Legal Opinion

Hill v. Honorable Mark a. Speiser

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 13, 1989No. 88-3013PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We grant the petition and do so on the authority of Bundy v. Rudd, 366 So.2d 440, 442 (Fla.1978), from which case we quote the following excerpt:

Regardless of whether respondent ruled correctly in denying the motion for disqualification as legally insufficient, our rules clearly provide, and we have repeatedly held, that a judge who is presented with a motion for his disqualification “shall not pass on the truth of the facts alleged nor adjudicate the question of disqualification.” Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.230(d); see, e.g., Dickenson v. Parks, 104 Fla. 577, 140 So. 459 (1932); Suarez v. State, 95…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bundy v. RuddSupreme Court of Florida · 1978
  2. Suarez v. State of FloridaSupreme Court of Florida · 1928
  3. Dickenson v. ParksSupreme Court of Florida · 1932
  4. Theo. Hirsch Co. v. McDonald Furniture Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1927

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Townsend v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API