Title: In re Disqualification of Shuff

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as In re Disqualification of Shuff, 117 Ohio St.3d 1230, 2004-Ohio-7355.] 
 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF SHUFF. 
THE STATE OF OHIO v. THOMAS. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Shuff,  
117 Ohio St.3d 1230, 2004-Ohio-7355.] 
Judges — Affidavit of disqualification — Disqualification denied, when. 
(No. 04-AP-113 — Decided December 2, 2004.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Seneca County  
Court of Common Pleas, No. 04-CR-215. 
____________________ 
Reporter's Note:  The previously published version of this opinion omitted a 
complete citation that has been added to this version of the opinion.  This version 
of the opinion supersedes the version that appears at 105 Ohio St.3d 1250, 826 
N.E.2d 308. 
____________________ 
 
MOYER, C.J. 
{¶ 1} Attorney Jonathan G. Stotzer — on behalf of the defendant — has 
filed an affidavit with the Clerk of this court under R.C. 2701.03, seeking the 
disqualification of Judge Steve C. Shuff from acting in any further proceedings in 
case No. 04-CR-215 in the Court of Common Pleas of Seneca County. 
{¶ 2} Affiant alleges that the judge is a cousin of defendant Thomas’s 
co-defendant, Jacquelyn Shuff.  The prosecuting attorney evidently intends to call 
Shuff as a witness at Thomas’s upcoming trial before Judge Shuff, and that 
scenario would place the judge in a situation in which his fairness and impartiality 
might reasonably be questioned, affiant alleges. 
{¶ 3} Judge Shuff has responded to the affidavit, and he states in his 
response that Shuff is a distant cousin with whom he has had little or no contact 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
during the past ten years.  The judge indicates that he does not know the 
defendant and holds no bias or prejudice against him. 
{¶ 4} I find no basis for ordering the disqualification of Judge Shuff.  
Canon 3(E)(1)(d)(v) of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct would compel the 
judge’s disqualification if “a person within the third degree of relationship” to him 
was “likely to be a material witness” in the case.  Yet Judge Shuff states that 
Jacquelyn Shuff is his fourth or fifth cousin. 
{¶ 5} To be sure, the judge nonetheless has an obligation to step aside if 
his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.  He denies, however, holding any 
bias or prejudice as a result of his distant relationship with Shuff, and he does not 
appear to have had many — if any — contacts with her in recent years.  I have 
“decline[d] to establish a rule that mandates the judge’s disqualification based on 
the existence of [a mere] friendship,” In re Disqualification of Bressler (1997), 81 
Ohio St.3d 1215, 1216, 688 N.E.2d 517, and the same can be said for more 
remote social or familial relationships like the one in this case. 
{¶ 6} Generally, the more intimate the relationship between a judge and 
a person who is involved in a pending proceeding, the more acute is the concern 
that the judge may be tempted to depart from the expected judicial detachment or 
to reasonably appear to have done so.  Flamm, Judicial Disqualification (1996) 
225, Section 8.2.  Given the distant familial relationship between the judge and 
the potential witness, given the apparently distant social connections between 
them, and given the judge’s assurances that he can decide the case impartially, I 
conclude that disqualification is not warranted in this case.  As I said recently, 
“[a] judge is presumed to follow the law and not to be biased, and the appearance 
of bias or prejudice must be compelling to overcome these presumptions.”  In re 
Disqualification of George, 100 Ohio St.3d 1241, 2003-Ohio-5489, 798 N.E.2d 
23, ¶ 5.  Those presumptions have not been overcome in this case. 
 
3
{¶ 7} For the reasons stated above, the affidavit of disqualification is 
denied.  The case shall proceed before Judge Shuff. 
____________________