Court Opinion

ID: 9836992
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-02 03:15:54.741095+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:19.707315
License: Public Domain

SULLIVAN, Judge
(concurring):
I concur with the majority opinion. I write separately only to note briefly the following words of the Supreme Court in Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555, 114 S.Ct. 1147, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994):
[Ojpinions formed by the judge on the basis of facts introduced or events occurring in the course of the current proceedings, or of prior proceedings, do not constitute a basis for a bias or partiality motion unless they display a deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair *472judgment impossible. Thus, judicial remarks during the course of a trial that are critical or disapproving of, or even hostile to, counsel, the parties, or their cases, ordinarily do not support a bias or partiality challenge.
(Emphasis added.) In the present case, trial defense counsel did not request voir dire of the military judge or challenge him following his comments. This proved to be a wise course of action because it is clear that the military judge’s comments do not display a “deep-seated” antagonism toward appellant that made fair judgment of his case impossible.