Conner v. State
SimpleOriginal

Summary

In this 2021 Maryland state case, a judge who had overseen Conner’s Drug Court participation also ruled on his probation revocation for substance use violations. The court found no bias and upheld the denial of the judge’s recusal.

2021 | State Juristiction

Conner v. State

Keywords Maryland case; judge recusal; drug court; probation revocation; substance use violations; bias; Conner; 2021; recusal denial; judicial bias; probation
Open Case as PDF

Maryland Drug Court Case: Judicial Impartiality

This 2021 Maryland case involved a defendant, Conner, whose probation revocation hearing for drug-related violations was presided over by the same judge who oversaw his participation in the Drug Court program. The court addressed the defendant's motion for the judge's recusal, ultimately finding no evidence of bias and upholding the decision to deny the motion. The ruling establishes a precedent regarding potential conflicts of interest within the framework of specialized courts like Drug Court.

Open Case as PDF

Maryland Drug Court Case: Recusal Denial Upheld

This 2021 Maryland case involved a defendant, Conner, participating in Drug Court. The judge overseeing Conner's Drug Court program also presided over his probation revocation hearing following substance use violations. A recusal motion was filed, alleging bias. The court ultimately found no evidence of judicial bias and denied the motion. The denial of recusal was subsequently upheld.

Open Case as PDF

Maryland Drug Court Case

A Maryland judge in 2021 handled both Conner's participation in Drug Court and later, his probation violation hearing. The judge's involvement in both aspects of the case didn't lead to accusations of bias being upheld. The court determined there was no conflict of interest and refused to remove the judge from the case.

Open Case as PDF

Conner's Case

Conner went to a special court program to help with substance use. The same judge who helped him with the program also decided if he broke the rules of his probation. Conner thought the judge shouldn't be involved because of this, but the court said the judge was fair.

Open Case as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

248 A.3d 318 (2021)

Highlights