Stepp in Butler 
County case No. CR 2004 02 0266.  The underlying matter is an appeal from a May 
2020 judgment overruling some of Mr. Stepp’s postconviction motions in that 
criminal matter. 
{¶ 3} Judge Piper filed a response to the affidavit and acknowledged that 
when he served as the prosecutor, he was involved in the investigation and 
prosecution of Mr. Stepp.  The judge further states that he is not a member of the 
panel assigned to the underlying appeal and that, regardless, he would not 
participate in Mr. Stepp’s appeal due to his prior involvement in the matter. 
{¶ 4} Because Judge Piper is not assigned to the underlying appeal—and 
has affirmed that he will not participate in it—Mr. Stepp’s affidavit of 
disqualification is dismissed as moot.  See also Jud.Cond.R. 2.11(A)(7)(b) 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
(requiring a judge who formerly served as a government lawyer to disqualify 
himself or herself from any particular matter in which he or she personally and 
substantially participated as a governmental lawyer); Williams v. Pennsylvania, ___ 
U.S. ___, 136 S.Ct. 1899, 1905, 195 L.Ed.2d 132 (2016) (“under the Due Process 
Clause there is an impermissible risk of actual bias when a judge earlier had 
significant, personal involvement as a prosecutor in a critical decision regarding the 
defendant’s case”). 
________________________