Magistrate selection panel

The panel selecting the new Magistrate in Ft. Lauderdale includes:

Chair: Walter Howard, Executive Vice-President
Equitable Bank

Ronald P. Anselmo, Esq.

Francis A. Anania, Esq.

Dr. Dan Arnold, Jr.

David M. Fee, Jr., Esq.

Elizabeth M. Hernandez, Esq.

Fred Haddad, Esq.

Marilyn Holifield, Esq.

Guy A. Lewis, Esq.

sick...

Sorry for the slow posting... I was in New Orleans on Thursday for a conference. I got food poisoning, which hit me Saturday morning. Just starting to recover today (while making the long boring drive to and from Ft. Myers in the Middle District). Hopefully I'll have a new post in the next couple of days.

Kathleen Williams

Kathy Williams, the Federal Defender for the Southern District of Florida, was sworn in today for another term (by 11th Circuit Judge Rosemary Barkett). Everyone who knows Kathy knows how great she is. Of course, I'm biased because I worked for her. But the judges and the AUSAs all respect her and the job she has done for this district. What most people don't know is that she is one of the leaders for the entire indigent defense community nationwide. This district is *very* lucky to have her.

"Nada -- is that how you say `nothing' in Portuguese?''

That's Albert Krieger after being asked to give a statement for the husband-and-wife leaders of a Brazilian evangelical megachurch who pleaded not guilty Tuesday to currency smuggling and other charges. Estevam Hernandes Filho and Sonia Moraes Hernandes are the founders of the Reborn in Christ Church. Here's the Herald article.

Recovery

Still trying to recover from eating so much this weekend.....

In the meantime, there's some good stuff from our local reporters:

1. Vanessa Blum had this weekend story about Jose Padilla and torture.

2. Jay Weaver covers the Charles Taylor motion to dismiss (by AFPD Miguel Caridad; response by AUSA Karen Rochlin).

3. Julie Kay has the scoop on who has put in for Magistrate Judge in Ft. Lauderdale. So far, we have Assistant federal defenders Patrick Hunt, Stewart Abrams, and Dave Brannon. From the US Attorney's office we Robin Rosenbaum and Patty Diaz. There are rumors, according to the article, that a private practitioner has also put in. Anyone know who?

Cully Stimson Resigns

See ya. Previous coverage here.

"He's waiting for Fidel to die so he can meet him in hell and beat him up."

A quote from one of my favorite lawyers, Jack Blumenfeld, about his client Jose Battle. Here's another interesting article from Category 305.

11th Circuit reinstates charges against Padilla

In a fifteen page opinion, the 11th Circuit has ruled for the Government on its appeal of the order dismissing Count I of the Padilla indictment. Here is the initial coverage by Vanessa Blum. More to follow from me once I've read the opinion. Initial coverage by me here.

Update -- So, I've read the decision. It's pretty bland. But if the law is supposed to make sense to the average citizen, check out these sentences in the concluding section:

Our analysis could stop there, but in light of the rather abstract nature of the
elemental analysis, we think it wise to elaborate briefly on the concept in practical terms. It appears that the trouble in this appeal stems from the interrelatedness of the three counts at issue. As we have noted, § 956 (the charge in Count One) serves as an object offense for § 2339A (the charge in Count Three), which serves as an object offense for § 371 (the charge in Count Two). But while these three charges are interrelated, they are not interdependent. The object offenses on which Counts Two and Three are premised are not themselves elements of those counts. In other words, to use Count Three as an example, the Government need not prove all the elements of § 956, the object offense, in order to satisfy the elements of the substantive § 2339A charge.

Yikes. The law has taken a strange path on prosecutorial decision-making, hasn't it? I think what the court is saying is that the law permits prosecutors to charge the same facts under lots of different legal theories. But does that make any sense? Do you think jurors understand this very fine distinction? Shouldn't we be making it easier for juries, not harder? I think Judge Cooke had the right idea -- the prosecutors need to figure out how it wants to proceed on this case and go forward on that theory. Prosecutions should not be multiple choice tests.

Cocaine Cowboys article

Julie Kay (for Category 305, not the DBR) writes about the Cocaine Cowboys movie here. Fun article and fun stories.

Alito comes to the Southern District of Florida

Seems like the Justices enjoy taking road trips to South Florida. Alito spoke at a luncheon for the Palm Beach County Bar Association last week. He previously spoke at Alex Acosta's investitute. And the Chief was just in town speaking at the University of Miami. (Roberts was interviewed by Jan Crawford Greenburg, who has a new blog and a new book. I'm in the middle of the book, Supreme Conflict, and it's a must read for Court junkies.)

"If we want to continue to attract the best and the brightest to the bench, we need to pay them more than second-year associates."

That's Guy Lewis in yesterday's Miami Herald, commenting on the debate about whether federal judges should be paid more.

"Halliburton sued in alleged Iraq rape of a Florida woman"

Vanessa Blum has the story here (and there are an awful lot of comments that follow from readers):

"Keys for those units were kept in an unsecured, unguarded key box and apparently a large number of employees knew where it was," [Miami attorney John] Spiegel said. "This dangerous situation clearly began with this gentleman having an opportunity to gain access to her studio," he said. "Imagine a woman checking into a hotel and the hotel allowing pretty much anybody access to room keys. I think the public would be outraged."Spiegel said Halliburton also turned a blind eye to alcohol consumption on premises, creating unsafe conditions for the small number of female employees working among hundreds of men.The woman reported the rape the following morning and was flown to a Baghdad hospital where a rape kit was performed to collect DNA samples.After taking several weeks' medical leave in Florida, she returned to Iraq but left permanently in July because of emotional difficulties.The suit seeks compensation for pain and suffering.

“They have stolen the courthouse from the Superior Court of California, and I mean nothing short of that.”

So said Mike Tein in front of Judge Altonaga yesterday. Robert Parks wasn't happy about it and the gloves came off. Julie Kay has the whole story here.

In this corner...

I'm not sure you ever want to be a defendant when the plaintiffs are federal judges. Looks like we're closer to litigation over the new courthouse. Earlier coverage here. Said William J. Zloch, the chief judge for the Southern District of Florida: ``We are frustrated. The general contractor is basically unable to perform and there are numerous problems that have led the GSA to evaluate its legal rights.''

"The lash is about to fall on all"

That was Judge Cooke today during the motion for a rule to show cause in the Jose Padilla case. Judge Cooke showed why she is such a great judge during the hearing -- she took appropriate action for the leak to the NY Times but did not go overboard and order an evidentiary hearing or sanctions.

The government's main argument for going forward with an evidentiary hearing was to make sure that those who were responsible for trying to "taint the jury pool" were exposed and punished. But if the defense lawyers were truly interested in tainting the jury pool, why leak to the NY Times? Why not leak to television reporters (as was done in this case) or at least the local reporters (who covered the action today here, here, and here). Although Judge Cooke apparently has a subscription, how many Miami jurors actually read the NY Times?

In the end, Judge Cooke took the defense lawyers at their word that "this was a simple misunderstanding, an honest mistake, and it has been rectified. Your honor can rest assured that this matter is at an end. There have been no further disclosures.''

"Panama's Noriega set to be released"

"This year, Panama's ex-leader Manuel Noriega may leave a South Miami-Dade prison where he's been since 1990." In today's Miami Herald, by Gerardo Reyes and Jay Weaver

No Pinch Hitters?

Julie Kay has an article in today's DBR about the Gus Dominguez trial. Judge Moore had refused to grant a continuance in the past. This time, he granted the government's request for a continuance, but he was not happy about it. Apparently the government threatened to dismiss the entire indictment if the continuance wasn't granted. Both sides have reason to be upset -- the defense prepared for trial, made reservations for hotels in the Keys, flew in witnesses and so on because this was a firm trial date. The prosecution is rightfully upset because the lead prosecutor has been ill and in the hospital, which is, of course, good cause to continue the case. What a mess....

Response to Cully Stimson

I wrote this letter to the editor, which was published in today's Herald:

Following 9/11, we gave extraordinary and unprecedented powers to the government's executive branch to fight terror. Therefore, it is critical that we ensure that our civil liberties are protected. Unfortunately, Cully Stimson, deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, attacked the lawyers who strive to protect our civil liberties. [He later apologized.]
Still, in a recent radio interview, Stimson called it ''shocking'' that some of the most prestigious law firms in the country were providing pro bono representation to detainees at Guantánamo Bay. Stimson has gone so far as to try to rally American corporations to stop doing business with these law firms.
Stimson blindly attacked those who selflessly volunteered to perform the highest calling of the legal profession, defending those who cannot defend themselves against the unfettered power of government. He also insulted CEOs who understand how important it is to protect our rights and the Constitution.
These lawyers, true patriots, are following in the proud tradition of John Adams who represented British soldiers tried in American courts. Instead of being attacked, the defenders of our Constitution and our country's integrity deserve our thanks.
DAVID OSCAR MARKUS, president,
Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Miami chapter, Miami

The editor correctly pointed out in brackets that Stimson has since apologized. But that has been criticized as well.

Any word...

... on who has put their name in for Magistrate Judge in Ft. Lauderdale?

"As rare as four-leaf clovers"

Mike Tein was referring to binding 11(e) pleas in this Sun-Sentinel article about Ze'ev Rosenstein (in which the parties agreed to a 144 month sentence -- see post below). I loved the quote, and I agree with Mike that you rarely see these sorts of deals in federal court where the parties agree on a particular sentence. The judge either accepts the deal and is then bound by the agreement or rejects it. It seems to me that both sides would want to do this more often. It gives everyone certainty, avoids litigation, and avoids appeals... Why don't we see more of these binding deals?

Ze'ev Rosenstein pleads guilty...

...and is sentenced to 144 months (that's 12 years for the math challenged; Update -- My math is actually incorrect. After he is extradited, Rosenstein will have 5 years 4 months to go which will be served in Israel where the pending Israeli case against him, conspiracy to commit murder, will be concurrent and no further prosecutions here or there.)

