Case Title: In re Disqualification of OFarrell

Citation: 2001-Ohio-4099

Docket Number: 2001AP017

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2001-03-07T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as In re Disqualification of O’Farrell, 94 Ohio St.3d 1225, 2001-Ohio-4099.] 
 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF O’FARRELL. 
THE STATE OF OHIO v. ARNDER. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of O’Farrell (2001), 94 Ohio St.3d 1225.] 
Judges — Affidavit of disqualification — Judge who presides over pretrial bail 
hearing pursuant to R.C. 2937.222 is not disqualified from presiding at 
trial, when. 
(No. 01-AP-017 — Decided March 7, 2001.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Tuscarawas County Court of Common 
Pleas case No. 2001CR020053. 
__________________ 
 
MOYER, C.J.  This affidavit of disqualification filed by Gerald Latanich, 
counsel for defendant, seeks the disqualification of Judge Edward O’Farrell from 
further proceedings regarding the above-captioned case, State v. Robert C. 
Arnder, Sr. 
 
Affiant asserts that Judge O’Farrell should be disqualified from further 
proceedings in the underlying case because he presided over a pretrial bail hearing 
pursuant to R.C. 2937.222.  In support of this assertion, affiant relies on the case 
of State v. Gillard (1988), 40 Ohio St.3d 226, 533 N.E.2d 272, in which the 
Supreme Court held that a trial judge who presides over a Crim.R. 16(B)(1)(e) 
motion hearing cannot preside over a subsequent trial in the same case.  Affiant 
claims that the testimony presented at the bail hearing in the underlying case was 
similar to the type of evidence at issue in Gillard and that Judge O’Farrell’s 
consideration of that testimony jeopardizes the appearance of impartiality in 
subsequent proceedings. 
 
The record before me contains no evidence to support affiant’s claim that 
the testimony heard by Judge O’Farrell will adversely affect the perception of the 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
judge’s fairness and impartiality.  Without a transcript of the bail hearing that 
includes the testimony considered by Judge O’Farrell, I cannot conclude that the 
holding in Gillard should be applied to this proceeding or to R.C. 2937.222 bail 
hearings in general.  Moreover, affiant’s claims that the judge’s consideration of 
this evidence will impair his ability to remain fair and impartial are speculative 
and more appropriately addressed on appeal of any conviction that may result 
from the impending trial. 
 
For these reasons, the affidavit of disqualification is found not well taken 
and is denied.  The case shall proceed before Judge O’Farrell. 
__________________