The COA held that a judge can pierce the veil of impartiality outside of the presence of a jury, and the judge did so here by suggesting questions that the prosecutor could ask on cross-examination, which amounted to the judge engaging in litigation strategy. However, this conduct did not amount to plain error affecting defendant’s substantial rights. The COA, thus, affirmed the conviction and sentence.

A trial court judge did not have to disqualify himself from the defendant’s criminal case even though the judge had publicly endorsed the prosecutor in a Circuit Court election campaign.