No. 24-579

Peter J. Strauss v. United States District Court for the District of South Carolina

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-11-27
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: ethics-commission expert-affidavit fifth-amendment judicial-impartiality judicial-recusal procedural-due-process
Key Terms:
FifthAmendment
Latest Conference: 2025-01-10
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Must a district court judge recuse himself when an expert affidavit challenges his impartiality after reporting a criminal defendant's attorney to an ethics commission for invoking Fifth Amendment rights?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Must a district court judge recuse himself in a criminal case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $8144 and 455 when provided a timely and sufficient expert affidavit required by 28 U.S.C. §144 and after the judge had become an adverse witness to the said criminal defendant attorney by wrongfully reporting him to the state’s ethics commission for invoking his Fifth Amendment rights in violation of U.S. Supreme Court precedent in a prior civil proceeding, both circumstances of which would lead an objective observer to reasonably question the judge’s impartiality?

Docket Entries

2025-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2024-12-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
2024-12-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-11-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 27, 2024)
2024-09-20
Application (24A280) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until November 29, 2024.
2024-09-17
Application (24A280) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 30, 2024 to November 29, 2024, submitted to The Chief Justice.

Attorneys

Peter Strauss
Joseph Parkwood Griffith Jr.Joe Griffith Law Firm, LLC, Petitioner
Joseph Parkwood Griffith Jr.Joe Griffith Law Firm, LLC, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent