Conflict of interest between a judge and attorney in a jury trial?

Not an issue.

A conflict is a situation which would make the judge lean towards one lawyer more than the other, or circumstances that would make people wonder if that would happen. One of my law partners is married to a judge. It's a big firm and her husband doesn't know me and never met me but to prevent the appearance of impropriety, the judge will recuse himself (get off the case and have it assigned to another judge) if anyone in our firm is involved in case that comes into his division.

When you work in a profession, you will get to know the judges - whether it's because you use the same gym, went to the same college, your kids are in the same school, etc. and there is nothing inappropriate about it.

Almost none at all, since in a state like Texas with a couple of law schools, a high percentage of any group of lawyers will be from the same school and judges are drawn from lawyers.

More important to me is the fact that the judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys all have gone through the prosecutors office and the Dallas prosecutors office has had some attitudes that have nothing to do with justice and a lot to do with re-election. The Thin Blue Line and failure to pick up on DNA testing are some of the results.

Where the state is the plaintiff, and the Judge and prosecutor get money from the state deposited into the prosecutor's and Judge's pension fund, wouldn't that be a "Conflict of Interest" Prime example is Child Support. States get 66% matching funds for every dollar the court awards the non-custodial parent. The state deposits a % of those funds into the Judge's and Prosecutor's pension funds. That's a conflict of interest is it not?

Yes. It is very rare, but when evidence comes up showing actual innocence, most prosecutors will move to dismiss rather than waiting for the jury to acquit. A judge, in most places, has no such authority as that would allow the judiciary to determine whether to go forward with a charge and that power is reserved to the executive branch.

As a California resident, let me say "thank you"! You are so passionate about your right to sit on a jury, when so many others are trying to get out of it! We need people like you!

But as for your question, no it's not a conflict of interest. They just know each other, maybe. But they could have met anywhere, or been on a case together before, or sat next to each other at a bar association dinner. That doesn't mean they would be in cahoots or have any bias at all.

You miss the point of Conflict of Interest - think about it ...

You got some citizen or flesh and blood man, woman or child on charges of DUI (a charge that cannot be defended against by the way - AS YOU CAN BE INFLUENCED BY A CAN OF SODA GETTING A SUGAR HIGH ... THUS; DUI - NO DEFENSE WHATSOEVER ... GUARANTEED REVENUE MACHINE) - and they are brought before the judge to be heard ... even a jury.

A jury can judge the facts, evidence and/or etc. - but; the judge judges the law ...

The DUI charge is levied by the STATE OF ... WHATEVER ... and the STATE is against the Defendant ...

BUT; the Judge is also Judging BY AND THROUGH THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE ... So ...

The judge is no longer AN IMPARTIAL ENTITY ... AS HE IS EMPLOYED OR GRANTED HIS AUTHORITY TO ACT - BY THE STATE OF WHATEVER ... therefore, since the Plaintiff (STATE OF WHATEVER STATE) is alleging the Defendant of a criminal act - and the Judge is also granted ALL his authority/jurisdiction to act and pass judgments - AS AN IMPARTIAL PARTY - AND IS NOT ...

That; my friend ... is what CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS ... the judge is acting on the behalf of the Plaintiff as his living comes from and so does his authority to carry out his job - FROM THE STATE/PLAINTIFF IN THE MATTER AGAINST A DEFENDANT THAT IS BUT A WEE LITTLE SHEEP ...

Should not the judge then recuse himself from EVERY MATTER NOT BROUGHT BY PRIVATE ATTORNEY AGAINST A PRIVATE PARTY???

Bass turds ... a floating in a sea of corruptions ... no wonder the goddess holding the scales with a blind fold does so - that she might not have to look at men dressing up like her and making a mockery of truth ... guess even an unrighteous goddess has some form of a conscience???

Hope this answers your question better than you asked it;

Aintmyfault

There are two differences:

1st if the judges acts unfair his decisions can be appealed to an higher court, if the jury acts unfair they can not be reversed.

2nd unless one of the attys is really really famous it is pretty easy to find 12 jurors who don't know either atty. It is impossible to find a judge that doesn't know the attys.

Why is going to the same Law school at the same time a conflict of interest???

No conflict, unless they slept together.

If the judge went to school with both the prosecutor and the defense attorney, there appears to be no bias.