Sentencing question

So will the Liberty City 7 6 5 get more or less time than Jose Padilla? Remember that Judge Cooke sentenced Padilla to 17 years and his co-defendants to less time. (The over-under line was 20 years). Certainly the Liberty City defendants will be citing to Padilla's case and arguing that they should get way less time. We'll set the over-under in this case at 17 years, the same sentence that Padilla received, for the lead defendant. What do you all think the appropriate sentences are now that they have been convicted?

Five of six convicted in Liberty City 6 case

Naudimar Herrera was acquitted (represented by Richard Houlihan). The rest, including lead defendant Narseal Batiste, were convicted. Initial Herald article here.

UPDATE (4:24pm): South Florida Lawyers has a funny post on the verdict. The Sun-Sentinel covers the case here. And the AP is also covering the case. Sentencing for the 5 convicted is set for July 26.

What an unbelievable case. Press releases by the Attorney General. Three really long trials. Two hung juries. Tens of millions of dollars spent. Two acquittals. An acquitted defendant being deported. Five convictions. Sick jurors. Replaced jurors. And now the appeals...

Should prosecutors hire jury consultants?

Michael Froomkin, blogging at Discourse, raises the very interesting question here. From his post:

If the US Attorney’s office uses jury consultants to tell them how to select a prosecution-friendly jury, that would seem to me to be not just unsavory, but to raise some due process and right to jury trial issues.

But, I have to say that based on a cursory survey of the literature, it seems my instincts here may be misplaced: I’ve found half a dozen academic articles that just report on this phenomenon as if there is nothing odd or unsavory about it; if anything the drift is that the poor under-resourced prosecutors (the ones who just spent $5-10 million on the Liberty Six trials) need consultants to level the playing field.

I suppose if all the consultants are doing is helping the prosecution spin better then that doesn’t raise a constitutional question, although I still think that it is not a good use of public money. But if they are helping prosecutors identify pro-prosecution jurors, even by attitudinal rather then demographic factors, that seems to to me to take us yet another step away from the jury system we would wish for.

Some surely would say that the government is only responding to an arms race started by wealthy criminal defendants and, who knows, there may be something to that in some cases. But in this case the defendants are not wealthy. Has the public defender’s office got jury consultants too? If they do, couldn’t they make a non-aggression pact on the jury consultants and save us all some money?

Prosecutors use jury consultants in high-profile cases all of the time. Other than the cost, I had never thought that it was an issue, but Froomkin raises some interesting points. Thoughts?

FBA lunch this Wednesday

Judge John Gleeson is speaking at the Federal Bar Luncheon this Wednesday at the Banker's Club at 11:45. Please RSVP to Celeste Higgins at Celeste_Higgins@fd.org

Gleeson is a District Judge in the Eastern District of New York, and was a former federal prosecutor -- the same John Gleeson that prosecuted John Gotti.

Gotti's defense lawyer, Albert Krieger, will be in attendance. Should be fun...

Back from the West Coast

It was a fun week in San Francisco (I can't believe I missed the Father Cutié drama)...

I see the blog was in good hands while I was away. Rick was great and we hope to have him back on a regular basis.

Just a couple of quick hits before we get going for the week:

-- The Liberty City 6 jury (the latest version of it) will continue deliberating this week. That case is truly jinxed... (In his post on last week's LC6 happenings, Rick missed Mike Tein -- who, of course, is the most quotable lawyer in the District -- from the Blum article: "What a shameful waste of our taxes at the worst possible time. Just think what $10 million could have done for our schoolchildren in Liberty City.")

-- The District now has a Wiki page. It's interesting to look at the historical makeup of the Court. (Some trivia pointed out on the page: "This federal district has the dubious distinction of having had more judges removed through impeachment than any other district, with a total of two, one-third of all federal district judges so removed.")

-- Justice O'Connor had this to say about judicial elections: "They're awful. I hate them." More here.

-- Rick posted on the FIU faculty vote for Dean, and FIU law professor Howard Wasserman has a lot to say about the vote and the coverage here. Howard criticizes the open proceedings and compares it to watching sausages being made. Gotta disagree with Howard here -- we wanna know how sausages are made. Open proceedings are a good thing. Better to have the press in there and reporting (even if the coverage in this case wasn't complete) than the alternative of having the doors closed.

-- Rumpole demonstrates why the Ben Kuehne case needs to be dismissed.

D.O.M. canned me

Honestly, I don't know how D.O.M. does this and runs a practice. It's like being Dick Vitale and Coach K for the same game. Anyway, a week of wearing just one hat was nearly more than he could take. And this morning's little joke certainly didn't help. As soon as he saw that, my blogging was done. He was all, "You're totally out of hand," and, "You're not taking blogging seriously," and, "People depend on this," and the whole nine. I know, I know: It's like Stewart firing Colbert for being too silly, but he was pretty mad.

"Did you say you were going to apply to be U.S. Attorney?"

"I said I was thinking about—"

"And you're not going to apply, are you?"

"Of course not, but I'm pretty sure people got that."

"And did you not use my PACER account for a post about Paris Hilton?"

"Sure, but—"

"And did you not ignore all the comments from my readers?"

"Stop crossing me, D. I'm not some government agent," I said. "At least as far as you and Acosta know."

D.O.M. went slackjawed. He had the exact look that Carrie Underwood's boyfriend must have had when he saw what she did to his truck.

"What?" I said. "Too soon?"

Let's all get together for some legal research

Judge Gold set an evidentiary hearing for July 13th to sort out whether treaties or Swiss law prevent UBS from divulging account holder names to the IRS, reports the DBR. (The link is for subscribers only.) According to the article by John Pacenti, Gold ordered the Attorney General to explain by June 30th whether the IRS position is correct. Anyone making assertions about what Swiss law says needs to be in court for the hearing.

Game on

Dear Curt, David, and Willie—

I'm thinking about applying for that U.S. Attorney gig. I wanted you guys to hear it from me.

Money is no object

I was getting a little desperate for something on the Liberty City 6 trial. Jay Weaver has been redeployed to the Herald's team on the scandal over Father Television's day at the beach. Fortunately, Vanessa Blum came through with something on theme for the SDFla Blog. It's a nice piece on the extraordinary cost of trying this case three times. Grossman Roth's Seth Miles, who was once across the aisle from me during my long stretch in Judge Ungaro's courtroom, has a nice quote, which is good to see. UF Professor Michael Seigel's kicker pretty much nails it, I think: "It's worth it if they are, in fact, terrorists. It's not worth it if they were a bunch of street kids saying stupid things."

Of course, a lot of what we do is relatively expensive. Back in the day, I used to marvel at the extraordinary expense that the U.S.A. put into a simple airport swallower case. If you added up the judge time, AUSA time, AFPD time, USPO time, agent time, court reporter time, interpreter time, and whatever else I'm forgetting, it was probably a good bit of money. But that's what makes our system of justice better than some system of summary or inquisitorial justice, which would be anathematic to the Republic. Anyway, it's not like the government would find a better use for this money. So, might as well let the lawyers, jury consultants, and graphic designers have it.

P.S. The New Times has this short post on its blog about the case.

Paris to answer questions from The Chief's witness chair?

The media are giddy over poor Paris' deposition in connection with Goldberg v. Paris Hilton Entertainment, Inc., a case pending before The Chief. Tew Cardenas represents the receiver for a local company that invested in a movie Paris was in but allegedly did not do enough to promote. Judging from some of the excerpts, I don't really know what they expected her to do. I can't even tell from her answers whether the questions that presumably instigated these were asked by her lawyers or the receiver's:

"Any chance I got, any red carpet, any press, if I was doing something for another product ... I would just bring it up, 'Oh, my new sorority film, it's going to be sexy, it's going to be really hot girls'—like I really, you know, did my best."

About her role as an executive producer:

"I'm not sure what a producer does, but—I don't know, help get cool people in the cast."

And the quote that everyone is jumping on, in response to who paid her cell phone bill:

"I don't know. I'm assuming, like, whoever pays my bills. I never ask about that stuff."

Seems like she's her own worst enemy, doesn't it? I mean, look at her—she's wearing heels on South Beach, and that hipster she's with is too self-involved to let her know that just isn't safe.

Even though this is being reported all over the Internet, only the Associated Press appears to have done original reporting, so these quotes are all we have of her deposition. But SDFla Blog doesn't just pilfer other people's news. We look into these important matters to put our own unique spin on them. (For this, we use D.O.M.'s PACER account.) Here it is:

Apparently, it's going to be a bench trial, if it comes to that. Can you just imagine what this will be like for The Chief? Or for this poor Paris creature? Incidentally, I love that The Chief denies Paris Hilton Entertainment's motion to seal certain documents with this flourish of rhetorical questions:

Many of the documents in Exhibit 1 are not financial records. For example, what is the need to file under seal the resume of CPA David Nolte, the list of his appearances in other court proceedings and his publications? Certainly those items need not be filed under seal. Also, how do the parties intend to proceed to trial and discuss the financial concepts in this case? Will it not be done in an open courtroom? If so, then why should it be sealed now?

That's basically the entire order. Classic stuff. I mean, you can almost hear his voice, can't you?

The birds and the Indians

It turns out D.O.M. reads the comments. I know, I know. I couldn't believe it either. He says to me, "You need to write about civil cases. And someone said you're posting too much. Also, some people want to see pictures of handsome men."

"D, those are anonymous. There's no accountability. They can say anything. You have to treat them like fortune cookies."

Anyway, there's no convincing him, so here's one about a civil case with a picture of a cute bird. That's as far as I'm giving in:

Your gambling losses may help save an endangered Everglades species of hawk from the government's efforts to save an endangered Everglades species of sparrow. The Miccosukee Indians sued the Fish & Wildlife Service alleging that its efforts to protect the sparrows were flooding the hawks' habitat, a third of which happens to be on tribal lands. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed on Tuesday most of Judge Moore's decision in favor of the government. It agreed with the Tribe, however, that the Service had to specify a low-point in the population of hawks that would trigger further review. The Service had claimed that the birds were too hard to count and elected to use water levels as a trigger instead. Noting that the Service seems to have counted the birds every year since 1969, Judge Carnes vacated that part of Judge Moore's decision and remanded the case:

The goal of the Endangered Species Act is to protect populations of species, and using habitat markers when population data is available is like turning on the weather channel to see if it is raining instead of looking out a window.

It's a pretty entertaining read as these things go. The Tribe was represented by Lehtinen Vargas & Riedi.

Zarabozo sentenced to life

Judge Huck imposed five consecutive life sentences plus 85 years on 21-year-old Guillermo Zarabozo for his role in the murders and other crimes committed aboard the Joe Cool. Zarabozo maintained that his accomplice Kirby Archer, who is serving a life sentence, was solely responsible for the killings.

Faculty disapproves Acosta's bid for FIU deanship

The FIU College of Law faculty recommended that the university not offer the deanship to U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, reports the DBR (whose article is available only with a paid subscription) and the Sun-Sentinel. The faculty endorsed two candidates, Beto Juarez, dean of the DU Sturm College of Law—a fantastic place to spend spring semester teaching criminal procedure and skiing—and Joel Friedman, a Tulane Law professor. The recommendations are not binding on the FIU president and provost but traditionally are seriously considered.

The "maybe-nots" have it (updated)

Have a rough day at the office ahead of you today? I bet Judge Lenard can sympathize. Apparently, "sternly order[ing]" the jurors in the Liberty City 6 trial "to follow the law and obey her instructions regarding their duty to deliberate" (as Curt Anderson put it for AP) did not do the trick. But she is not giving up on them yet. Motion for mistrial denied.

UPDATE: Deliberations are starting again with a new alternate subbing-in for the person now known as "the recalcitrant juror".

A tiresome rant on grammar but you get a free DFW essay out of it

So, the other day I'm at the gym over at the U and one of the undergrads who works there is all excited about his LSAT score and can't wait to apply to law school. I ask him how he feels about grammar and diagramming sentences, and he looks at me like I'm some kind of walking non-sequitur because what he's really good at is arguing.

If only I'd had a copy of yesterday's Flores-Figueroa v. United States in my pocket. This was reported under such headlines as "Justices Limit Use of Identity Theft Law in Immigration Cases" and "High court removes tool for deporting illegals." Those are, of course, much more grabby than the more accurate, "Court rules adverb 'knowingly' modifies entire predicate and its object." Few under 35 would have any idea what that headline meant. (The late, great David Foster Wallace explains why in this brilliant piece that takes a little while to download because it's a pretty big file but is completely worth it.) I can't imagine what they would make of the crux of Justice Breyer's reasoning, which was this:

In ordinary English, where a transitive verb has an object, listeners in most contexts assume that an adverb (such as knowingly) that modifies the transitive verb tells the listener how the subject performed the entire action, including the object as set forth in the sentence.

Dismaying as it is, a world where judges and lawyers don't have a command of grammar—the kind you get from diagramming hundreds of sentences—is anarchic.

