Skip to content

Bills · 2011-2012 Regular Session

SB 74

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

eliminating substitution of judges in criminal matters.

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Senate, not reached
  3. Passes Assembly, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

Under current law, there are two methods by which a judge who is scheduled

to handle a case is replaced: disqualification and substitution. A judge is required

to disqualify himself or herself in a case if the judge may be considered to have an

interest in the matter, such as if the judge is related to a party, has previously been

involved with the case as counsel, or has a significant financial or personal interest

in the outcome.

Substitution is the method by which parties in the case may have a judge who

is scheduled to handle a case taken off the case without having to give a reason. Each

party in a civil case and the defendant in a criminal case generally have a right to

one substitution, except that additional substitution rights occur in certain cases if

there is a successful appeal or if the judge who handles a preliminary hearing is

assigned to handle the trial.

This bill retains the provisions relating to the disqualification of a judge for both

civil and criminal matters, but eliminates the defendant's right to substitution of a

judge in criminal matters.

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Darling (R) , Kedzie (R) , Wanggaard (R) , Zipperer (R)

8 cosponsors

Bies (R) , Jacque (R) , Knilans (R) , Mursau (R) , Rivard (R) , Spanbauer (R) , Vos (R) , Ziegelbauer (I)

Votes

Senate: Report passage recommended by committee on Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce, and Government Operations, Ayes 3, Noes 2

Passed 3–2 May 12, 2011 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Apr 27, 2011 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Zipperer, Kedzie, Darling and Wanggaard;Cosponsored by Representatives Jacque, Bies, Knilans, Mursau, Rivard, Spanbauer, Vos and Ziegelbauer

  2. Apr 27, 2011 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce, and Government Operations

  3. May 3, 2011 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  4. May 4, 2011 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. May 11, 2011 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  6. May 11, 2011 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  7. May 11, 2011 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  8. May 12, 2011 · Senate

    Report passage recommended by committee on Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce, and Government Operations, Ayes 3, Noes 2

  9. May 12, 2011 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  10. Jun 7, 2011 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 6-8-2011 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  11. Jun 8, 2011 · Senate

    Read a second time

  12. Jun 8, 2011 · Senate

    Placed at the foot of the 11th order of business on the calendar of 6-8-2011

  13. Jun 8, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 offered by Senator Grothman

  14. Jun 8, 2011 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 adopted

  15. Jun 8, 2011 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  16. Jun 8, 2011 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  17. Jun 8, 2011 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed

  18. Jun 8, 2011 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  19. Jun 8, 2011 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  20. Jun 8, 2011 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Judiciary and Ethics

  21. Jan 11, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Jacque

  22. Mar 23, 2012 · Assembly

    Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1