You remember this case -- the one where prosecutors wanted the witnesses to testify in "light disguise." Previous blog coverage on this case here and here. The AP is reporting on the plea here; Herald here.

Judge Dimitrouleas presided.

Cert from SDFLA

Our appellate correspondent, Richard Rosenthal, writes in:


On Friday the U.S. Supreme Court granted cert on a fascinating case that originated right here in S.D. Fla. Without delving too much into details -- those interested can go to Wyner v. Struhs, 254 F. Supp. 2d 1297 (S.D. Fla. 2003) -- Judge Middlebrooks awarded "prevailing party" attorneys' fees to the ACLU of Florida after it successfully obtained a preliminary injunction that allowed a nude anti-war protest in a public park. But the catch is that after "winning" the preliminary injunction, the ACLU "lost" its request for a permanent injunction because the protest was was one-time deal, rather than a recurring performance. The Eleventh Circuit -- in an unsigned, unpublished opinion -- affirmed Judge Middlebrooks's award of attorneys' fees. Wyner v. Struhs, 179 Fed. Appx. 566 (11th Cir. 2006). Although that unpublished affirmance is not even binding precent within the Eleventh Circuit, it nevertheless conflicted with a Fourth Circuit ruling (Smyth v. Rivero, 282 F.2d 268 (4th Cir. 2002)), and the Supreme Court has now stepped in to resolve the conflict. After the Supreme Court's virtual elimination of attorneys' fees under the "catalyst theory," a Supreme Court ruling in this case could deliver yet another serious blow to civil rights organizations and other "do-gooder" litigants. Stay tuned.....

Padilla trial continued

Judge Cooke continued the Padilla trial until April 16, 2007. This was done, in part, to allow for the mental evaluations to take place.

Picking up on one of Rumpole's recent riffs (read his comments and responses by a Herald reporter) regarding article headlines, here is the headline for a recent Sun-Sentinel article about the Padilla argument in the 11th Circuit: "Lawyers for terror suspects pessimistic as appeals court considers conspiracy charge." So I read the article looking for quotes from the lawyers saying they were pessimistic. There wasn't one! The article, by Vanessa Blum, was well-written and informative, but the headline (which I'm sure wasn't written by her) was absolutely wrong and had nothing to do with the article. How does this happen?

Padilla case goes to Atlanta

The 11th Circuit heard argument today in Jose Padilla's case on Judge Cooke's decision to dismiss Count I of the indictment. More to follow later, but here's Vanessa Blum's (Sun-Sentinel) take of the argument. Heavyweights argued it -- Anne Schultz for the Government and Paul Rashkind for the defense. Both are chiefs of the appellate divisions of their respective offices.

More news and notes

I've been on a news and notes kick lately...

1. "Chief justice off mark on judges' earnings; Judicial pay shouldn't be tied to Congressional salaries": The Miami Herald contains this editorial today concerning Chief Justice Roberts' year end report that I covered here.

2. On Friday, a Broward jury found Michael and Robert McKay guilty of racketeering conspiracy as president and secretary-treasurer of American Maritime Officers, a national labor union based in Dania Beach. Vanessa Blum covers the quick verdict (after a long trial) here. "Defense attorneys for the men said they were shocked by the jury's decision and how quickly it was reached. 'I can't read the jurors' minds, but they certainly didn't have time to go through all of the evidence in the case,' said attorney Neal Sonnett. Lawyer Fred Haddad, who represents Robert McKay, said he would ask U.S. District Judge James Cohn to order a new trial." The case was prosecuted by Robert Tulley.

3. How Appealing blogs here about a new TV show about Supreme Court clerks: "What's next -- Howie Mandel hosting cert. or no cert.? Hollywood's quest to glorify U.S. Supreme Court law clerks will soon reach new heights (or perhaps depths) as Fox Television has given the green light to a new series entitled 'Supreme Courtships.' According to Variety magazine, 'Supreme Courtships revolves around the professional and personal world of six Supreme Court clerks. Tieche and Adelstein Productions ('Prison Break') principals Marty Adelstein and Michael Thorn will produce.' And The Hollywood Reporter says that 'Supreme Courtships, from 20th Century Fox TV and Adelstein Prods., is a comedic drama about the personal and professional lives of six Supreme Court clerks and their supervisors.'" Above the Law has more here.

4. "Pulling on a Fine Line: Case raises questions about when a N.Y. lawyer may advise snowbirds in Florida." From the intro to the ABA Journal article: "A licensed Florida lawyer may advise clients in that state on New York matters, even if he or she is not licensed in New York.So why can’t a licensed New York lawyer advise Sunshine State residents on New York matters, even though he is not licensed in Florida?" The article continues:

