Court Opinion

ID: 9851146
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:07:57.81937+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:49.668642
License: Public Domain

BUSSEY Judge,
dissenting,
I must respectfully dissent. The majority holds, without authority, that 22 O.S. 1981, § 576 requires the affirmative consent of the parties, on the record, before the same judge can preside at both the preliminary hearing and trial. I cannot agree.
Under an analogous provision, 20 O.S. 1981, § 1401(c), a trial judge may be disqualified when a party is able to show that the judge is prejudiced in the case before him. In Willis v. State, 650 P.2d 873, 874 (Okl.Cr.1982), this Court held that the right to preclude a disqualified judge from trial is a personal privilege which can be waived. Likewise, I would hold that 22 O.S.1981, § 576 creates a personal right in either party to object to the trial judge’s participation at both the preliminary hearing and trial. However, such right can be waived. Willis, at 874.
The record reveals that at a time when both parties were fully aware that Judge Stilwell had presided over the preliminary hearing, both parties announced “ready for trial.” Appellant did not object before or during trial. This should be presumed as an implied consent. Moreover, the appellant has wholly failed to demonstrate, and the record does not reveal any prejudice from Judge Stilwell’s participation at both the preliminary hearing and trial. Therefore, I respectfully dissent.