Opinion ID: 1954826
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Judge Evans's Alleged Recollection of Farmer's Guilty Plea

Text: ¶ 9. Farmer first contends that although Judge Evans claimed he could not remember the facts of the case at the hearing on the Motion for Recusal, at the sentencing hearing he managed to recall in great detail particular statements made by Farmer upon entry of his guilty plea. Review of the record reveals that Judge Evans did not discuss any statements previously given by Farmer but only the testimony presented at the trial. Although Farmer's first claim is meritless, we address Judge Evans' remarks that could have conceivably been recollections of the earlier proceeding. ¶ 10. At the sentencing hearing, Judge Evans recounted the procedural history of Farmer's case. He noted that Farmer previously entered a guilty plea to the crime of aggravated assault and that we had some question about whether [the 85%] law would be applicable to the sentences imposed after July 1st, 1995 but the alleged crime had been committed before that date. Judge Evans further recalled that this Court set aside Farmer's guilty plea due to counsel's erroneous advice regarding Farmer's potential sentence. ¶ 11. When imposing the twenty-year sentence, Judge Evans commented that he saw no reason for reducing the sentence previously given Farmer upon entry of his guilty plea. Judge Evans remarked I said you had every reason to plead guilty then and take twenty years.... Though this statement possibly suggests that Judge Evans remembered making a comment upon sentencing Farmer after entry of his guilty plea, it in no way operates to overcome the presumption that Judge Evans acted unbiased in the instant case. ¶ 12. The fact that Judge Evans recalled the procedural history of the case does not evidence bias on his part. Moreover, there is no guarantee that Judge Evans actually remembered the events surrounding Farmer's guilty plea or whether a perusal of the record in this case refreshed his recollection. Regardless, Farmer fails to overcome the presumption that Judge Evans acted impartially.