When immigration lawyer M. Ronald Gould raised that question in a lawsuit filed against officials of the Florida Bar, a federal district court gave him an answer he didn’t like.Gould filed his action after the bar, which has enforcement authority over Florida’s professional conduct rules for lawyers, nixed his plan to advertise his availability to advise clients on “New York legal matters only” out of an office in Miami.“I save them money because they don’t have to fly to New York to see a lawyer, and they don’t have to pay a lawyer extra money to come see them,” says Gould, who’s been admitted to practice in New York since 1961 and has lived in Florida nearly three decades. “Many people here still have business in New York, and I want to be available to them.”Gould’s suit argued that the Florida Bar’s restrictions on his advertising violate his free speech rights under the First Amendment and cited his “genuine and credible fear” that the bar would charge him with unauthorized practice of law (a third-degree felony under state law) if he went ahead with his plan. But in a decision issued Aug. 8, District Judge Federico A. Moreno granted the bar’s motion for summary judgment. Gould v. Harkness, No. 04-23178-CIV-MORENO (S.D. Fla.). Gould has appealed the ruling to the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"Two defense lawyers can keep fees Feds claimed were tainted"

That's the headline in today's Justice Watch from Julie Kay.

"Miami attorneys Ed Shohat and Bruce Lehr got their best holiday present from federal prosecutors. The government decided to let them keep $757,000 in legal fees from their clients, convicted businessmen Eduardo and Hector Orlansky, which the government had previously argued were tainted. The deal, which was approved by the Department of Justice last week, also gives the government a gift. The Orlansky brothers agreed to forfeit to the government another $750,000 from the sale of a luxury Manhattan condominium. *** Negotiations between Shohat and Lehr and federal prosecutors went on for several months. The consent order approving the deal was signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Menchel and Shohat Dec. 28 and by the Orlanskys Dec. 29."

Now the fight turns to the oppressive guideline ranges:

"Meanwhile, Lehr has filed papers seeking a downward departure in sentencing for Hector Orlansky, based on, among other things, his client’s health. Orlansky, 61, has had cancer in his shoulders, colon and vocal chords; suffers from an inner ear disorder called Meniere’s disease; has high blood pressure and cholesterol; and suffers from depression and anxiety. In addition, Lehr argued, Hector Orlansky should get a lesser sentence because he had no criminal history prior to the fraud charges and was “well-respected in the fields of banking and finance.” If the pretrial probation office investigation is adopted by the court, Orlansky would spend a minimum of 151 to 188 months in prison, which would probably amount to the rest of his life. Shohat said he will file a downward departure request for Eduardo Orlansky soon. Judge Jordan has not set a sentencing date. Denied bond requests, the brothers are being held at Miami’s Federal Detention Center."

disclosure -- I'm quoted in the article.

And here's the pitch...

The DBR covers (here) the upcoming trial of sports agent Gustavo Dominguez, which is scheduled to begin in front of Judge Moore in Key West on January 16. "Federal prosecutors have indicated they will call Seattle Mariners shortstop Yuniesky Betancourt and Chicago Cubs catcher Henry Blanco to testify, according to Miami attorney Susan Dmitrovsky, who represents Dominguez. However, the government may have some difficulty in getting the players to testify as many players, including Blanco, are out of the country playing winter ball in South America, Dmitrovsky said." Also alleged: "Co-defendant Hernandez smuggled the wife and daughters of Chicago White Sox pitcher Jose Contreras into the country, and that Hernandez was taped by a cooperating witness admitting doing so. Prosecutors are not alleging that Contreras, who earned $9.6 million in 2006, was smuggled into the country. He is not expected to testify at the trial."

The case is being prosecuted by Ben Daniel and Nathaniel Mandel.

Betancourt's stats can be seen here.
Blanco's here.
Contreras's here.

News and Notes

1. The New York Times reports on Padilla here. The Government has been taking some hits in the press recently on this case and this is another example.

2. "Compensation: Empty-handed": That's the headline in this DBR article about Tom Tew's lawsuit against the Florida bar being dismissed with prejudice in federal court. "About 4,000 asbestos clients of disbarred attorney Louis Robles will have to find another way to recoup the $13.5 million their former lawyer stole from them after a federal judge threw out their claim against The Florida Bar. In an unusual class action suit filed last January, the plaintiffs claimed a security fund maintained by the Bar to compensate clients victimized by dishonest attorneys applied to them, and their claims should be paid in full. The suit argued that the Bar’s failure to pay a lump sum denied the plaintiffs their due process and equal protection rights under the U.S. Constitution. But U.S. District Judge Willis B. Hunt Jr. of Georgia disagreed in a dismissal order Dec. 22. He denied the plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice, barring them from re-filing. The judge, who handled the case after the recusal of Miami judges, concluded the 11th Amendment gives the Bar immunity because it is a regulatory arm of the state Supreme Court."

News and Notes

1. Listen to Nina Totenberg's story on Jose Padilla here. Lots of interesting stuff, including high-ranking government officials stating that it was the government's intent to incapacitate Jose Padilla. Totenberg quotes an official who says that it would be in the government's interest to have the Court declare Padilla incompetent and send him to a medical facility.

2. Justice John Paul Stevens says he is a "moderate conservative" in an interview about Gerald Ford. Fun to watch...

3. "Greenberg Traurig Reached $7.6 Million Settlment with FDIC": Greenberg Traurig agreed to pay the FDIC $7.6 million for its role as a legal adviser to the now defunct Hamilton Bank of Miami, according to a June settlement between the FDIC and Greenberg.

