Dominguez v. State
Court of Appeals of Alaska
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MANNHEIMER, Judge.
This case presents a controversy concerning the authority of a judge to play a further role in litigation after the judge has been peremptorily challenged.
At common law, a disqualified judge was not wholly barred from further participation in the case. Rather, the judge was permitted to take purely administrative or "ministerial" actions in the case-i.e., actions that do not involve a resolution of any of the issues raised in the litigation and that do not otherwise affect the litigation rights of the parties. 1
However, Alaska Criminal Rule 25(d)(@8) codifies a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Gieffels v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
- Thoeni v. Consumer Electronic ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2007
- Tunley v. Municipality of Anchorage School DistrictAlaska Supreme Court · 1981
- Tlingit-Haida Regional Electrical Authority v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
- Roberts v. State, Department of RevenueAlaska Supreme Court · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hicks v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2016
- B.F.L. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2010
- Hicks v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2016
- Thomas Garber v. Superior Court, Third Judicial DistrictAlaska Supreme Court · 2025