So, their pictures are better than mine...

From yesterday's dedication ceremony of the Atkins' building (via the DBR).

Gag order lifted in part

Judge Lenard held a hearing today on my motion in the Liberty City Seven case regarding the gag order that extended to acquitted defendant Lyglenson Lemorin, his lawyer Joel DeFabio, and DeFabio's agents (me).

On January 12, we filed a motion for clarification of her order, asking how far the gag order reached and who was covered. Then on January 24, Scott Srebnick and I filed a writ of mandamus with the Eleventh Circuit attacking the gag order.

Today, Judge Lenard clarified the earlier gag orders. Lemorin's wife is now free to speak. And all of us can speak about Lemorin's immigration case, so long as we don't touch on the facts of underlying criminal case. Query how we will do that since the immigration case is based on the same facts. We still cannot discuss the facts of the first trial that led to Lemorin's acquittal. Accordingly, we will proceed with our appeal in the 11th Circuit.

Judge Lenard indicated she will be writing an order to memorialize her oral findings today, which I will post.

What struck me most about the hearing was the Government's repeated discussion about trying to protect the rights of the six men still on trial. As Srebnick and I argued in court today, none of those charged men objected to Lemorin speaking to the press. Lemorin has been detained for almost 19 months since the Government issued a press release calling him an agent of al Qaeda who wanted to blow up buildings. He should be permitted to respond to those false allegations in the media to restore his reputation and to shine light on the allegations in his immigration case.

I generally do not blog about cases with which I'm involved, but this is an exception because the gag order affected the blog. So I feel that it's okay to discuss these issues here.

Here's an article from the DBR in today's paper setting out what had occurred up till today. They'll be a bunch more in the paper tomorrow, which I will post.

UPDATE -- here are articles from the DBR, Herald, Sun-Sentinel and the AP about yesterday's proceeding.

C. Clyde Atkins renaming ceremony

It was a beautiful day for a beautiful ceremony this morning, renaming the Tower Building the C. Clyde Atkins United States Courthouse (at 301 N. Miami Avenue).

Here's a picture I took with my cell phone of Chief Judge Moreno presiding over the events. Speakers included:

Senator Bill Nelson, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Nilda Pedrosa (for Mel Martinez), Frank Angones, and Judy Korchin.

Atkins' wife and daughter also spoke.

All of the federal judges and magistrates were there and they were retelling stories about Atkins. I never practiced before him, but from what everyone was saying he seemed like a truly good person.

"Thank goodness for courts and judges who know the Constitution and follow the law."

That's the concluding sentence from a glowing editorial about Judge Cooke's handling of the Padilla sentencing. Here's more:

The punishment that Jose Padilla and two codefendants will get for conspiring with Islamic jihadists is both measured and fair. U.S. District Court Judge Marcia G. Cooke could have given Padilla a life sentence, but instead sentenced him to 17 years and four months in prison. That is less time than prosecutors asked for and more than defense lawyers hoped for -- but it is entirely commensurate with the crimes for which the three men were convicted.
This judgment and trial have been good illustrations of how the U.S. justice system should work: an impartial and fair assessment of the facts and evidence, followed by a correct apportionment of punishment, or if the case warrants, relief for the defendants.

And Vanessa Blum describes the jail where Padilla will likely serve this time. Certainly no cake walk:

Within the super-maximum security federal prison in Florence, Colo., rumors tell of a unit for terrorists called "Bombers Row." If it exists — and the Bureau of Prisons isn't telling — that is where Jose Padilla, the man once dubbed the "dirty bomber," will likely serve his 17-year prison term alongside many of the country's most notorious and dangerous criminals. The fortress-like facility outside Colorado Springs, formally ADX Florence, is known to prison experts as the "Alcatraz of the Rockies" and to its roughly 500 inmates as "The Tombs."
ADX is government shorthand for Administrative Maximum U.S. Penitentiary. Lawyers for Padilla use a simpler moniker to describe his possible jail: "hell."

And here's Curt Anderson on the chances of a government appeal:

U.S. prosecutors face steep legal hurdles if they appeal the prison terms imposed on Jose Padilla and two other men convicted of terrorism conspiracy and material support charges because of the broad powers federal judges enjoy in deciding sentences.Only a few years ago, judges were required to more closely follow federal sentencing guidelines and deviations were difficult. But with its 2005 U.S. vs. Booker decision, the U.S. Supreme Court began a series of rulings handing judges far more discretion to vary sentences based on individual circumstances.It was this authority that U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke relied upon Tuesday when she rejected a sentencing guideline range of between 30 years and life for Padilla and his two co-defendants, settling instead on much lesser prison terms for all three. Prosecutors had argued for life.

