general, Colorado requires that its district attorneys and attorney general prosecute criminal cases. Colo. Const. art. IV, § 1(1); id., art. VI, § 18; § 20-1-102(1)(a), 6 C.R.S. (2000). However, section 20-1-107, 6 C.R.S. (2000), provides that a judge may disqualify the district attorney from a case and appoint a special prosecutor if the district attorney "is interested or has been employed as counsel in any case which it is his duty to prosecute or defend." Although the statute does not define "interested," we have held that a court may properly disqualify a district attorney who has somé involvement in the defendant's case that would "impair that office's ability to prosecute the case fairly." People ex rel. Sandstrom v. Dist. Court, 884 P.2d 707, 710 (Colo.1994). Sp lo.App.1992) (<HOLDING>). An appearance of impropriety is "an interest
holding that a warrantless arrest does not violate the fourth amendment if at the time of the defendants arrest police had probable cause to believe that an offense has been is being or will be committed holding that there is no appearance of impropriety sufficient to warrant recusal when the judge learned negative facts about the defendant from a social gathering held by a prosecutor in a former case involving the defendant holding that the court of appeals in applying state law on appeal of a diversity action must apply law of the state as it existed at the time of its decision rather than as it stood at the time the case was decided in district court holding that an appearance of impropriety existed where the deputy district attorney had an altercation with the defendant at the time of the defendants arrest holding that where the law is unsettled at the time of trial but settled by the time of appeal the plainness of the error should be judged by the law at the time of appeal