Utah Admin. Code R597-2-2 - Disclosure, Recusal, and Disqualification
(1) For purposes of disclosure,
commissioners shall:
(a) make
disclosures at the monthly commission meeting prior to the first
scheduled meeting at which the retention evaluation reports for a
given class of judges will be discussed or, in any event, no later
than the beginning of the meeting at which a particular judge's
evaluation is considered; and
(b) disclose to the commission any
professional or personal relationship or conflict of interest with a
judge that may affect an unbiased evaluation of the
judge.
(2)
Relationships that may affect an unbiased evaluation of the judge
include any contact or association that might influence a
commissioner's ability to fairly and reasonably evaluate the
performance of any judge or to assess that judge without bias or
prejudice, including but not limited to:
(a) family relationships to a
state, municipal, or county judge within the third degree
(grandparents, parents or parents-in-law, aunts or uncles, children,
nieces and nephews and their spouses);
(b) any business relationship
between the commissioner and the judge;
(c) any personal litigation
directly or indirectly involving the judge and the commissioner, the
commissioner's family or the commissioner's
business.
(3) A
commissioner exhibits bias or prejudice when the commissioner is
predisposed to decide a cause or an issue in a way that does not
leave the commissioner's mind open to exercising the commissioner's
duties impartially in a particular case.
(4) After making a disclosure, a
commissioner may voluntarily recuse him or herself if the
commissioner believes the relationship with the judge will impact an
unbiased evaluation of the judge.
(5) Recusal will preclude a
commissioner from participating in the commission's evaluation of the
judge and from voting on whether to recommend the judge for
retention.
(6) A
commissioner may move to vote on the disqualification of another
commissioner if:
(a) the other
commissioner makes a disclosure and does not voluntarily recuse, and
that commissioner's impartiality might reasonably be questioned;
or
(b) the other
commissioner does not make a disclosure, but known circumstances
suggest that the commissioner's impartiality might reasonably be
questioned.
(7)
To disqualify a commissioner:
(a) a
motion to disqualify must be seconded; and
(b) ratified by a two-thirds vote
of those present.
(8) During the discussion
concerning possible disqualification, any commissioner may raise any
facts concerning another commissioner's ability to fairly and
reasonably evaluate the performance of any judge without bias or
prejudice.
(9)
Disqualification encompasses exclusion both from participating in the
commission's evaluation of a judge and from voting on whether to
recommend the judge for retention.
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.