The Court's other decisions yesterday would probably reinforce the point (if I had a really good reason to slog through them) because they all involve "statutory interpretation," which is legalese for grammar. Two are about civil procedure issues—a remand of state claims to state court is appealable even though the statute says it isn't and the circuit courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review a denial of a stay of arbitration. One is about liability under CERCLA. (Shell won; that's as far as I want to get into that one.)

Too much democracy

Go here right now and type in David Oscar Markus. Or copy and paste it. I've made it easy for you.

P.S. If you are interested in keeping up with every pundit's musings on who should get Souter's seat, How Appealing has enough links to suck up your whole work day.

Help Wanted

So, D.O.M. calls and he's all, "Why haven't you posted anything all day long?" and I'm like, "Dude, I've been working like a dog, yo," and he's all up in my face with, "Doing what?" like he's the boss of me or whatevers and I'm like, "Grading papers and exams," and then he busts out with, "What's all that wind?" like if he doesn't know I like to grade on the Bay and now that's gonna be a thing because, "Think of the Blog!" and everything.

Anyway, the races are on. Applications are now being taken for district judges, U.S. Attorneys, and U.S. Marshals. Here's the official announcement:

Pursuant to the instructions set forth in the attached letter from Senator Bill Nelson and Senator Mel Martinez, dated April 30, 2009, the Florida Federal Judicial Nominating Commission is now accepting applications for the following positions:
U.S. District Judge, Southern District of Florida
U.S. District Judge, Middle District of Florida
U.S. Attorney and U.S. Marshal, Northern District of Florida
U.S. Attorney and U.S. Marshal, Middle District of Florida
U.S. Attorney and U.S. Marshal, Southern District of Florida

The revised Rules of Procedure for the Judicial Nominating Commission, dated April 30, 2009, application forms with incorporated instructions, and the names and addresses of the members of the Commission are available at the following Web sites:

1) The Florida Bar; 2) the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida; 3) the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida; and 4) the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

In addition, these materials may also be obtained from the Commission Chair, John M. Fitzgibbons, The Law Offices of John M. Fitzgibbons, 707 North Franklin St., Suite 700, Tampa, FL 33602.

Completed applications must be received by the Commission Chair and commission members in the manner specified by the Rules of Procedure by 5 p.m., Friday, June 5, 2009. Applicants who are selected by the commission for personal interviews will be subsequently notified as to the date, time and location of the interviews.

You have to figure they'll be about this careful, so this can't be fun. And above is what the SDFla looked like today if you were busy grading papers like I was.

"Please help us, judge."

It didn't take. The mind-wipe, I mean. It didn't work.

Friday afternoon, deliberations over the fate of the Liberty City Six hit a new snag, according to reports by the Associated Press and the Miami Herald. Here's the abridged version of the AP report:

A few hours after an ill juror was replaced, a note signed by the jury foreman in the "Liberty City Six" case said a female juror "refuses to engage in discussions based on the evidence or the law" and that this could be "unfair to the defendants," according to U.S. District Judge Joan Lenard. The note said the juror was disruptive and had made comments offensive to others.

"Please help us, judge," the note said, adding the juror "feels deliberating is a waste of time."

In court Friday, the juror accused of not wanting to deliberate also sent her own note, complaining that she feels under "attack" from the others and hinted she may have made comments about the law that were "misinterpreted."

After summarizing the notes in court, Lenard summoned the jurors back into court and sternly ordered them to follow the law and obey her instructions regarding their duty to deliberate. Lenard told the panel to return Monday.

"This may clear up the problem," Lenard said outside the jury's presence. "Maybe not."

SDFla Blog Origins

This month Hollywood brings us the career-beginning adventures of Wolverine and the mutants and (way more importantly) the crew of the Starship Enterprise. So I thought I'd stay on theme and screen the clip of how D.O.M. came to start this blog.

And that's how it happened.

Judge Altonaga feted in New Haven

The Latino Law Students Association at Yale Law School is awarding SDFla Judge Altonaga (YLS '86) its Public Service Award tonight at New Haven's Union League Café. Dean (and Supreme Court Candidate®) Harold Koh is scheduled to attend. Last year, LLSA honored Judge (and Supreme Court Candidate®) José Cabranes (which we know because they have yet to update their web site). Maybe they'll post some pictures or a nice blurb on their blog or Facebook page.

The photo is YLS's Sterling Law Building in 2006 and the guy who wouldn't get out of my shot.

Bern backs UBS

The government of Switzerland filed an elegantly understated amicus brief for Judge Gold's consideration on Thursday (according to PACER) or yesterday (according to the media). The upshot of it is that enforcement of the United States' summons—which it implies (but refrains from outright saying) is just a "fishing expedition"—circumvents the applicable treaty and violates Swiss law. Here is the very abridged version:

The Government of Switzerland has a strong interest in the preservation of the integrity of Swiss law and sovereignty and in promoting respect by the United States of its international treaty obligations to Switzerland.

If the Court were to order UBS to produce evidence from Switzerland, and backed that order with coercive powers, the Court would be substituting its own authority for that of the competent Swiss authorities, and therefore would violate Swiss sovereignty and international law.

The Wall Street Journal reports that an IRS agent speaking at a financial conference in Miami confirms that more "John Doe" summonses are in the works.

Souter succession speculation

ABC News Supreme Court correspondent Jan Crawford Greenberg canceled her scheduled appearance today at the Eleventh Circuit Judicial Extravaganza in Birmingham. Instead, she stayed in Washington to contribute to the frenzy of speculation about Justice Souter's successor. (The President is chatting with Souter in the photo, which is from the White House's new Flickr photostream.)

The Wall Street Journal has a fun graphic with scary mugshots of leading contenders. The Economist includes former President Clinton among the hopefuls. CNN lists seemingly everyone imaginable except Bill—including SDFla's Judge Jordan, whom this blog has previously all but endorsed.

As for Souter, he's not yet gone but already seems to be forgotten. Justice Stevens wrote today about Souter that "the Court will suffer a far greater loss than many now realize." That's almost certainly true as even the illuminati of constitutional law seemed at a painful loss today to dig up even one defining, signature Souter opinion in United States Reports. Professor Powe of Texas summed it up: "He couldn’t be my favorite for what he wrote; he was my favorite for what he was." (Souter did write one that shows how crafty he is—Brendlin v. California (2007)—but I'm apparently not on the New York Times' speed-dial.)

"I direct you to wipe your minds clean."

That was Judge Lenard instructing the Liberty City jury to start over with its deliberations, after replacing a sick juror with an alternate. Here is Jay Weaver's article.

