Whether a reasonable and informed observer would question the judge's impartiality when the judge allowed an AUSA who became a witness in the proceedings to prosecute the case

QUESTION PRESENTED a 2 __ This Court's precedents set fourth an objective standard 3 that requires recusal when the likelihood of bias on the part 4 of the judge is too high to be constitutionally tolerable, 5 || Williams v. Pensylvania, 579 US, 136 Sct, 195 LEd2d 132 _ | 6 (2016) Lexis 3774. District judge's recusal is required | 7 under 28 U.S.C. § 455 if a reasonable and informed! observer 8 would question the judge's impartiality;;;. and under 28 U.S.C. § | 9 144 if’a judge has personal bias or prejudice either against | 10 or in favor of a party, Stone v. Trump (2021) Lexis 175000. | . 11ft. Mr. Bell Fourth Amendment rights to property and Fifth . 12]; Amendment rights to due process, both.were overlooked by 13 district and the D.C Circuit. District court allowed the |. ot 14 AUSA who became a witness in the proceedings, which led to . is the confiscation: of Mr. Bell's property. . . | 16 The questions presented: . | 17 "Would a reasonable and informéd observer question ‘the. judge's , “18 impartiality who alléied an! AUSA ‘ishoxhecame \dwitness: in-proceédings ; 19 through his. own acknowlédgement , to prosedutevéniithe 20 proceedings he's a witness of? ; ‘21 If a judge demonstrates favortism under § 144, for the 22 AUSA who became a witness, is that judge impartial? . 24}, — oe L . ae ; i | t i . : 1 ;