We're Back

Welcome back to work, and thanks for sneaking away for a few minutes to check in here. (You won't find any resolutions or wish lists here. For that check out Rumpole or Brian Tannebaum.)

The last two weeks have been quiet in the District, but things always heat up to start the year. For example, lots should be happening with the biggest case in the District (and probably the country) -- the Padilla case. Oral argument on the Government's expedited appeal will be heard this month. Also, Padilla will be evaluated by a jail doctor shortly. And soon to follow will be hearings on Padilla's allegations regarding torture and misconduct.

To start the year, I'll give you the end of year report from Chief Justice Roberts, which can be read here (hat tip to the usual suspects -- Doug Berman, ScotusBlog, and How Appealing). It's an interesting read, asking for only one thing: higher salaries for federal judges to ensure the independence of the judiciary. He also notes that the pay problem has had other consequences -- judges are starting to come mostly from the public sector where in the past most judges came from private practice. Even though it's a pretty dry subject, the Chief is such a great writer, making the report fun to read.

Here's the intro:

Between December 19 and January 8 there are 32 college bowl games–but only one Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary. I once asked my predecessor, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, why he released this annual report on the state of the federal courts on New Year‘s Day. He explained that it was difficult to get people to focus on the needs of the judiciary and January 1 was historically a slow news day–a day on which the concerns of the courts just might get noticed.

This is my second annual report on the judiciary, and in it I am going to discuss only one issue–in an effort to increase even more the chances that people will take notice. That is important because the issue has been ignored far too long and has now reached the level of a constitutional crisis that threatens to undermine the strength and independence of the federal judiciary.

I am talking about the failure to raise judicial pay. This is usually the point at which many will put down the annual report and return to the Rose Bowl, but bear with me long enough to consider just three very revealing charts prepared by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

The appendix is also interesting. Here's a portion from the Appendix:

Nationwide, the number of criminal appeals dropped by 5% to 15,246 filings, after rising by 28% in 2005 in response to the Booker decision. Despite that decline, the number of criminal appeals in 2006 surpassed by more than 25% the number of filings in the years before the Court's decision in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004)....

The number of criminal cases filed in 2006 decreased by 4% to 66,860 cases and 88,216 defendants. The decline stemmed from shifts in priorities of the United States Department of Justice, which directed more of its resources toward combating terrorism. The number of criminal cases filed in 2006 is similar to the number of cases filed in 2002, when criminal case filings jumped by 7% following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Although the number of criminal case filings declined in 2006, the median time for case disposition for defendants climbed from 6.8 months in 2005 to 7.1 months in 2006. The median time period, which was 27 days longer than in 2004, reflected an increase in the time that courts needed to process post-Booker cases.

Anyone have the numbers for this District?

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Sorry for the lack of posting during the Holidays. I've been taking it easy, trying to get ready for 2007. The blog will be back up and running on January 2, 2007. Apparently though, the Federal Courts are closed. This just in from the Court's website:

Court Closed on January 2, 2007 for National Day of Mourning
Following President George W. Bush's declaration of a National Day of Mourning to honor the memory of former President Gerald Ford, Chief United States District Judge William J. Zloch announced today that the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, at all its Divisions, will be closed to the public on January 2, 2007. Consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 77(a), the Clerk's Office will follow established protocols for receipt and processing of emergency filings which require expedited judicial attention.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it

Judge Moreno sentenced "a Hialeah carpenter convicted of selling counterfeit Cuban cigars in a high-stakes trial . . . to five months of home confinement on Thursday in federal court in Miami." Prosecutors had asked for five years in prison.

Jose Padilla to be evaluated in courtroom

Last week, Judge Cooke ordered Jose Padilla to be evaluated by a prison doctor to aid in the competency determination. According to the Miami Herald, Mr. Padilla did not object to that evaluation but did object to it being conducted in the prison:

One of Padilla's attorneys, Michael Caruso, argued that his client did not want to go through the examination in shackles in the detention center because it ''conjures up memories'' of his allegedly harmful experience of being detained as an ''enemy combatant'' in a Navy brig for more than three years.

Apparently the Government objected to the evaluation being done in the actual courtroom, and the Court is waiting to see what the jail's position is before ruling.

Sue em!

Things are getting ugly with the new federal courthouse. According to this DBR article by Julie Kay, "the Government Services Administration is considering suing the contractor for the Wilkie D. Ferguson Jr. Federal Courthouse in Miami for construction problems that have delayed the opening of the courthouse by at least 18 months." Lots of juicy tidbits in the article... Worth a read.

Padilla to be evaluated by jail doctor

Here is a good article summarizing the Padilla proceedings today. He will now be evaluated by a prison doctor. "Our position is, we don't have a problem with that," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Frazier. Any bets as to what this prison doctor will say?

And a player to be named later...

