Rule 19.2.Criminal
Rule 19. TRANSFER/CHANGE OF VENUE · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 17, 2026
Full Text of Rule 19.2
Plain-English Summary
Transferring a criminal case to another county does not necessarily mean handing it off to a new judge too. Rule 19.2 keeps the judge who granted the venue change in the driver’s seat: that same judge continues presiding over the case in its new county, unless the judge is disqualified from doing so.
The approach preserves continuity. The judge who heard the arguments for moving venue already has context on the case, and Rule 19.2 lets that judge carry the matter forward rather than starting a new judge from scratch in the receiving county.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who presides over a criminal case after it is transferred to a different county?
The superior court judge who granted the venue change continues as the presiding judge, unless that judge is disqualified.
Does the case automatically go to a judge in the new county?
No. Rule 19.2 keeps the original judge who granted the transfer in charge of the case, rather than reassigning it to a judge in the transferee county.
What would cause a different judge to take over after a criminal venue transfer?
If the judge who granted the venue change is disqualified from continuing to preside.
Does Rule 19.2 apply to civil venue transfers as well?
No, the rule specifically addresses criminal actions transferred to the superior court of a different county.
Why does the rule keep the same judge on a transferred criminal case?
The rule does not state a reason, but keeping the judge who granted the transfer in charge avoids handing the case to a new judge with no prior familiarity with it.