Opinion ID: 1659158
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Trial Judge Bias

Text: Defendant claims that certain conduct by Judge Kinder indicated bias against defendant. He claims error in the failure of Judge Kinder to disqualify. Among the complaints is that Judge Kinder encouraged defendant to fire his lawyer. The record reflects that the first expression of dissatisfaction with counsel came from defendant at the July 17 hearing, when defendant responded to a comment that defense counsel thought the case would be tried by saying, Then I'll have to get another lawyer. A review of the entire record reflects that Judge Kinder counseled against defendant's failure to follow the attorney's advice and against self-representation. Defendant also complains that Judge Kinder encouraged defendant to not be concerned about whether to plead guilty to first or second degree murder. During the course of the questioning, Judge Kinder made an offer to allow the defendant to plead guilty to second degree murder of Mrs. Hodges. Defendant replied, It doesn't matter to me ... Really, I think it's kind of a moot question.... Judge Kinder replied, I think it's a matter of statistics, but that's neither here nor there. The judge then explained that defendant's account of the murder of Mrs. Hodges created a real jury question and a reala matter that a finder of fact would have to determine as to whether or not you deliberately and knowingly killed that woman. In context, the comment was not designed and did not have the effect of encouraging defendant to plead guilty to first degree murder rather than second degree murder. The judge was attempting to inform defendant that a jury might find second degree murder based on defendant's version of the death of Mrs. Hodges. The third area of alleged bias against defendant was Judge Kinder's comments regarding the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. He referred to the test as one going into 622 various questions about how I feel about myself and my bodily functions. Similarly, Judge Kinder made a comment that he somewhat agreed with some of defendant's observations regarding psychiatrists. When viewed in the context of the whole record, the statements do not establish that Judge Kinder had a disqualifying bias against the defendant. Finally, defendant refers to comments by Judge Kinder that he has no qualms about the death penalty, and, If I really wanted to be a cruel man, I'd probably sentence you to life without parole. Defendant argues that these declarations show an undue bias in favor of the death penalty. Again, in the context of the record, these were merely efforts on the part of the judge to advise the defendant that by pleading guilty to first degree murder, the trial judge was free to consider either life imprisonment without parole or the death penalty. These comments do not demonstrate an undue bias. A disqualifying bias and prejudice is one that has an extrajudicial source and results in an opinion on the merits on some basis other than what the judge learned from his participation in the case. An impersonal prejudice resulting from background experience is insufficient to require disqualification. State ex rel. Wesolich v. Goeke, 794 S.W.2d 692, 697 (Mo. App.1990). Applying that standard here, none of the facts alleged indicate a personal bias against the defendant or in favor of the State on the issue of either guilt or punishment.