Legal Opinion
Scott v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 10, 1989No. 85-206, 86-423PublishedCited by 60 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON REHEARING EN BANC
Before ROGERS,* Chief Judge, MACK, NEWMAN, FERREN, TERRY, STEADMAN, and SCHWELB, Associate Judges, and PRYOR, Senior Judge.** ROGERS, Chief Judge:
We must decide the appropriate remedy for a violation of Canon 3(C)(1) of the American Bar Association’s Code of Judicial Conduct which requires that “[a] judge *747should disqualify himself in a proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Code op Judicial Conduct Canon 3(C)(1).1 The trial judge presided at a trial prosecuted by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, a division of the…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Tumey v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Rose v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- In Re Murchison.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Alley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1994
- Allen v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Jefferson-El v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
- Gibson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- Rohrbach v. AT & T Nassau Metals Corp.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.