Claim of Judicial Bias Was Meritless
Stephen Tunick was arrested and hired an attorney to represent him. He entered a plea of not guilty on September 12, 2006. After several continuances, the case was scheduled for trial to commence on November 20, 2006. On November 20, 2006, the court asked counsel and Tunick to determine if it was the Defendant's intent to apply for accellerated rehabiliation or to go to trial.
On November 21, 2006, counsel filed a motion for recusal asserting, inter alia, that the court participated in plea negotiations, demonstrated an appearance of bias and made incorrect representations of fact on the record. The court denied the motion. Tunick was convicted following a jury trial of one count of sexual assault in the fourth degree and appealed claiming that the court improperly refused to disqualify itself.
The Appellate Court affirmed. A thorough review of the record lead the court to conclude that there was no factual basis for Defendant's claim of bias. Nowhere in the record did it appear that the court participated in any plea negotiations or that the court in any way expressed an opinion that the case was a strong one for the state. The claim was meritless.
State v. Tunick
Connecticut Appellate Court
(AC 28461)
