Case Title: In re Disqualification of Ruehlman

Citation: 2013-Ohio-1780

Docket Number: 13-AP-022

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2013-04-09T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Ruehlman, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2013-Ohio-1780.] 
 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF RUEHLMAN. 
THE STATE OF OHIO v. SWEETING. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Ruehlman, ___ Ohio St.3d ___,  
2013-Ohio-1780.] 
Judges—Affidavit of disqualification—R.C. 2701.03—Affiant failed to identify any 
matter currently pending before judge against whom affidavit was filed—
Affidavit denied. 
(No. 13-AP-022—Decided April 9, 2013.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas 
Case No. B-1203527. 
__________________ 
O’CONNOR, C.J. 
{¶ 1} Defendant in the underlying case, Deion L. Sweeting, has filed an 
affidavit with the clerk of this court under R.C. 2701.03 seeking to disqualify 
Judge Robert P. Ruehlman from presiding over any further proceedings in case 
No. B-1203527 in the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County. 
{¶ 2} Sweeting alleges that Judge Ruehlman threatened to place an 
electronic stun belt on him during trial, indicated that his motions would be 
overruled, and denied him “stand by counsel assistance.”  As support, Sweeting 
submitted isolated pages from an undated transcript. 
{¶ 3} Judge Ruehlman did not specifically respond to the allegations 
against him.  Instead, he submitted the entire June 13, 2012 transcript from which 
the pages submitted by Sweeting were taken.  Judge Ruehlman explains that the 
entire transcript “puts the excerpts selected by Mr. Sweeting in context.” 
{¶ 4} The transcript shows that Judge Ruehlman informed Sweeting that 
he would “probably” order that Sweeting wear an “electronic belt” at the trial and 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
that if Sweeting got “out of hand,” he would get “zapped.”  It is not obvious from 
the transcript why Judge Ruehlman thought that Sweeting would “probably” wear 
an electronic belt, and because Judge Ruehlman did not otherwise respond to the 
allegations against him, the record does not indicate why the judge thought that 
such a strong warning was justified.  “[A] judge’s failure to respond to allegations 
of bias and prejudice may result in the judge’s disqualification to avoid the 
appearance of impropriety.”  In re Disqualification of Corrigan, 94 Ohio St.3d 
1234, 763 N.E.2d 602 (2001).  See also In re Disqualification of Floyd, 101 Ohio 
St.3d 1215, 2003-Ohio-7354, 803 N.E.2d 816, ¶ 9 (“statements sworn to by the 
affiant, and unchallenged by the judge, could suggest to a reasonable person the 
appearance of impropriety”).  Here, Judge Ruehlman’s failure to respond to the 
allegations in the affidavit could have led to his disqualification. 
{¶ 5} But despite the judge’s omissions, Sweeting has not identified any 
matter currently pending before Judge Ruehlman, and therefore his affidavit is not 
well taken.  Sweeting vaguely claims that various motions remain pending before 
the trial court, but he also admits there is “no pending court date.”  And the 
common pleas court docket shows that Sweeting appealed his convictions and 
that his appeal remains pending.  “[T]he chief justice cannot rule on an affidavit 
of disqualification when the affiant fails to specify what is currently pending 
before the judge against whom the affidavit is filed.”  In re Disqualification of 
Hayes, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2012-Ohio-6306, ___ N.E.2d ___, ¶ 4. 
{¶ 6} For the reasons stated above, the affidavit of disqualification is 
denied. 
______________________