Two more prosecutors have left the U.S. Attorney's office -- Chuck Duross is heading to DC to work in the fraud division and Matt Dates is taking a gig with the Red Cross. George Karavetsos was named as Duross' replacement as an Acting Deputy Chief in the Major Crimes Section. Also, Art Wyatt is the new Deputy Chief in the Narcotics Section starting in January (filling the spot vacated by Karen Gilbert when she was named Chief of the Major Crimes Section). Wyatt has been on a two-year detail to Bogota, Colombia as a Resident Legal Advisor for DOJ, and before that, he was working in the HIDTA office.

Weekend news and notes

1. "FIU couple to plead guilty in Castro agent case." FIU Professor Carlos Alvarez is pleading to a conspiracy count, capping his exposure to 5 years. And his wife Elsa is pleading to a misprision of a felony count, capping her sentence at 3 years. She's probably looking at a credit time served sentence of approximately 6 months.

2. Apply to be a magistrate judge in the Ft. Lauderdale division of the Southern District of Florida. (check the left hand side of the page). But only if you've been a member of the bar for 5 years, aren't 70, and aren't related to a district judge...

Padilla status conference Monday

Judge Marcia Cooke will hold a status conference Monday on the issue of Padilla's competency. According to this AP article by Curt Anderson, prosecutors and defense lawyers have agreed that before the case can proceed to trial, Padilla must be found competent after a hearing. Psychological evaluations have been submitted to the judge detailing Padilla's competency issues. Here are some of the findings as reported in the AP article:

• "Reports being suspicious of everyone, including his attorneys, and stated that he does not know who he can and cannot trust. He indicated he was unsure of whether his attorneys might really be federal agents posing as his attorneys.''
• "Appeared to become visibly distressed whenever asked about sensitive topics (his palms appeared to become sweaty ... his body would tense up, and he would rock back and forth).''
• "Is unable to watch video recordings of his interrogation ..."
• "Appears convinced at times that no matter what happens he will be returned to the brig, even if he prevails in the current case.''
• "Was certain that nobody could help him, that he could not be rescued from his current situation.''
• Both experts concluded that Padilla was not faking mental problems and, in Hegarty's words, "is terrified that anyone will consider him mentally ill or crazy.''

Train wreck

So, Narseal Batiste, the supposed leader of the Miami Seven has written a 25 page letter to Brian Andrews at Channel 4. Brian Andrews has been the center of controversy in this case before regarding leaks and he is stirring the pot again. The letter will look familiar to defense lawyers -- we see these sorts of letters all the time. But for it to be sent to the press... well, that's a little unique. I'm sure Batiste's lawyer, Ana Jhones, isn't having a happy morning.

Here is the letter. (It's actually addressed to Brian Adams, but I doubt he meant him.). Here is the Channel 4 story about the letter.

"Feds say agent smuggled baseball stars into U.S."

Here is Julie Kay's article in the Review. Free access today. Woohoo.
Ben Daniel is prosecuting this case. Susan Dmitrovsky and Abe Bailey are defending.

Ellis Rubin RIP

Icon Ellis Rubin has died.
Love him or hate him, he is a legend in this community... Way ahead of his time and a true trial lawyer. Rumpole has this to say:

Mr. Rubin was a throwback to the days when the solitary defense attorney rode into town to defend the person no one else would defend.Did Mr. Rubin like a case in the news? Sure. But don't let his cases in the press mask the underlying talent of an excellent trial lawyer. He should not be remembered for that one case everyone mentions (TV intoxication). He should be remembered for being a fighter, an innovator, a man who cared about his clients, and man who went to jail for his beliefs.
We proudly admit we bought and read his book "Get Me Ellis Rubin". One comment always stuck with us, and only a real trial lawyer would be able to write about it. Mr. Rubin wrote that he always enjoyed trying cases against a prosecutor who had a reputation for never losing. Because when he managed to cause them enough problems in trial, he knew they were in unfamiliar territory and he had the advantage. Only a lawyer who tries a lot of cases knows that feeling. From the outside looking in, we think his was a life well lived. We celebrate his memory.

Report from Court Administator

Clarence Maddox writes in to correct our previous post:
I think that it is important for me to note that as judges and staff continue to relocate to the WPB courthouse and get resettled this week, we are not open for business in the usual sense. In that respect the DBR was not accurate. I anticipate resumption of normal Court activities by Monday, December 18th. Clarence Maddox, Court Administrator, SDFL.
We stand corrected!

In other news, Judge Cecilia Altonaga found South Florida water managers in violation of U.S. water quality standards for pumping billions of gallons of polluted runoff from sugar farms into Lake Okeechobee without a federal permit. The Judge rejected an array of defense arguments from the South Florida Water Management District, including that a permit wasn't needed because the state agency wasn't the source of the tainted water, but was simply moving it between two similar places -- the giant lake and the drainage canals crisscrossing the vast farming area to the southeast. Here is the 100+ page ruling.

West Palm open

According to this morning's DBR, the Federal Courthouse in West Palm is open for business. Also of note, Judge Kenneth Marra will be moving from Ft. Lauderdale to the renovated courthouse.

