Legal Opinion

Dominguez v. State

Court of Appeals of Alaska

Decided April 18, 2008No. A-10095PublishedCited by 4 opinions

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

  1. Gieffels v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Thoeni v. Consumer Electronic ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Tunley v. Municipality of Anchorage School DistrictAlaska Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Tlingit-Haida Regional Electrical Authority v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Roberts v. State, Department of RevenueAlaska Supreme Court · 2007

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hicks v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2016
  2. B.F.L. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2010
  3. Hicks v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2016
  4. Thomas Garber v. Superior Court, Third Judicial DistrictAlaska Supreme Court · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API