State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Opinion 91-07

Question

Should a District Court judge who was formerly with the city prosecutor's office and who discloses this past association with the city prosecutor's office pursuant to Opinion 90-14, also refrain from hearing that city's cases for six months after taking office?

Answer

CJC Canon 3(C)(1)(b) requires recusal in those cases on which the judicial officer participated or gained knowledge about while working as the city prosecutor in the absence of other circumstances which might cause the judicial officer's impartiality reasonably to be questioned. A judicial officer, who is a former city prosecutor, is not required to refrain from hearing all that city's cases for a specified period of time. There may be circumstances, however, where the judicial officer should not sit on a proceeding involving the city if the judicial officer's impartiality reasonably might be questioned.

NOTE: Effective June 23, 1995, the Supreme Court amended the Code of Judicial Conduct. In addition to reviewing the ethics advisory opinions, the following should be noted:

Opinion 91-7—CJC Canon 3(C)(1)(b) became 3(D)(1)(b).

The Supreme Court adopted a new Code of Judicial Conduct effective January 1, 2011. In addition to reviewing the ethics advisory opinions, the following should be noted:

CJC 2.11(A)(6)(b)

Opinion 91-07

02/28/1991

 

Privacy and Disclaimer Notices Sitemap

© Copyright 2025. Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts.

S5