20-311d.
Change of judge; procedure; grounds.
(a) If a party or a party's attorney believes that the judge to whom an action is assigned cannot afford that party a fair trial in the action, the party or attorney may file a motion for change of judge. The motion shall not state the grounds for the party's or attorney's belief. The judge shall promptly hear the motion informally upon reasonable notice to all parties who have appeared in the case. If the judge disqualifies the judge's self, the action shall be assigned to another judge by the chief judge. If the judge refuses to disqualify the judge's self, the party seeking a change of judge may file the affidavit provided for in subsection (b). If an affidavit is to be filed it shall be filed immediately.
(b) If a party or a party's attorney files an affidavit alleging any of the grounds specified in subsection (c), the chief judge shall at once determine, or refer the affidavit to another district judge for prompt determination of, the legal sufficiency of the affidavit. If the affidavit is filed in a district court in which there is no other judge who is qualified to hear the matter, the chief judge shall at once notify the departmental justice for the district and request the appointment of another district judge to determine the legal sufficiency of the affidavit. If the affidavit is found to be legally sufficient, the case shall be assigned to another judge.
(c) Grounds which may be alleged as provided in subsection (b) for change of judge are that:
(1) The judge has been engaged as counsel in the action prior to the appointment or election as judge.
(2) The judge is otherwise interested in the action.
(3) The judge is related to either party to the action.
(4) The judge is a material witness in the action.
(5) The party or the party's attorney filing the affidavit has cause to believe and does believe that on account of the personal bias, prejudice or interest of the judge such party cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial or fair and impartial enforcement of post-judgment remedies. Such affidavit shall state the facts and the reasons for the belief that bias, prejudice or an interest exists.
(d) In any affidavit filed pursuant to this section, the recital of previous rulings or decisions by the judge on legal issues or concerning the legal sufficiency of any prior affidavits filed by counsel for a party in any judicial proceeding, or filed by such counsel's law firm, pursuant to this section, shall not be deemed legally sufficient for any belief that bias or prejudice exists.
History:
L. 1971, ch. 198, § 3; L. 1972, ch. 97, § 1; L. 1973, ch. 130, § 1; L. 1978, ch. 110, § 1; L. 1985, ch. 104, § 1; L. 1986, ch. 115, § 34; L. 1999, ch. 57, § 15; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
84
cases (
22 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case:
State v. Moyer, 410 P.3d 71 (Kan. 2015).
State v. Moyer, 410 P.3d 71 (Kan. 2015).
· cites it 33× “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.”
State v. Walker, 153 P.3d 1257 (Kan. 2007).
· cites it 11× “Issue 2: Did the Trial Court Err in Denying the Defendant’s “Motion to Change Judge”? Walker next argues that the trial court erred in denying his “Motion to Change Judge,” filed pursuant to K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 20-311d. Judge David W.”
State v. Sawyer, 305 P.3d 608 (Kan. 2013).
· cites it 13× “I don’t believe that that’s the case here because a jury is going to determine his guilt or innocence.”
– State v. Lyman –, 455 P.3d 393 (Kan. 2020).
· cites it 6× “The Reverend Richard Elliott stated he "observed on various occasions what appeared to me to be the judge sleeping.”
State v. Reed, 144 P.3d 677 (Kan. 2006).
· cites it 7× “A motion for a change of judge is governed by K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 20-311d. The first step of the procedure prescribed by that statute allows a party who “believes that the judge to whom an action is assigned cannot afford that party a fair trial in the action” to file a motion to…”
State v. Moyer, 360 P.3d 384 (Kan. 2015).
· cites it 13× “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.”
State Ex Rel. Stovall v. Meneley, 22 P.3d 124 (Kan. 2001).
· cites it 4× “MOTION TO DISQUALIFY ALL SHAWNEE COUNTY JUDGES Meneley argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to disqualify all Shawnee County judges from his ouster trial.”
State v. Hurd, 316 P.3d 696 (Kan. 2013).
· cites it 7× “The district judge also refused to recuse, and the chief judge reviewed Hurd’s affidavit filed under K.S.A. 20-311d and affirmed the district judge’s decision.”
State v. Robinson, 270 P.3d 1183 (Kan. 2012).
· cites it 4× “After the trial judge denied his request, Robinson filed an affidavit in support of his motion pursuant to K.S.A. 20-311d(b) and (c), identifying six instances in which the trial judge allegedly demonstrated “personal bias and prejudice.”
State v. Logan, 689 P.2d 778 (Kan. 1984).
· cites it 6× “Judge Abbott noted that the defendant's motion to disqualify the district court judge and its supporting affidavit were insufficient under K.S.A. 20-311d. Judge Abbott concurred with the advisory ruling as well because a reasonable person with knowledge of all the circumstances…”
Hulme v. Woleslagel, 493 P.2d 541 (Kan. 1972).
· cites it 11× “: This is an original proceeding in mandamus brought by plaintiff requesting that this court order defendant, administrative judge of the Twentieth Judicial District of Kansas, Division One, to disqualify himself pursuant to Section 3, Chapter 198, Laws 1971 (now K.S.A. 1971…”
State v. Sappington, 169 P.3d 1107 (Kan. 2007).
· cites it 4× “The assigned judge shall then hold an informal hearing on the motion. Next, if the judge refuses to recuse, the party seeking a change of judge may then file an affidavit alleging the grounds for change of judge.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(a) — 27 cases
State v. Moyer, 410 P.3d 71 (Kan. 2015).
