State ex rel. Rondon v. Lake Superior Court, Criminal Div. Two, 45S009010OR643

Decision Date10 April 1991
Docket NumberNo. 45S009010OR643,45S009010OR643
Citation569 N.E.2d 635
PartiesSTATE of Indiana on the Relation of Reynaldo C. RONDON, Relator, v. LAKE SUPERIOR COURT, CRIMINAL DIVISION TWO, and the Honorable James E. Letsinger as Judge Thereof, Respondents.
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

PER CURIAM.

This Court issued an alternative writ of mandamus directing the Lake Superior Court, Criminal Division Two, and the Honorable James E. Letsinger, as Judge thereof, to recuse himself from hearing Relator's petition for post-conviction relief and to name a panel of judges from which the parties were to choose a judge to hear the petition for post-conviction relief. We now make that writ permanent.

Relator, Reynaldo Rondon, was sentenced to death on May 10, 1985. Subsequent to a direct appeal, Relator filed a petition for post-conviction relief on June 29, 1990. Seven days later, Relator filed his motion for change of judge, along with a certificate of good faith by counsel and supporting affidavits by both Relator and his counsel alleging bias and prejudice on the part of Respondent, the Honorable James E. Letsinger. Respondent denied this motion.

Ind. Post-Conviction Rule 1(4)(b) provides:

Change of venue from the judge shall be granted when the petitioner files, within ten (10) days of the filing of his petition, an affidavit that the Judge has a personal bias or prejudice against petitioner. The affidavit shall state the facts and the reasons for the belief that such bias or prejudice exists, and shall be accompanied by a certificate of good faith of petitioner's counsel. For good cause shown, the petitioner may be permitted to file the affidavit after the ten (10) day period. No change of venue from the county shall be granted.

This Court has said that "[p]rovisions for change of judge are to assure not only that a litigant has an unbiased judge but also to assure that he believes that he has an unbiased judge, i.e. that he is being fairly treated." Adams v. State (1978), 268 Ind. 434, 436, 376 N.E.2d 482, 483. If a petitioner files his motion for a change of judge in a timely manner and complies with the form required by the rule, the trial court is obligated to grant the motion. Lombardo v. State (1986), Ind., 499 N.E.2d 1075.

Relator's compliance with the requirements of P-C.R. 1(4)(b) entitles him to a change of judge.

The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Lambert v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • 5 Marzo 2001
    ...Court, 626 N.E.2d 802, 803 (Ind.1993), and we reaffirm that holding here. See also State ex rel. Rondon v. Lake Superior Court, Criminal Div. Two, 569 N.E.2d 635, 636 (Ind.1991) (DeBruler, J. dissenting) ("The rule rejects the proposition that there should be an automatic change of venue in......
  • Jackson v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • 21 Noviembre 1994
    ...of petitioner's counsel. The rule previously had been viewed as providing an automatic change of judge. See State ex rel. Rondon v. Lake Superior Court (1991), Ind., 569 N.E.2d 635; Tucker v. State (1991), Ind.App., 581 N.E.2d 455. However, our supreme court recently decided that the better......
  • State ex rel. Whitehead v. Madison County Circuit Court, 48S00-9312-OR-1437
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • 29 Diciembre 1993
    ...the county shall be granted. P-C.R. 1(4)(b). The Whiteheads seize on language in this author's opinion in State ex rel. Rondon v. Lake Superior Court (1991), Ind., 569 N.E.2d 635, to contend that once a petitioner has complied with the form required by the rule, the trial judge is obliged t......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT