With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". grand jury challenge. The assignment judge properly recused himself from the matter because of the possibility that he would be called as a witness, but ruled that motions to disqualify other judges must be made before the judge sought to be disqualified. See R. 1:12-2 (providing that ”[a]ny party ... may apply to a judge for his disqualification") (emphasis added). He thus denied the motion to recuse the other judges "with the understanding, of course, that defendant has the right to seek to recuse any individual judge as the rules and the cases permit.” Defendant apparently never exercised that right, however. He is not in a position now to attack the propriety of the fact that his challenge was heard by an Essex County judge. See Bonnet v. Stewart, 155 N.J.Super. 326, 330 (App.Div.) (<HOLDING>), certif. den., 77 N.J. 468 (1978). Reaching

A: holding that party who had sought disqualification of the judge who heard his cause only from the assignment judge and not the judge himself could not appropriately raise recusal issue on appeal
B: holding that a defendant was not entitled to a relief under section 2255 when he asserted that the sentencing judge who was not the trial judge was influenced by the sentence imposed by the trial judge on a codefendant
C: holding that the fact that a judge had ruled against the defendant is not a basis for finding the judge prejudiced
D: holding that where appellant moved to recuse trial judge from deciding the motion for new trial the judge of the administrative district was required to designate a judge to hear the recusal motion
A.