Guest Blogger

Professor Ricardo Bascuas has agreed to guest-blog next week. Have fun!

Justice Souter retiring at the end of the Term

WOW!! Big news!!

Here's ScotusBlog:

Justice David H. Souter has decided to retire when the Supreme Court completes its current Term in early summer, the NBC-TV network reported Thursday night. The 69-year-old jurist, who is completing his 19th year on the Court, has passed word of his plans to others, and the White House has been told, according to the network’s account. Other news organizations also were reporting that Souter has made his decision not to continue serving.
By leaving office this summer, Souter will be giving President Obama time to select and seek Senate approval of the new Chief Executive’s first appointee to the Nation’s highest court before the Court returns for a new Term on Oct. 5. That process could be slowed, however, if the President chooses a nominee who would stir such opposition among conservatives that Senate action could be slowed. With Democrats in control of the Senate, however, Obama’s choice almost certainly would win approval.
Even if the President were to pick a decidedly liberal new Justice, it would not bring a strong shift in the current Court’s direction, since four conservatives along with their sometime ally, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, tend to control outcomes on many key issues.

Well, now we can start our who will replace Souter sweepstakes. Any chance it's someone from the 11th or our District? We've had prospects before... In fact, the very first post on this blog urged then-President Bush to appoint a Floridian to the Supreme Court. So, who are our best prospects?

John S. Kastrenakes new Circuit Judge in Palm Beach

Another mistrial?

The Liberty City 6 case looks like it's on the way to another mistrial...

UPDATE -- 4PM -- Judge Lenard dismissed the sick juror. She is hearing arguments about replacing that juror with an alternate. Here's the Herald article.

Original post from this morning addressing the problem:

Here's the Herald article:

Jury deliberations in the third terrorism trial of a group of inner-city Miami men accused of collaborating with al Qaeda were delayed Thursday because a juror has fallen ill and cannot return until next week.
Prosecutors argued that the remaining 11 members of the jury should continue to deliberate without the 12th juror, but defense lawyers opposed that recommendation. Instead, they argued that the judge replace the 12th member with an alternate juror, stressing that the panel had only started its deliberations on Monday.

Why would the government want to proceed with 11? Read on...

Defense lawyers seemed especially concerned about the potential loss of the one juror because he is a black man who they believe might be sympathetic to the six defendants, who are also mostly black. They even asked the judge to suspend the deliberations until the 12th juror, whose illness was not disclosed, could return next Wednesday, as recommended by his doctor. ''He's a black juror,'' defense attorney Louis Casuso said. ``He's one of the very few that has no problems.''
U.S. District Judge Joan Lenard rejected suspending deliberations, saying they must continue because of the length of the trial. ''It's really not an issue of race; it's an issue of illness,'' she told the defense team.

What about adding the alternate:

Lenard told both sides to return later Thursday to argue further over adding an alternate as the 12th juror for deliberations, instead of going forward with the 11 existing members. If the judge decides to add an alternate juror, it would be an Hispanic woman.
The judge would then tell the jury to begin its deliberations anew.
The racially mixed, 12-member jury started deliberations on Monday after a two-month trial, but the one juror fell ill early on Wednesday.
They are deciding whether the defendants, dubbed the Liberty City 6, are guilty of conspiring with the global terrorist group, al Qaeda, to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago along with major federal buildings in Miami and other cities.
The first two trials ended with hung juries and the acquittal of one defendant, a lawful U.S. resident named Lyglenson Lemorin who is facing deportation to his native Haiti.
Prosecutors tried to portray the group's ringleader, Narseal Batiste, as a militant figure who used his Moorish religious organization to recruit followers to destroy the United States. They accused Batiste and his followers of taking an oath to al Qaeda and shooting photographs of target sites in Miami to prepare for their destructive mission.
Defense attorneys attacked the prosecution's case as a setup led by an FBI informant who posed as an al Qaeda representative to lure the men into a fictitious terrorism conspiracy. They said that the men were struggling construction workers trying to help their poor community by establishing the religious group in a Liberty City warehouse.
Awaiting verdicts again on four terror-related conspiracy counts are: Batiste, 35; Patrick Abraham, 29; Stanley Grant Phanor, 33; Rotschild Augustine, 25; Burson Augustin, 24; and Naudimar Herrera, 25. The first two defendants are being held at the Federal Detention Center. The latter four were released on bond after the second mistrial last year.
If convicted on all four charges, including conspiring to provide material support for al Qaeda, each defendant could face up to 70 years in prison.

Supreme Court affirms 11th Circuit...

... in US v. Dean. Chief Justice Roberts opens the opinion this way:

Accidents happen. Sometimes they happen to individuals committing crimes with loaded guns. The question here is whether extra punishment Congress imposed for the discharge of a gun during certain crimes applies whenthe gun goes off accidentally.

With that intro, it's not surprising that the Court said yes and affirmed the 11th Circuit.

In other news, the feds charged a man with trying to get rocket technology to South Korea. Curt Anderson has the story here:

A Korean-American who served prison time for attempting to broker the sale of deadly nerve gas bombs to Iran was indicted Wednesday on new charges of trying to help South Korea obtain advanced Russian rocket hardware and technology.
Investigators also found thousands of e-mails allegedly sent by Juwhan Yun, a 68-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen from Short Hills, N.J., involving other deals for sophisticated radar and air defense systems, short-wave infrared cameras, laser-guided bomb components and missile launch devices.
Yun is quoted in one e-mail as boasting that he has been "the largest one-stop supplier" of sensitive military and similar equipment for South Korea for the past 30 years.

"There is no constitutionally significant difference between masturbating in front of a minor in person versus doing so via web camera."

That's the Eleventh Circuit in USA v. Aldrich. Not sure I have anything to add to that one.

Moving on to other appellate news, the 11th Circuit reversed Judge Highsmith's sentence of probation for James Hendrick, "once Monroe County's powerful government attorney." Here's Jay Weaver's article and here's the opinion. The entire analysis on the sentencing is as follows:

The government cross-appeals Hendrick’s below-guidelines sentence. After
carefully reviewing the record and considering the arguments that the parties
briefed and orally argued, we agree with the government that the sentence is both
procedurally and substantively unreasonable. We accordingly vacate it and
remand for resentencing.

That's it? I understand (sort of) short opinions from appellate courts when they affirm, but to reverse with no analysis...

What say you dear readers? I have taken off moderation, so please be appropriate in the comments.