“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.”
State v. Walker, 153 P.3d 1257 (Kan. 2007).
“Issue 2: Did the Trial Court Err in Denying the Defendant’s “Motion to Change Judge”? Walker next argues that the trial court erred in denying his “Motion to Change Judge,” filed pursuant to K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 20-311d. Judge David W.”
State v. Reed, 144 P.3d 677 (Kan. 2006).
“A motion for a change of judge is governed by K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 20-311d. The first step of the procedure prescribed by that statute allows a party who “believes that the judge to whom an action is assigned cannot afford that party a fair trial in the action” to file a motion to…”
State v. Robinson, 270 P.3d 1183 (Kan. 2012).
“After the trial judge denied his request, Robinson filed an affidavit in support of his motion pursuant to K.S.A. 20-311d(b) and (c), identifying six instances in which the trial judge allegedly demonstrated “personal bias and prejudice.”
State v. Sappington, 169 P.3d 1107 (Kan. 2007).
“The assigned judge shall then hold an informal hearing on the motion. Next, if the judge refuses to recuse, the party seeking a change of judge may then file an affidavit alleging the grounds for change of judge.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(b) — 18 cases
State v. Robinson, 270 P.3d 1183 (Kan. 2012).
“After the trial judge denied his request, Robinson filed an affidavit in support of his motion pursuant to K.S.A. 20-311d(b) and (c), identifying six instances in which the trial judge allegedly demonstrated “personal bias and prejudice.”
State v. Reed, 144 P.3d 677 (Kan. 2006).
“A motion for a change of judge is governed by K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 20-311d. The first step of the procedure prescribed by that statute allows a party who “believes that the judge to whom an action is assigned cannot afford that party a fair trial in the action” to file a motion to…”
State v. Walker, 153 P.3d 1257 (Kan. 2007).
“Issue 2: Did the Trial Court Err in Denying the Defendant’s “Motion to Change Judge”? Walker next argues that the trial court erred in denying his “Motion to Change Judge,” filed pursuant to K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 20-311d. Judge David W.”
– State v. Lyman –, 455 P.3d 393 (Kan. 2020).
“The Reverend Richard Elliott stated he "observed on various occasions what appeared to me to be the judge sleeping.”
State v. Sappington, 169 P.3d 1107 (Kan. 2007).
“The assigned judge shall then hold an informal hearing on the motion. Next, if the judge refuses to recuse, the party seeking a change of judge may then file an affidavit alleging the grounds for change of judge.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(b)(5) — 5 cases
State v. Logan, 689 P.2d 778 (Kan. 1984).
“Judge Abbott noted that the defendant's motion to disqualify the district court judge and its supporting affidavit were insufficient under K.S.A. 20-311d. Judge Abbott concurred with the advisory ruling as well because a reasonable person with knowledge of all the circumstances…”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(c) — 21 cases
State v. Moyer, 410 P.3d 71 (Kan. 2015).
“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.”
State v. Walker, 153 P.3d 1257 (Kan. 2007).
“Issue 2: Did the Trial Court Err in Denying the Defendant’s “Motion to Change Judge”? Walker next argues that the trial court erred in denying his “Motion to Change Judge,” filed pursuant to K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 20-311d. Judge David W.”
State v. Hurd, 316 P.3d 696 (Kan. 2013).
“The district judge also refused to recuse, and the chief judge reviewed Hurd’s affidavit filed under K.S.A. 20-311d and affirmed the district judge’s decision.”
State v. Moyer, 360 P.3d 384 (Kan. 2015).
“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.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(c)(3) — 4 cases
State v. Moyer, 410 P.3d 71 (Kan. 2015).
“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.”
State v. Moyer, 360 P.3d 384 (Kan. 2015).
“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.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(c)(5) — 15 cases
State v. Walker, 153 P.3d 1257 (Kan. 2007).
“Issue 2: Did the Trial Court Err in Denying the Defendant’s “Motion to Change Judge”? Walker next argues that the trial court erred in denying his “Motion to Change Judge,” filed pursuant to K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 20-311d. Judge David W.”
State v. Robinson, 270 P.3d 1183 (Kan. 2012).
“After the trial judge denied his request, Robinson filed an affidavit in support of his motion pursuant to K.S.A. 20-311d(b) and (c), identifying six instances in which the trial judge allegedly demonstrated “personal bias and prejudice.”
State v. Sappington, 169 P.3d 1107 (Kan. 2007).
“The assigned judge shall then hold an informal hearing on the motion. Next, if the judge refuses to recuse, the party seeking a change of judge may then file an affidavit alleging the grounds for change of judge.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(c)(l) — 1 case
State v. Sawyer, 305 P.3d 608 (Kan. 2013).
“I don’t believe that that’s the case here because a jury is going to determine his guilt or innocence.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(d) — 14 cases
State v. Sawyer, 305 P.3d 608 (Kan. 2013).
“I don’t believe that that’s the case here because a jury is going to determine his guilt or innocence.”
State v. Hurd, 316 P.3d 696 (Kan. 2013).
“The district judge also refused to recuse, and the chief judge reviewed Hurd’s affidavit filed under K.S.A. 20-311d and affirmed the district judge’s decision.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(e)(3) — 1 case
State v. Sawyer, 305 P.3d 608 (Kan. 2013).
“I don’t believe that that’s the case here because a jury is going to determine his guilt or innocence.”
— K.S.A. § 20-311d(h)(5) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.