I think Fane Lozman might be a Jedi Knight. His Supreme Court victories are legendary. And now he has entered the trial court arena, fighting the Sith prosecutors who tried to take him down. Of course, he won. And with a judgment of acquittal no less. Here's the coverage:
Fane Lozman has made a name for himself literally fighting city hall.
He beat Riviera Beach in the U.S. Supreme Court twice.
Now, Lozman says he is being targeted by State Attorney Dave Aronberg because he has fought corruption in his city and county.
Tuesday, Lozman went to trial on a criminal charge and again it went his way, as the Singer Island activist turned the tables and tried to put Riviera Beach and Palm Beach County’s state attorney on trial.
“This is a waste of your time,” Lozman told jurors at the start of his trial on criminal mischief charges for kicking and damaging a gate on a Singer Island dock near his home. “This is about retaliation for fighting corruption in Riviera Beach.”
Lozman attacked prosecution witnesses, including dock owner Davender Kant, a former Riviera Beach city building official.
“Have you committed homestead fraud?” Lozman asked Kant.
Riviera Beach police arrested Lozman last February.
***
“This case is about destruction,” countered Assistant State Attorney Nicholas Kaleel. “It is not about who owns the dock.”
However, that argument didn’t wash with Circuit Court Judge Ashley Zukerman, who ordered the charge against Lozman dropped right after prosecutors finished their case.
Why does Fane win so often, beating the government that acts too soon and too often wrong? He thinks through each step, envisions what to do to win, never gives up being tough, stays smart and acts right. Oh, and always speaks the truth.
ReplyDeleteLawyers, listen, watch and learn.
Good job Fane!
Who da man?
ReplyDeleteLozman da man!
His "boat is a house" case before the Supreme Court which was a 5-4 vote should be studied by all law classes. Its fascinating because each side in the vote is a random selection of judicial philosophy. One side had the most conservative member, most liberal member and a moderate. The other side had the same. His case is really what the Supreme Court is for. Even in the wild difference of each Justice's judicial philosophy there was not a uniform agreement on either side. Its a very rare Supreme Court ruling for that alone.
ReplyDelete