Cert petition denied for Sal Magluta

Here's the AP:

A reputed cocaine kingpin has lost his fight to reduce his 195-year prison term.
The Supreme Court, acting Monday, rejected an appeal from Salvador Magluta, who was convicted of laundering at least $730,000 in drug money and bribing a juror at an earlier trial. The federal appeals court in Atlanta threw out the bribery count, but otherwise upheld the lengthy sentence.
Magluta asked the high court to take his case to consider whether the government should have been barred from trying him again after a jury acquitted him in 1996 of charges based on the same conduct. He also disputed the sentence's length since the judge acknowledged he took into account money laundering charges on which the jury found Magluta not guilty.
The case is Magluta v. U.S., 08-731.

TalkLeft has coverage of the case here.

Here's $60K to go work somewhere else

Apparently some of the big firms in DC, Boston, and New York are paying people to take a year off and work at a public interest job. Here's the Boston Globe story. Any word of that happening here in Miami?

From the article:

With his degree from Harvard Law School due in June, Juan Valdivieso makes an attractive prospective hire, and last summer, he scooped up a postgraduation job offer from the white-shoe firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius in his native Washington, D.C.

But as the recession deepens, budgets tighten - even at top-notch law firms. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius e-mailed Valdivieso last month that it would have to defer his employment for a year, until the fall of 2010. But the company threw him a lifeline: It would pay him a $60,000 stipend if he spent the year after graduation at an unpaid public service job. The 28-year-old is looking for work in an organization that will indulge his interest either in civil rights or consumer protection.

What up SDFLA?

It was a nice weekend, no? The weather was fantastic. It was cooler here than in New York this weekend.

Plus, the Heat won. Jermaine O'Neal is showing why we traded for him.


The Dolphins had a nice draft. We addressed our needs and got some big upside with our first couple of picks.

Too bad the Marlins are in a funk after starting the year 11-1... Getting swept back-to-back is ugly.

So what's on tap this week? We may get a verdict in the Liberty City 6 case. Any other trials starting up? Give me a shout and let me know what's going on...

Interesting news in DC -- the prosecutors in the Ted Stevens case have hired lawyers, to be paid for by DOJ. Here's the BLT story on it. Those lawyers can get $200/hour, not to exceed 120 hours a month. Chump change for most of the biglaw former AUSAs being hired...

That's your Sunday night ramble.

Only in South Florida...

1. Law firm handling "Chinese dry wall" cases has that same problem in their office. (Palm Beach Post)

2. "Lauderdale Lakes woman stole ID to pay for tummy tuck, feds say." (Sun-Sentinel)

3. Mutual Benefits sealed documents to remain under seal. (Sun-Sentinel)

Roy Black interviewed on Helio case

Tom Withers, who runs the awesome Federal Criminal Defense Blog out of Savannah, Georgia, has this great interview of Roy Black. Check it out.

Here's the intro question and answer:

Q: Thanks for your time and congratulations on the not guilty verdicts in the Helio Castroneves case. Any indication from the government on whether they will retry the conspiracy count against Castroneves and his sister?

Mr. Black: No, but in our view, the government can't retry Helio on conspiracy because of collateral estoppel. If the jury found no tax deficiency on the substantive evasion counts, then there was no unlawful plan. An agreement to comply with the tax code is not a crime. Or, if the jury found no willfulness on the evasion counts, then there can be no willfulness on the conspiracy. Either way we win. At a minimum we get interlocutory review in 11th Circuit before we start any litigation on this issue, we will meet with the government and see what their views are. There are civil remedies the government should be satisfied with.

Here's a snippet about a funny part of the trial with Bob Bennett:

Q: How was the experience of trying this case with Bob Bennett out of Washington, D.C.? Anything you gained from observing his courtroom demeanor/preparation?

Mr. Black: I have known and worked with Bob before and he is a wonderful lawyer. Not just that but the has a great sense of humor which really connects with the jury. One of the funnier parts of the trial dealt with Hugo Boss suits. The government claimed Helio should have reported the income from getting free suits from them. Our defense was that Hugo Boss was a sponsor of the racing team and Helio had to wear the suits. The claim was pretty petty. The total retail value of the suits was around $12,000. The summary government expert even admitted the amount was not material to the return. I cross-examined the CEO of Hugo Boss about how wonderful their suits were and that they wanted to show them off by having a slim good looking guy like Helio wear them. Then Bob got up, stuck his stomach out (which I can attest goes pretty far) and asked how would the suits look on his body. The jury got a good laugh out of that.

The Fourth Amendment is not dead yet...

...not even in cars. See Arizona v. Gant, decided today (holding that police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest only if it is reasonable to believe that the arrestee might access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest).

The lineup of Justices is interesting -- Scalia votes with the majority while Breyer dissents. I think that right now Justice Scalia might be the most pro-defendant Justice on the Court. No joke.

In other news, check out this editorial in the DBR by Patricia Acosta in which she discusses the recent administrative order allowing reporters to bring in their cell phones, but prohibiting them from using them inside the courtrooms. Here's the conclusion:

A thawing of the federal freeze on electronic access? Hardly. The order — citing federal policies and rules adopted when television cameras were the size of refrigerators and blinding lights were needed to make them work — spells out that while the devices can be brought in, they cannot be used. Use, the order says, would “violate the sanctity of the courtroom and disrupt ongoing judicial proceedings.” Past administrative orders banned only the use of cell phones and cameras inside courtrooms but said nothing about text messaging or e-mailing. This bring-don’t-use rule does not, in my opinion, reasonably advance a legitimate judicial interest nor is it required by the old policies or rules. It assumes that texting is the same thing as 1960s-style broadcasting when that plainly is not the case. It also sets the stage for real disruption when all those BlackBerry-toting scribes rush for the exits after each key development to knock out a few lines, then try to get back in to see what they’ve just missed. The truth is that tapping text on silenced electronic devices is no more disruptive of courtroom proceedings than scribbling on a piece of paper, whispering in someone’s ear, a yawn, or a nod of the head in reaction to a ruling or a critical admission. No significant noise is created by the mere act of pressing the keys of a device to create or view a message. Federal judges themselves type electronic messages throughout trials and hearings. They know this does not disrupt the proceedings. Why then, the rule? It’s obvious. Once the tweeting starts, we’ll have real time, electronic reporting on big federal trials. This won’t harm the dignity of the proceedings, but it will further the case for letting video cameras in the door as well. Of course, the case for allowing that to happen was proven not only 30 years ago but also throughout the last 30 years of Florida state court history, so federal judges ought not be afraid that if they now allow a little twittering to go on, it will force them to do what they should have done long ago. We finally have reached the era where knowledge can be transmitted at the speed of light from almost any place. This technological advancement is here to stay and makes the world a better place. In the courtroom, it allows the journalist instantly to report the defendant’s gasp and the relative’s tears as the freshly rendered verdict shocks through the air. Thirty years ago, the spirit of openness drove seven courageous Florida judges to embrace a bold new technology that made our democracy better. Their federal colleagues need to start down that path somewhere. Tweet.