News and Notes

1. Another first of its kind prosecution in Miami. A federal grand jury in Miami Wednesday indicted the son of former Liberian President Charles Taylor on torture charges in the first U.S. criminal case of its kind. Charles Taylor Jr., 29, accused of committing atrocities in Liberia as the former head of a paramilitary unit in his father's government, is in custody at the Federal Detention Center in Miami. He faces sentencing today on a separate passport-fraud conviction. The three-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury in Miami accuses the defendant, also known as Charles McArthur Emmanuel, a U.S. citizen, of burning his victim's flesh with a hot iron, forcing the victim at gunpoint to hold scalding water and shocking the victim's genitalia. Here is the Herald article and the Sun-Sentinel article. Here is the indictment. The case has been assigned to Judge Altonaga and is being prosecuted by Karen Rochlin.

2. "Gravely ill, Miami lawyer Ellis Rubin says goodbye. As he prepares for death, Miami lawyer Ellis Rubin says he is proud of his storied career." (Miami Herald)

3. "Case of the Dwindling Docket Mystifies the Supreme Court." (NY Times)

4. "Crumbling Dream: Jesus Palencia is likely to be taken from his family and deported. Did he place too much trust in the U.S. Court system?" (DBR)

Padilla replies to torture

We broke the Jose Padilla motions to dismiss based on torture and the Government's response. Padilla has now replied. I don't know how to link to stuff that I scan into my computer. Does anyone know how to do this? UPDATE -- Thanks to a helpful reader, HERE ARE ALL THE PLEADINGS. In any event, here is a synopsis of the evidence Padilla plans on presenting at the hearing on the motion (the Government opposes a hearing):
UPDATE -- Here is a NY Times article on the allegations and a picture of how Padilla was moved around while at the brig. And here is the AP article written by Curt Anderson in the Washington Post.

Although Mr. Padilla’s allegations, with nothing more, should merit an evidentiary hearing, Mr. Padilla does not anticipate reliance on merely his word in meeting his burden of persuasion in this motion. Attached as Exhibit “A” is an affidavit from Mr. Padilla affirming that all the factual allegations in his motion to dismiss the indictment for outrageous government conduct are true. Attached as Exhibit “B” is an affidavit from Dr. Angela Hegarty who has evaluated Mr. Padilla and concludes, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that Mr. Padilla was tortured during his detention as an enemy combatant and suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of the conditions of his confinement. Attached as Exhibit “C” is a memorandum from Dr. Stuart Grassian, a renowned expert on the deleterious effect of isolation, explaining the mental and physical problems that arise from prolonged isolation and sensory and sleep depravation. Attached as Exhibit “D” is a declaration from Andrew Patel, Esq., regarding his knowledge of Mr. Padilla’s conditions of confinement and the adverse reactions Mr. Padilla has suffered due to the conditions of his confinement, including an inability to assist counsel. Attached as Exhibit “E” are still frames from an unclassified video of Mr. Padilla being transported from his cell to other parts of the facility where he was confined. These still frames show Mr. Padilla being brought out of his cell with a mask and earmuffs and all manner of restraints. One of the stills provides a partial vantage of Mr. Padilla’s cell. In addition to the attached affidavits, Mr. Padilla will separately file a request for a § 5(a) filing pursuant to the Classified Information Procedures Act, 18 U.S.C. App. III, supporting the allegations made by his motion. Also, undersigned counsel have made a specific discovery request for information pertinent to Mr. Padilla’s conditions of confinement, including Mr. Padilla’s interrogation plan, all orders authorizing interrogation techniques employed against Mr. Padilla, and the identities of all persons who conducted interrogations of Mr. Padilla or were responsible for making determinations on Mr. Padilla’s condition of confinement. Finally, Mr. Padilla has also reiterated his demand that the government fully comply with this Court’s Order, DE 572, compelling the government to turn over records generated during Mr. Padilla’s confinement. This Court ordered the government’s compliance within thirty days of September 14, 2006. Id. As of this filing, almost eighty days have elapsed since September 14 and the government still has not fully complied with this Court’s Order.

Sal Magluta resentenced

Sal Magluta was resented yesterday to 195 years in prison. The case was set for resentencing becasue the 11th Circuit had reversed one of his counts of conviction. Magluta had asked for a de novo sentencing hearing, which the judge denied. There were also some late fireworks as Magluta's lawyers filed a motion to recuse the night before sentencing, which was also denied. Here is the Herald article about the sentencing.

This decision will certainly be appealed. It will be interesting to see how the 11th Circuit deals with the Booker issues on appeal where Willie Falcon, Magluta's partner, was sentenced to 20 years as part of a deal and Magluta got 195 years for proceeding to trial. Is this reasonable?

Here is an op-ed that Milton Hirsch and I wrote, which was published in the Herald, after Magluta's first sentencing hearing -- but before the Supreme Court breathed life back into the 6th Amendment in Blakely and Booker:

Miami's last cocaine cowboy rode into the sunset last week. Salvador Magluta, considered one of Miami's most notorious narcotics dealers, was prosecuted in federal court for having witnesses murdered and for laundering millions of dollars in drug proceeds. A federal judge then punished Magluta with a 205-year sentence. Magluta, 48, will live in prison till the day he dies. But Magluta was never convicted of the homicides for which he was sentenced. A jury of his peers found Magluta not guilty of the murders, and guilty only of the nonviolent money-laundering charges -- crimes that carry a maximum sentence of 20 years.

