OH4: No bar to judge who issued SW also hearing suppression motion

There is no due process or judicial ethics restriction on a suppression hearing judge hearing the validity of the warrant he or she issued. State v. Taylor, 2023-Ohio-2995, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 2982 n.1 (4th Dist. Aug. 22, 2023):

State v. Chamberlin, 161 Wash.2d 30, 162 P.3d 389 (2007) (no violation of due process or judicial ethics where judge presided over motion to suppress under a search warrant the judge issued; appellate review is a potential check against any bias); People v. Antoine, 335 Ill.App.3d 562, 781 N.E.2d 444, 269 Ill. Dec. 647 (2002) (mere fact that trial judge presided over warrant proceedings and issued the search warrant did not establish bias or prejudice), State v. Smith, 113 N.J. Super. 120, 273 A.2d 68 (1971) (nothing prevents trial judge from issuing search warrant and ruling on validity; action in issuing search warrant is ex parte whereas motion proceeding is adversarial), Peaper v. State, 14 Md.App. 201, 286 A.2d 176 (1972) (absent a showing of bias or prejudice, mere fact that judge issued the warrant would not preclude him from presiding at a suppression hearing or at trial), Trussell v. State, 67 Md.App. 23, 506 A.2d 255 (1986) (judge who issued search warrant was not required to recuse from ruling on suppression motion), State v. Heard, 574 So.2d 873 (Ala. Ct.Crim.App.1990) (absent a showing of prejudice, an issuing magistrate may properly serve as the trial judge on the same cause), Castillo v. State, 761 S.W.2d 495 (Tex.Ct. App. 1988) (no basis for disqualification when presiding judge over suppression motion issued the warrant).