Who will be the next U.S. Attorney?

Inside Track has a post here about the slow selection process. Here's a piece:

While other states are starting the interview process, the federal Judicial Nominating Commission in the Sunshine State still has not issued a notice seeking applications to replace Miami U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, whose term is up this summer. Acosta is interviewing Wednesday for the dean’s position at Florida International University’s law school.
The delay in calling for applications could mean that Acosta’s top assistant, Jeff Sloman, would likely serve as acting U.S. attorney. Sloman, a Democrat, is said to be interested in the job permanently.
Meanwhile, another potential applicant has emerged: Broward Circuit Judge Ilona M. Holmes.
After President Obama was elected and a turnover in U.S. attorneys was apparent, talk centered on Greenberg Traurig attorney Jackie Becerra, a Hispanic woman and the former right hand to U.S. Attorney Marcos Jimenez. But word is she’s happy at Greenberg, and her office confirmed Friday that she just adopted a baby. So, congratulations to Jackie.
Another name in the mix is Miami-Dade Assistant County Attorney Wilfredo Ferrer, a former federal prosecutor.
Other legal eagles who have surfaced as possible Acosta replacements are in alphabetical order David Buckner with Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton in Coral Gables, Brian Miller at Akerman Senterfitt in Miami, Curtis Miner at Colson Hicks Eidson in Coral Gables, Mark Schnapp of Greenberg Traurig, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Daryl Trawick and Bruce Udolf at Berger Singerman in Fort Lauderdale.
Diversity came up as an issue for women, blacks and Cuban-American Democrats looking at the makeup of the 56-member commission. Among the names mentioned so far, Holmes and Trawick are black, and the rest are white males.

Will the feds retry Helio Castroneves?

As you all know by now, the jury acquitted Helio Castroneves and his co-defendants of all counts, save for one conspiracy count. Technically the government has the ability to retry Helio on that count. But will they?

In the past, this U.S. Attorney's office has retried defendants after hung juries -- for example, we are on the third Liberty City trial, and the office retried the Joe Cool case after it hung. But this is different because the jury acquitted Helio of every substantive count. I would be really surprised if the feds chose to retry this one count. The sense is that Helio won the trial and was vindicated, so a retrial would look petty and vindictive. Plus, there's no reason to believe that the next jury would have any more reason to find Helio guilty after the first jury rejected almost the entire case. What say you readers -- should the U.S. Attorney's office retry Helio on the one hung count?

(p.s. Rumpole, let me know if you want to double down on your last bet).

Helio Castroneves found not guilty

All three defendants found not guilty. The jury hung on one count as to Helio... I can't imagine that they would retry it. Congrats to him and his defense team.

Rumpole, get that Benjamin ready

The jurors in the Helio case asked for the opening statements to be read back today. Judge Graham said no, telling the jurors that opening statements weren't evidence. From Jay Weaver's article:

The jury said it reached a verdict on two tax-evasion counts against the 33-year-old Castroneves and deadlocked on five others -- including the leading conspiracy charge.
The panel also said it reached a verdict on one charge against the driver's sister/manager, Katiucia Castroneves, 35, but deadlocked on the other six.
Jurors said they did reach a verdict on four counts against Castroneves' sports lawyer, Alan R. Miller, 71, of Michigan, including the main conspiracy charge. Miller was not charged in the three other tax-evasion counts in the indictment.
One of Castroneves' lawyers, Roy Black, urged the judge to bring the deliberations -- now in their sixth day -- to a close. He asked Graham to announce the partial verdicts and to declare a mistrial on the deadlocked counts.
The judge refused.
Miller's attorney, Robert Bennett, then asked Graham if he would at least announce the jury's verdict for his client, saying the anticipation was ``sheer agony.''
Federal prosecutor Matt Axelrod opposed disclosure, raising concern about courtroom ''reaction'' if the jury's verdict on Miller was revealed at this point.
The judge sided with the government, denying Bennett's request.
It appears from the defense lawyers' requests in court that they're confident Miller may have been acquitted and that the jury may also have acquitted the Castroneves siblings on a least a few of the tax-evasion charges. A mistrial declared on the remaining counts would be an additional setback for the government.

BOP listserv moderator Howard Keiffer convicted

Many criminal defense lawyers, prosecutors and judges are members of the BOP listserv, which was started by Howard Keiffer. Keiffer spoke at conferences around the country about the Bureau of Prisons and related issues. I emailed with him a couple times over the years... Turns out he wasn't a lawyer even though he appeared in about 20 different district courts. He was convicted this week in federal court. Here's the AP article:

A man accused of impersonating a lawyer in at least 10 states was convicted Wednesday of mail fraud and making false statements in what a government lawyer hoped would be the first of several federal prosecutions around the country.
It took only about an hour and a half for a federal jury in Bismarck to convict Howard O. Kieffer, who shrank in his chair and gulped as the verdict was read.
Authorities said Kieffer lied on his application to practice law in federal court, but still represented such clients as a former St. Louis Blues hockey player who pleaded guilty to plotting to kill his agent.
At the trial, two witnesses told the jury they each paid Kieffer at least $20,000 to appeal prison sentences for their loved ones, only to find out later that he wasn't a lawyer. Attorneys testified that they thought Kieffer was one of their colleagues because he seemed to know about federal court matters and because they saw him at attorney training seminars.
Kieffer's attorney, Joshua Lowther, called no witnesses, but he said the government did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
The 54-year-old from Duluth, Minn., faces up to 25 years in prison and a $500,000 fine; a sentencing date was not immediately set. Assistant U.S. Attorney David Hagler said Kieffer could be prosecuted in federal court in other states where he posed as a lawyer.

Here's an article by the ABA which goes into some depth about Keiffer. Worth a read.

Partial Verdict in Helio Castroneves case

The jury has reached a verdict on all counts as to the lawyer, Alan Miller. That verdict form has been placed in a sealed envelope. The jury has also reached verdicts on 3 counts as to Helio Castroneves and 2 counts as to his sister. The jury has been told to continue deliberating on the other 5 and 6 counts, respectively. Judge Graham gave the infamous "Allen charge" to the jury, otherwise known as the dynamite charge. More to come soon, I bet...

