Can a judge be found to have been found guilty of misconduct by failing to object in the trial court?

As an initial matter, appellant forfeited his claim of error by failing to object in the trial court. In general, a "specific and timely objection to judicial misconduct is required to preserve the claim for appellate review." (People v. Seumanu (2015) 61 Cal.4th 1293, 1320.) Appellant contends there could be no forfeiture of the claim because a lack of impartiality is a structural error giving rise to a due process violation. We are not persuaded, at least under the circumstances presented here. A claim of "invidious bias" may not be forfeited on appeal as a result of the failure to object in the trial court. (See People v. Geier (2007) 41 Cal.4th 555, 613.) Here, however, appellant does not suggest the trial judge publicly displayed a bias or lack of impartiality. Instead, he asks the court to infer that the judge, having already made one previous ruling in the case, would have a " 'confirmatory' bias" that would tend to make the judge confirm or reinforce the earlier decision. Although appellant cites no case law addressing this type of bias or whether it may legally form the basis for a claim that a judge is not impartial, his argument appears to be a due process bias claim that is subject to forfeiture. (See People v. Johnson (2015) 60 Cal.4th 966, 979-980.)