...are underway.
The Government is up first, followed by Adham Hassoun.
Tomorrow will be Kifah Wael Jayyousi and then Jose Padilla. The Government will finish up with rebuttal.
Judge Cooke has decided to read the jury instructions before closing argument. I've had this done a couple times and don't really have a preference... Any thoughts on whether this is a good or bad thing? Does it matter?
The SDFLA Blog is dedicated to providing news and notes regarding federal practice in the Southern District of Florida. The New Times calls the blog "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." All tips on court happenings are welcome and will remain anonymous. Please email David Markus at dmarkus@markuslaw.com
Monday, August 13, 2007
Saturday, August 11, 2007
"Federal Judge Accused of Religious Bias"
The federal judge referred to in the headline for this DBR article (which is going to be published Monday) is William Zloch:
Fort Lauderdale, Fla., attorney Loring Spolter is accusing U.S. District Judge William Zloch of bias in two employment discrimination cases, citing his deep religious beliefs, and wants the judge removed from the cases.
In a 110-page motion for recusal filed last month, Spolter cited Zloch's hiring of several law clerks from Ave Maria Law School, a donation to the Roman Catholic school and his attendance at several junkets for judges sponsored by conservative organizations.
I've had trials and a number of contested hearings in front of the former Chief Judge and have always found him to be fair and impartial. Definitely a no-nonsense judge, which is good. I think he lets both sides try their case. No complaints here...
To cite where a judge hires law clerks is just ridiculous. This motion will go nowhere.
Fort Lauderdale, Fla., attorney Loring Spolter is accusing U.S. District Judge William Zloch of bias in two employment discrimination cases, citing his deep religious beliefs, and wants the judge removed from the cases.
In a 110-page motion for recusal filed last month, Spolter cited Zloch's hiring of several law clerks from Ave Maria Law School, a donation to the Roman Catholic school and his attendance at several junkets for judges sponsored by conservative organizations.
I've had trials and a number of contested hearings in front of the former Chief Judge and have always found him to be fair and impartial. Definitely a no-nonsense judge, which is good. I think he lets both sides try their case. No complaints here...
To cite where a judge hires law clerks is just ridiculous. This motion will go nowhere.
Friday, August 10, 2007
News and Notes
1. Poor Monkey (Sun-Sentinel).
2. Our chief would never do this (WSJ Blog).
3. Jury instructions in Padilla almost finalized (AP).
4. Cop sues in federal court (DBR).
5. Sy's funeral. (Rumpole)
2. Our chief would never do this (WSJ Blog).
3. Jury instructions in Padilla almost finalized (AP).
4. Cop sues in federal court (DBR).
5. Sy's funeral. (Rumpole)
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Water cooler talk
Forget about 756, everyone is talking about yesterday's 3rd DCA's opinion re Adorno Yoss.
From the concurrence by former AUSA (we had to have a SDFLA connection somewhere!) Angel Cortinas:
Plainly and simply, this was a scheme to defraud. It was a case of unchecked avarice coupled with a total absence of shame on the part of the original lawyers. The attorneys manipulated the legal system for their own pecuniary gain and acted against their clients’ interests by attempting to deprive them of monies to which they might otherwise be entitled. More unethical and reprehensible behavior by attorneys against their own clients is difficult to imagine.
Youch.
Here's the opinion.
Here's the coverage in the DBR, the Herald, and the WSJ blog.
From the concurrence by former AUSA (we had to have a SDFLA connection somewhere!) Angel Cortinas:
Plainly and simply, this was a scheme to defraud. It was a case of unchecked avarice coupled with a total absence of shame on the part of the original lawyers. The attorneys manipulated the legal system for their own pecuniary gain and acted against their clients’ interests by attempting to deprive them of monies to which they might otherwise be entitled. More unethical and reprehensible behavior by attorneys against their own clients is difficult to imagine.
Youch.
Here's the opinion.
Here's the coverage in the DBR, the Herald, and the WSJ blog.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Padilla update
The government has rested after a short rebuttal. The rest of the week is legal issues without the jury. Closing arguments Monday and Tuesday next week.
Very sad day...
via Rumpole, SY GAER HAS PASSED AWAY
If you didn't know Sy because you don't get over to state court, you missed out. This man is a legend and embodied the Metro Justice Building. What a loss.
If you didn't know Sy because you don't get over to state court, you missed out. This man is a legend and embodied the Metro Justice Building. What a loss.
Govt rebuttal in Padilla trial to start today
And closing arguments will start Monday the 13th!
Now when will we get a verdict? Any guesses on how long the jury will be out? The over/under is Friday the 17th at 5PM.
Now when will we get a verdict? Any guesses on how long the jury will be out? The over/under is Friday the 17th at 5PM.
Monday, August 06, 2007
Executive branch vs. Judicial branch
The Louis Robles case has pitted prosecutors against the judiciary. The government and the defense had worked out a deal for Robles -- 10 years in prison plus restitution -- and that deal had the blessing of the receiver and almost all of the victims.
Judge Gold, however, won't accept the deal, saying it's too lenient. The government recently filed a 16 page motion for reconsideration explaining why the plea made sense. Judge Gold denied that motion, which now leaves the government with two choices. It can try a case that neither party wants to try. Or it can dismiss the counts that carry more than a 10 year maximum, leaving Judge Gold with no choice but to sentence Robles to 10 years, even after a trial.
Oftentimes, defense lawyers complain that sentencing is driven by prosecutors and that it should be left to judges to sentence, not executive officers. In this case, prosecutorial discretion is important in capping the sentence.
Any thoughts on what the U.S. Attorney's office should do? Should they defer to the judge or stand up for their position?
Here are previous posts on the Robles case. Our initial coverage of the issue is here. The DBR covers the story today but there is no free link yet.
Judge Gold, however, won't accept the deal, saying it's too lenient. The government recently filed a 16 page motion for reconsideration explaining why the plea made sense. Judge Gold denied that motion, which now leaves the government with two choices. It can try a case that neither party wants to try. Or it can dismiss the counts that carry more than a 10 year maximum, leaving Judge Gold with no choice but to sentence Robles to 10 years, even after a trial.
Oftentimes, defense lawyers complain that sentencing is driven by prosecutors and that it should be left to judges to sentence, not executive officers. In this case, prosecutorial discretion is important in capping the sentence.
Any thoughts on what the U.S. Attorney's office should do? Should they defer to the judge or stand up for their position?
Here are previous posts on the Robles case. Our initial coverage of the issue is here. The DBR covers the story today but there is no free link yet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)