This can't be real, can it?

From the Sun-Sentinel:

With thick tape wrapped around his face, his hands bound and layers of shrink-wrap pinning him to a chair, the 17-year-old abductee was threatened with a blowtorch.His mother stood by, pleading on the phone for her ex-husband to pay the kidnappers.For the teenage captive, the ordeal inside a South Florida mobile home was very real. But for his mother, the FBI said Tuesday, it was all an act.According to a federal criminal complaint, the woman, with her boyfriend and his nephew acting as accomplices, staged the abduction last week in a bid to extort $50,000 from her ex-husband, a Southwest Ranches resident.

Here's what the FBI said happened:

At first, authorities thought they had rescued mother and son, but the teen recognized one of his captors as his mother's boyfriend, the complaint states.When investigators questioned Ponce and Boza, they implicated Arriaza, and all three eventually confessed, authorities said. It was not known Tuesday whether they had hired attorneys, and their relatives either could not be reached or declined to comment.Arriaza's ex-husband, identified in county court records as Hernan Pena, 41, also could not be reached. According to the FBI, it all began with the maternal promise of a meal and a fancy cell phone.Arriaza lured her unsuspecting son to a South Florida Wal-Mart on Thursday afternoon by telling him she would buy him an Apple iPhone and dinner, the agency's criminal complaint said.She intentionally left her white Honda Civic unlocked in the parking lot so Ponce could slip into the back seat with a fake gun, the FBI said. When Arriaza and her son returned to the car, Ponce sprang up, taped over the teen's eyes and ordered his mother to drive to his trailer on Southwest 127th Court in Miami-Dade County. Ponce reportedly called Pena and made ransom demands."During one of the calls, Arriaza informed (her ex-husband) that they were burning their son's feet and implored him to pay," according to the complaint.As Arriaza and Ponce watched, Boza held the lighted blow torch close enough to the teen's leg that it singed the hairs, authorities said.Pena quickly contacted the FBI, and investigators somehow tracked the mother and son to the trailer.

Judge Gold rules Florida law on Cuba travel is unconstitutional

If you wanna go to Cuba, now's a good time to pack your bags. Yesterday Obama eased restrictions on travelling there. And today, Judge Gold issued an Order finding a Florida law making trips there more expensive unconsitutional. Here's the Herald's take:

A federal judge Tuesday morning overturned a 2008 state law that increased registration fees and requirements for travel agencies specializing in trips to Cuba.
U.S. District Court Judge Alan S. Gold's decision comes just a day after the Obama administration announced lifting several travel restrictions to Cuba -- allowing Cuban exiles to visit the Island more than once a year, pushing for use of cellphones on the island and easing requirements for remittences to relatives.
In question was the 2008 Sellers of Travel Act approved by the state Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Charlie Crist. The act required travel agencies in Florida selling trips to Cuba to post up to a $250,000 bond and pay up to $25,000 in registration fees.

In other news, another UBS client who hid assets offshore pleaded guilty. From the Herald:

A Lighthouse Point man pleaded guilty Tuesday in federal court in Fort Lauderdale to filing a false income tax return, as part of a wide-ranging government probe of wealthy clients of Swiss banking giant UBS AG who hid assets offshore.
According to court papers, Robert Moran had $3.4 million in a UBS account in Switzerland as of Dec. 31, 2007, but didn't report to the Internal Revenue Service that he had the account nor declare income from it as required by U.S. law.
Moran, who is founder and president of Moran Yacht & Ship in Fort Lauderdale, faces up to three years in prison and a fine of $250,000.
He held the UBS account in the name of Winter Drive Investments, S.A., a Panamanian corporation that he controlled, according to court papers.
A U.S. citizen who has or controls an offshore bank account worth more than $10,000 is required to say so on income tax returns.
Moran is the second UBS client to face criminal tax charges since UBS agreed in February to provide the United States with the names and account information of 250 to 300 U.S. clients.

Back from Spring Break

Well, spring break is over, and you can feel it -- it already feels like summer outside. I'm already missing the blast of cool air from last week.

This week, we'll be sure to hear the Castroneves verdict.

Last week, I missed the 11th Circuit's opinion in Gen. Noriega's case. Looks like he is headed to France (!!). The Federal Criminal Defense Blog -- run by friend of blog Tom Withers -- has all the details.

Liberty City is still moving along. They've had 36 trial days -- Defendant Batiste is on the stand now...

Vanessa Blum covered the Riolo Ponzi scheme here. She raises the interesting question of whether trustees and receivers do more harm than good for investors. South Florida Lawyers covers a similar question here. Friend of blog David Rothstein in the Blum article:

As attorney David Rothstein of Miami put it: "People who perpetrate Ponzi schemes typically don't keep very clean records."Rothstein represents victims of another alleged Ponzi scheme under investigation in South Florida. In that case, federal regulators say George Theodule of Lake Worth raised more than $40 million, using fresh funds to repay earlier investors.

Theodule misappropriated at least $3.8 million to purchase expensive luggage, electronics, artwork and jewelry, according to a civil lawsuit filed in December by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.Theodule's attorney, Russell Weigel of Miami, said his client disputes the allegations.To the frustration of his investors, Theodule has not been charged with any criminal activity. And according to Rothstein, it's unknown how much of the money entrusted to Theodule is left."Typically, when people live large, the money evaporates," Rothstein said.

Finally, you'll notice a new comment policy on the blog. You gotta sign in first. You can still post under an alias, but I think this will add a bit more accountability. We'll see how it works.

Helio Castroneves case to jury

Here's AP coverage and Sun-Sentinel coverage of the closings. Here's the govt case:

Racing champion and reality TV star Helio Castroneves took part in "a pattern of deception" with his sister and lawyer to avoid paying taxes on more than $5.5 million, a federal prosecutor told jurors Thursday in closing arguments.Prosecutor Jared Dwyer said the group had wealth and success but thought "the rules didn't apply to them" when it came to paying taxes. So, Dwyer said, they funneled Castroneves' income into shell corporations and offshore accounts to hide it from the Internal Revenue Service and shirk a tax bill of roughly $2.3 million."Mr. Castroneves wanted to take advantage of all the opportunities in this country but skipped out on his responsibilities," Dwyer said.

