Opinion ID: 4169027
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: standard of review

Text: This court exercises de novo review over whether a trial court judge's recusal is required. See State v. Sawyer, 297 Kan. 902, 909, 305 P.3d 608 (2013) (We judge the adequacy of due process under a de novo standard of appellate review.); Kansas Judicial Review v. Stout, 287 Kan. 450, 459, 196 P.3d 1162 (2008) (The interpretation of a Supreme Court rule, like the interpretation of a statute, is a question of law.); State ex rel. Stovall v. Meneley, 271 Kan. 355, 385, 22 P.3d 124 (2001) (When faced with an affidavit of prejudice filed pursuant to K.S.A. 20-311d, this court has unlimited review, and on appeal must decide the legal sufficiency of the affidavit and not the truth of the facts alleged.).