Opinion ID: 2293324
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The trial judge's allegedly improper statements to Weber's counsel.

Text: Weber next claims that the trial judge made several improper statements to his defense counsel that, individually or cumulatively, violated Weber's right to a fair trial. Weber cites three exchanges between the trial judge and his defense counsel, but provides little or no explanation of how those exchanges unfairly prejudiced his rights. [31] Because Weber did not request a curative instruction to obviate the prejudice that he now asserts, we review Weber's claim for plain error. [32] Weber first cites the following exchange at sidebar: Trial Judge: As an aside, I think the officer identified [Weber's defense counsel] as the person he picked up. Prosecutor: Identified who? Trial Judge: [Weber's defense counsel] as the person that they picked up. I figure there's no miscarriage of justice there. Prosecutor: They wouldn't have let him go. Trial Judge: Good point. Weber fails to provide any analysis regarding how this exchange affected his right to a fair trial. Although the trial judge was apparently attempting to make a joke at the expense of Weber's defense counsel, we find no plain error. Weber next cites the following exchange from the same sidebar as the above comment: Trial Judge: Let [Weber's defense counsel] finish. Defense counsel: I mean Trial Judge: That unnerves me. I don't need those things in the courtroom, the phone. Defense counsel: It's off. It's silent. Trial Judge: Just take it off. Defense counsel: That's fine. I didn't know where to put it. Trial Judge: I was going to  I was ready to give you a suggestion, but that would be both rude, inappropriate, and highly improper. Weber's defense counsel explains: The Trial Court was referring to my cell phone which was off but apparently the Court did not like it that it was clipped to my waist. The phone did not go off since it was turned off but the Trial Court made an issue out of it in front of the jury that they knew what was occurring. Contrary to Weber's assertion that the trial judge made an issue out of [defense counsel's cell phone] in front of the jury, the record reflects that the exchange occurred during a sidebar conference. The trial judge deemed the cellular phone clipped to defense counsel's waist distracting and instructed him to remove it. Despite the trial judge's surprising comment following that request, the trial judge, nonetheless, properly exercised his authority to maintain courtroom decorum. [33] We find no plain error. Finally, Weber cites the following exchange: Trial Judge: What are you getting ready to ask? Defense counsel: I was going to ask him  Prosecutor: Can we do this at sidebar? Trial Judge: If you are going to ask him a question that I already ruled on, the answer is no. You did not look at driver's license DMV information. Unless you have something else that we did not discuss at sidebar, if you have something else that I did not rule on, come on over we will talk about it. Defense counsel: That's fine. [At sidebar] Defense counsel: I was going to ask him was that when you take pedigree, do you confirm the information from pedigree from the motor vehicle license; weight, height  Prosecutor: Then the next he is trying to get into the glasses thing, Your Honor, that is where he is going with this. He is trying to backdoor it. I don't have a problem if he  Trial Judge: You are cutting me off. Now, if you ask him does he confirm it, but he said he did not see the driver's license, he did not look at it, there is nothing  no other reason once he said that. Defense counsel: I believe he said I don't remember. I don't recall. Trial Judge: He said he didn't recall, that is kind of the end of it. There is nothing else if he says he did not see it, he didn't recall, didn't recall looking at it, then you are going ask him was he wearing glasses or something he did not see. So unless you can get him to say I saw something, he already said no. I think we are kind of stuck with that answer. Even if he did see the driver's license, at that point in time, he said he wasn't wearing glasses at the time that he was arrested, so, you know, comes a little more of a demur, so what. I don't know what else to do. Prosecutor: I will avoid a situation where [defense counsel] blurts out glasses in his question. Then that puts me in a position. Trial Judge: If he does that, I will do it twice. You will get sanctioned. Defense counsel: I don't intend to do that, not trying to do that. Trial Judge: This is a strict liability situation, if you do it, then you pay a penalty for it. I don't see  you don't have anything else. He did not see the license, did not compare it, and the fact that he may be required to wear glasses when he legally drives, of course he wasn't driving, legally driving a car at the time, the State's case is to be believed. So let's go ahead get on everything else through in that regard, then move on. Defense counsel: Fine. Again, Weber does not explain how this exchange affected his right to a fair trial, and we discern no plain error. In his Reply Brief, Weber makes a general allegation (unaccompanied by precise and pertinent references to the record) that the trial judge's hostility towards his attorney throughout the trial deprived him of his right to an unbiased judge. [34] Weber specifically claims that: When one looks at the whole trial and the number of statements and comments made about the undersign [ i.e., Weber's counsel], it is clear that the Trial Judge had an issue with the undersign. That issue clearly made its way to the jury and denied [Weber] his Constitutional Right to a fair and impartial trial. The conflict between the undersign and the Trial Judge continued to the point that the Trial Court has excused himself from the undersigns' case after the trial in this case. Because Weber did not fully and fairly present that argument, either below (in the form of an objection to the trial judge's allegedly improper conduct) or in his Opening Brief, we review it for plain error. [35] Our review of the transcript reveals that the trial judge occasionally made inappropriate statements and, at times, a cold record suggests a less than friendly attitude towards Weber's defense counsel. The record, however, does not support Weber's contention that the trial judge was biased or hostile towards Weber's defense counsel. We therefore conclude that the trial judge's statements and arguable attitude toward Weber's defense counsel did not violate Weber's right to a fair trial.