The defense:

In closing arguments, defense lawyers for Castroneves insisted he did not cheat on his taxes and had followed the advice of his attorneys and accountants. They reminded jurors Castroneves has not collected most of the money at issue and would only owe taxes when he is paid."There are mistakes and ignorance at times, but at the end of the day there is no crime," said attorney David Garvin.
***
According to prosecutors, after learning the U.S. firm would withhold 30 percent of his contract for the IRS, Castroneves and his co-defendants diverted the income to a Dutch company to avoid the deduction. Although Castroneves has not yet received the money, he still owes taxes under the constructive receipt rule, Dwyer told jurors.But defense lawyer Roy Black called the government's reasoning absurd. "You pay the taxes when you get the money, that's the bottom line," Black said.The jury is expected to begin weighing the evidence on Friday.

Helio Castroneves closing arguments on Thursday

You gotta know when to hold em...

Check out this cool story about a Yale Law School student who doubles as a professional poker player. From the end of the story:

After graduating from Yale in 2005 with a degree in political science, Selbst pursued a Fulbright Scholarship in Madrid. When she returned the next summer, she turned pro and, within a year, won the first of her World Series payouts, taking her game to the final table of the No-Limit Hold-Em event, which ESPN broadcast, and banking $101,285 for her seventh-place finish.In the summer of 2007, Selbst again reached the WSOP finals and took home $140,000.Before returning to New Haven for law school, on June 12, Selbst won the $1,500 Pot-Limit Omaha event at the WSOP, taking home her first bracelet and $227,933 in winnings"People still say to me, 'Oh, you play poker. Do you make a living at that?'" Selbst says."I'm going to try to make it out for a couple of tournaments, if I can, this summer, but everything is up in the air until I find a summer job. Law school kind of gets in the way of it all."

"In 25 years on the bench I have never seen anything approach the mishandling and misconduct I have seen in this case."

That was Judge Emmet Sullivan today, ordering a probe into the Ted Stevens case. Here's the AP. The coverage of the case is worth a read. From the article:

During Tuesday's hearing, Sullivan read a primer on criminal procedure, the kind of rudimentary lecture students normally receive during their first year of law school.
The judge said he has seen a troubling trend of prosecutors withholding evidence in cases against people ranging from Guantanamo Bay detainees to public officials such as Stevens. He called on judges nationwide to issue formal orders in all criminal cases requiring that prosecutors turn over evidence to defendants.
It was a stinging rebuke of the Justice Department and Sullivan called on Holder to order training for all prosecutors.

In (misconduct) news closer to home, a large internet pharmacy case was dismissed in Judge Zloch's courtroom today. You remember this one -- it's the Google jury... Here's coverage by the Health Care Fraud Blog:

In a stunning development with implications in two large prosecutions, the United States dismissed with prejudice an Indictment against 10 individuals today in a South Florida courtroom, two of whom had already plead guilty and testified in the trial against the other eight defendants. This follows an eight week trial featuring two mistrials, one based on prosecutorial misconduct and also included accusations against the government of witness tampering and the testimony of a federal prosecutor to attempt to refute the testimony that the government gave permission for one of the defendants to operate his business.

Bad times for lawyers

The Herald's business section has a long piece on how the tough economy is affecting lawyers. And Julie Kay makes a special guest appearance here. (UPDATE -- Julie wrote the long piece as well, but they cut her name out of the byline!). One of the recruiters quoted in the article has this happy thought for lawyers who have been laid off: "Think about learning a new practice area or even a new career."


In other news, Jay Weaver has the latest on the Helio Castroneves case. Here's a small part of the article and the necessary picture:

Castroneves' lawyers maintain he owes no taxes on the Coimex earnings because the payments were made to his father, who lives in Brazil and once supported his son's career. As for the racer's Penske income, the money went to a Dutch annuity account -- income that Castroneves will start receiving next month, when he intends to pay his taxes.
The prosecution's portrayal of Castroneves as a chiseler could undercut his charismatic profile -- he's also known for winning the Dancing With the Stars reality TV show -- in the eyes of 12 federal jurors. As his trial wraps up this week, they will soon decide the fate of Castroneves, 33, his sister/manager, Katiucia Castroneves, 35, and his attorney, Alan R. Miller, 71, of Michigan.
They're charged with conspiring to evade paying taxes on $5.5 million in income between 1999 and 2004. If convicted, they could each face five to 10 years in prison.
Such an outcome would crush the racing star's career.
Whatever their decision, the jurors' verdict will come just after the start of the IndyCar Racing season, which got under way Sunday with the Honda Grand Prix of St. Petersburg -- a race that Castroneves won in 2006 and 2007. For this season, Penske has replaced Castroneves, a two-time Indy 500 winner, with Will Power.

"He left behind a watch collection that Prince Charles would be envious of."

Mike Tein has gotta be the most quotable lawyer in the District. The watch collection belongs to Won Sok Lee. The Palm Beach Post has the story:

After four years as a fugitive, alleged hedge fund swindler Won Sok Lee was in U.S. District Court on Friday morning; having been arrested in his native Korea in February as he tried to board a plane to Argentina.
Lee faces more than 30 counts of mail fraud, wire fraud and money laundering in connection with KL Financial Group, which swindled wealthy Palm Beach residents out of almost $200 million.

Tein was the receiver in the KL case.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A couple of you have emailed me the story about the federal lawsuit by ASA David Ranck against State Attorney Kathy Rundle. The Herald had an editorial about the case here. And Jay Weaver has been covering the case -- here's a snippet from the latest article:

The original prosecutor on the case, David Ranck, had similar misgivings about Espinosa's shooting of the teen. Ranck was taken off the case by Fernández Rundle after he told the Miami-Dade lead detective it was "not a good shoot" early in the investigation."The deceased was found unarmed, and no firearm was found around where he fell nor on the codefendant when he was captured, " Ranck wrote in an office memo a month after the January 2004 shooting, noting that homicide detective Charles "Buck" McCully told him that no gun was ever found.Also in the memo, Ranck alleged an "appearance of impropriety" because a Miami-Dade police major, Angus Butler, had called the state attorney's office to have him removed from the case. Ranck, who said he was taken off the case for "diplomatic reasons, " raised doubts about the "independence" of Fernández Rundle's office.Last August, Ranck sued Fernández Rundle and her top two assistants after she suspended him without pay for 30 days because he posted his memo on the Justice Building Blog, a Miami-Dade legal community website. Ranck said he posted it in May 2008 only after he had been assured by prosecutor Richard Scruggs that the case would be closed. A key hearing in Ranck's federal lawsuit is set for June. For his part, Llanes pleaded guilty in 2005 to burglary and second-degree felony murder charges, being held responsible for the officer's fatal shooting of Barquin. Llanes received a six-year probationary sentence as a youth offender.

There's Rumpole making news again. The case raises some interesting questions -- can a prosecutor be suspended for speaking out about the handling of a case?