DC · rules
D.C. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 25
Judge’s or Magistrate Judge’s Disability
(a) During Trial. Any judge regularly sitting in or assigned to the court may complete a
jury trial if:
(1) the judge before whom the trial began cannot proceed because of death, sickness,
or other disability; and
(2) the judge completing the trial certifies familiarity with the trial record.
(b) After a Verdict or Finding of Guilty.
(1) In General. After a verdict or finding of guilty, any judge or magistrate judge (if
authorized by law) regularly sitting in or assigned to the court may complete the court’s
duties if the judge or magistrate judge who presided at trial cannot perform those duties
because of absence, death, sickness, or other disability.
(2) Granting a New Trial. The successor judge or magistrate judge may grant a new
trial if satisfied that:
(A) a judge or magistrate judge other than the one who presided at the trial cannot
perform the post-trial duties; or
(B) a new trial is necessary for some other reason.
History
COMMENT TO 2016 AMENDMENTS This rule has been redrafted to conform to the general restyling of the federal rules in 2002. It is identical to the federal rule, except for references to “judge” and “magistrate judge” instead of the term “judge” in the title and in paragraph (b) to make the rule applicable to magistrate judges. The parenthetical “if authorized by law” reflects that a magistrate judge’s authority to act is limited by statute and rule.
Provenance
- Source
- dccourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-14
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
c6c2b1256a444345f752542a02597c36cb42a2cb57a1c192df0b63b7b133ace6
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.