The jury's verdict notwithstanding, the judge decided that Magluta was responsible for the homicides and sentenced him accordingly. In a watershed 1997 opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal judges, in imposing sentence, may ignore jury verdicts of acquittal and determine whether defendants have done wrong. The Herald applauded the punishment, and the new U.S. attorney claimed that such a sentence sends a message about justice. It does indeed: The message is that prosecutors can lose and still win, that a jury no longer stands between an accused American and a life sentence.

The jury is a special American institution and has been, until recently, the heart and soul of our criminal-justice system. The jury stands between arbitrary rule and the citizenry, and is a shield against overzealous government. Our Founding Fathers recognized that even an independent judiciary was not enough to protect us against abuses of power. They didn't trust judges to mete out justice on questions of guilt or innocence. To determine the answers to these questions, the Founders wanted the commonsense judgment of citizens. Acting upon the court's 1997 ruling, prosecutors and judges have found ways to end-run jury verdicts and the jury system itself. Judges sentence defendants convicted of lesser charges as though they had committed other, more-serious crimes, even in the face of a not-guilty verdict by a jury. Based on inconclusive evidence, or even rejected evidence, a judge is free to send a man to jail for life. Not guilty doesn't mean anything anymore. Conviction is optional. It is the jury verdict that separates America's legal system from that of so many other nations. All countries, even the worst, have laws, judges, lawyers. Most have trials -- or what are called trials -- and many even have juries. But in too many of those countries a verdict is a foregone conclusion: the prosecution having indicted, the jury is simply a rubber stamp. In Magluta's case the jury's verdict was treated as irrelevant, and because it was Magluta no one cared.

As Justice Felix Frankfurter famously warned: ``It is easy to make light of insistence of scrupulous regard for the safeguards of civil liberties when invoked on behalf of the unworthy. It is too easy. History bears testimony that by such disregard are the rights of liberty extinguished, heedlessly at first, then stealthily, and brazenly in the end.''

Back to work

Welcome back to work after the long weekend!
Not much going on in the Southern District of Florida. If you have any news, please email me: domarkus -- at -- hotmail dot com.
In the meantime, here's an interesting article from the weekend about Justice Scalia, "the civil libertarian" by Scott Turow. One of the money lines: "Justice Scalia, especially in the last decade, has frequently taken an expansive view of the Bill of Rights, thus supporting defendants in criminal cases."
Will Alito and Roberts follow suit?

Turkey day news and notes

Some of the commenters are expressing frustration that I didn't post the verdict in the Jack Maxwell trial. In my defense, I was traveling over the weekend and just missed the coverage in the Herald, which was buried in the local section. BTW, it was guilty on all counts. Sheesh!

In another case we've been covering, Judge D has ruled (in a 14 page Order) on the Government's motion to have its witnesses wear "light disguises." He splits the baby, allowing the light disguises but requiring the feds to turn over the names of the witnesses and allowing cross-examination on the observation posts (which the Government did not want). I can't wait to see what they actually wear to Court. The Order says they can wear makeup, wigs, and facial hair -- as long as the jurors can see their eyes...

Finally, a reader who attended the potrait hanging for former AG Ashcroft writes in from the road: "...[T]he event was very nice, and it was interesting to see Gen. Aschroft sitting in the Great Hall directly underneath the nude statute he had covered up during his tenure with large drapes. The tall statute of the woman on the right of the stage has one breast exposed (a la Janet Jackson). When the current AG introduced Aschcroft, he was pretty funny about it. He said that the contrasts between him and the former AG were pretty obvious, starting off with: 'You know, several members of the media have commented on the different styles between John and me. And I suppose that's true. For example, John likes blue drapes. I happen to like a more open look.'"

Happy Thanksgiving

This is one of the few working days this year where there is no traffic on US1.... I'm not even in town to enjoy it. I hope all of you have a Happy Thanksgiving. If you are looking for a little reading: 1) The Government filed its appellate brief if Padilla; and 2) the trial started for the two brothers in the American Maritime Officers union case and only Sonnett gave opening statement while Haddad reserved. Last Thanksgiving, we were talking about similar items.

Power family

Other blogs write about their power couples, so I figured it's fair game to give a shout out to one of our own. Paul Huck Jr. was just named general counsel to incoming Governor Charlie Crist. Huck's wife is recently appointed Third DCA judge Barbara Lagoa. Dad -- who happens to be Federal District Judge Paul C. Huck (pictured to the left) -- must be proud...

Here is Huck Jr.'s bio from the article linked above:
"Paul Huck, General Counsel: Mr. Huck joined the Office of the Attorney General in 2003, serving as the Regional Deputy for South Florida and later as Deputy Attorney General. Prior to joining the Attorney General’s Office, he was a shareholder in the Miami law firm of Kenny Nachwalter. Mr. Huck is a graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School."