In Scott v. State, 717 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 1998), an affiant's sworn statement containing exculpatory information for the defendant was presented to the court to support the defendant's Brady claim. The defendant moved to disqualify the trial judge based on the fact that the judge had presided over an unrelated trial of the affiant, had received correspondence from a jailer or from the affiant in the prior matter, and had commented on the affiant's sentence. Id. at 911. This Court found that allegations of the judge's prior involvement in the affiant's case did not set forth a well-grounded fear of prejudice. Id.