And finally, here's Jay Weaver on Padilla's mom's reaction:

After Tuesday's sentencings, Padilla's mother, Estela Ortega-Lebron, shouted ''Praise the Lord'' and ''Hallelujah'' as she left the courthouse.
Ortega-Lebron, who lives in Plantation and attended most of the three-month trial, said the judge's decision not to give Padilla life was proof that her son was not a terrorist.
''He's not a terrorist,'' she said. ``He's not an enemy combatant. He's not al Qaeda or the Taliban. He's a human being.''
Ortega-Lebron, who called the government's treatment of her son ''insane,'' said he has suffered psychologically from his time in isolation in the military brig and in federal detention. ''Mentally, he won't be like me and you,'' she said.

Padilla defendants convicted because of "Obama bin Laden"

That's according to the Daily Business Review today. The entire quote:

"Their attorneys blames their conviction on the numerous times prosecutors used al Qaeda and its leader Obama bin Laden in trial. Cooke also allowed jurors to see a videotape of Obama bin Laden."

WHOOPS!

UPDATE -- on reflection, I'm sorry I posted this. The article is actually very good and has some interesting points and quotes. We all make typos and mistakes. It was mean of me to point it out.

Thoughts on Padilla sentencing

• Many news outlets are referring to the 17 year sentence as "lenient." Since when did 17 years become a lenient sentence? Think about where you were 17 years ago.

• Some commenters are wondering why Padilla's sentence was the longest of the three defendants when his role was arguably the least serious. Answer: He had the worst criminal history. He is a career offender under the sentencing guidelines, while the other two defendants are not.

• Will Padilla get credit for time he served in the naval brig?

• Will the government appeal the sentences? They would very likely lose after the recent Supreme Court cases, Gall and Kimbrough, which gave very wide latitude to district judges in sentencing defendants. If they know they will likely lose, will they still appeal just to make a point?

• Thank goodness for the Supreme Court's Apprendi line of cases. It lets judges judge again at sentencing.

Jose Padilla sentenced

Judge Marcia Cooke sentenced Jose Padilla to just over 17 years today. Co-defendant Adham Amin Hassoun received 15 years and eight months, and Kifah Wael Jayyousi, received 12 years and eight months.

The sentences mark huge victories for the defense because the advisory sentencing guideline range calculated by the judge was 30 years to life, and the government was asking for life.

Judge Cooke explained: “There is no evidence that these defendants personally, killed maimed or kidnapped.” She also said that she could consider Padilla's harsh treatment in the brig, over government objection.

With good time, Padilla will be released in about 12 years. Assistant U.S. Attorney John Shipley objected to the sentences, calling them unreasonable. It will be interesting to see whether the government appeals the sentences after Gall and Kimbrough, the recent Supreme Court cases which give district courts very wide latitude in sentencing.

The over-under wasn't too far off, I guess.

UPDATE -- a number of people have emailed me asking about Judge Marcia Cooke. Here is original post I wrote about her when the case was first assigned to her division. I think she has demonstrated her independence and courage. Here is what I said about her back then in November 2005:

Perhaps DOJ looked at Judge Cooke's resume and saw that she was a Bush appointee and a former AUSA and thought that she would be a push-over for the feds. Froomkin (who I doubt has ever appeared before her) goes so far as to say "the government should not expect a hostile bench." If this is what the government thought, it is dead wrong. Judge Cooke -- to put it in Chief Justice Roberts' words -- calls a strike a strike and a ball a ball, and will not be pushed around by the government. She is known in this community as a fair judge who listens carefully to both sides and calls it right down the middle. She is well liked by criminal defense attorneys and prosecutors alike.

Big SDFLA day

Judge Cooke will impose sentence this morning in the Padilla case. The CSM asks the following question:

Can a suspected future terrorist receive the same harsh punishment meted out against actual terrorists who were personally involved in planning or carrying out genuine bombings, assassinations, and kidnappings?

The article then tracks some of Michael Caruso's arguments:

In a hearing on Friday, Padilla's lawyer, Acting Federal Public Defender Michael Caruso, argued that there is no comparison between his client's conduct and the conduct of convicted terrorists currently serving sentences of life in prison.
•Richard Reid attempted to detonate a shoe bomb on a crowded commercial airliner over the Atlantic Ocean in December 2001.
•Zacarias Moussaoui admitted to infiltrating the US to serve in a second wave of Al Qaeda attacks similar to the massive 9/11 terrorist attacks.
•Ramzi Yousef planned the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that killed six and injured at least 1,000 and was the mastermind of a foiled 1995 plot to assassinate the pope and simultaneously bomb 11 airliners carrying 4,000 passengers.
•Wadi El-Hage helped plan the 1998 bombing of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed 224 and injured 4,500.

Professor Berman at his sentencing blog is covering the case here.

And the retrial of another big case starts up today, but I can't comment on it.