Cracking the guidelines

Last year the Sentencing Commission retroactively amended the crack guidelines. But what happens when a defendant was sentenced as a career offender? Here's the Law.com article discussing how the 11th Circuit oral argument from the 5 consolidated cases (4 from Judge Hurley, 1 from Judge Middlebrooks) went in Atlanta today:

Today, two of the most controversial issues in sentencing law -- the length of sentences for crack cocaine offenders and judges' ability to go outside the federal sentencing guidelines -- will intersect in arguments at a federal appeals court panel sitting in Atlanta.
The five cases from the Southern District of Florida, consolidated for oral argument at the 11th Circuit, have the potential to affect many other cases throughout Florida, Georgia and Alabama. The appellate chief at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Atlanta, Amy L. Weil, said she'd seen about a dozen motions by defendants in the Northern District of Georgia alone that raise the same issue.
In each case before the court today the defendant was convicted of a federal crack cocaine offense and sentenced before more lenient crack cocaine sentencing guidelines went into effect in November. Each is trying to get a new sentence based on the change in the guidelines but has been stymied because prosecutors argue they were sentenced as career offenders. (see below for related case briefs.)
Crack cocaine sentencing guidelines have been criticized because the sale, manufacture or possession of crack carries a much harsher sentence than that for a similar amount of powder cocaine. The disparity has been described as a 1-100 ratio, meaning a small amount of crack is equivalent under the sentencing guidelines to a large amount of cocaine. Defenders of the disparity in sentencing have said that crack is more likely to be linked with crimes of violence, while critics note that the harsher crack guideline disproportionately affects African- Americans.

"A rising legal star in Miami agrees to plea bargain involving mail fraud, laundering charges "

That's the headline from the National Law Journal article about Richard Simring. Here's the intro:

A rising Miami legal star and community activist has quietly agreed to a plea deal in which he has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud and money laundering in connection with his role as in-house counsel to an indicted billionaire businessman. Few in Miami have known that Richard Simring, a former partner at Stroock Stroock & Lavan and Jorden Burt, plead guilty in July in the Eastern District of Virginia and is facing possible suspension of his Florida Bar license. Simring took the plea deal, in which he faces a possible five years in prison and must testify against his former boss, before a grand jury could indict him, according to his lawyer, Brian Tannebaum of Miami's Tannebaum Weiss. "He's taking responsibility for what the government says he did," Tannebaum said. "He didn't want to roll the dice and face…a jury." Simring was charged in connection with his role as chief legal counsel to Ed Okun, a Carmel, Ca., billionaire who operated the "1031 Tax Group." The company was one that specialized in 1031 tax exchanges, a way to defer capital gains taxes by exchanging one investment property for another. U.S. v. Richard Simring, No. 3:08cr00321-REP (E.D. Va.).

Very sad.

UPDATE -- I re-read the article and this struck me:

Simring, according to the information, told Okun that he must stop transferring client funds and that he risked going to jail. In 2007, Simring became aware that Okun was continuing to misappropriate millions from clients and was on the verge of insolvency, according to the information. That's when the Okun resigned and Simring was appointed interim chief executive officer. According to the information, Simring complied with Okun's orders to continue transferring millions of dollars of client money. Simring resigned three days after assuming the role of CEO. Okun's company soon after filed for bankruptcy.

Three days!

Tough times

From AboveTheLaw (which has a new editor):

* It looks like 2008 will be the worst year for law firms since 2001. The American Lawyer says the "silver lining" is that firms can "winnow out unproductive lawyers and apply greater discipline to expense control." In other words: more layoffs, less perks. [American Lawyer]

* Law firms are not the only ones suffering. Florida courts will cut 250 positions by October 1. [Daily Business Review]

Random questions from the last two days

Did you work on Monday and Tuesday this week?
	Yes, I went to the office both days
	Yes, I worked from home
	No, I played Guitar Hero at home
Free polls from Pollhost.com

And for the comments:

How many billable hours were lost in the rain?

Did BigLaw make their secretaries work?

Should the federal courts track the school closures?

If the court is closed, should you be able to e-file motions?

Federal court in Miami closed Monday & Tuesday

UPDATE -- because the SDFLA tracks Dade County Schools, Miami federal court will be closed Tuesday.

Here's the notice from the court website:

AUGUST 17, 2008, 7:30 p.m.Federal District Court Operations and Tropical Storm Fay
The U.S. District Courthouses in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Monroe Counties will be closed on Monday, August 18, in accordance with Administrative Order 2007-44. This administrative order mandates that, in the event of hazardous weather that causes the local public schools in a particular county to close, the U.S. District Courthouse in that county will also close. The U.S. District Court closures include the U.S. Bankruptcy Courts.
Jurors have been instructed to call in for further reporting instructions.
At this time, the U.S. District Courthouses in West Palm Beach and Fort Pierce will remain open on August 18 unless the public schools in those locations also close.
Any change to the scheduled closures will be made via media announcements. Changes will also be posted on the Court's website at http://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/

Rain

That was some storm this afternoon, no?

It wasn't this bad:

But apparently there was an F-1 tornado. Pics here.

"I didn't want to go in the life raft. He made me go. He had my gun."

That was Joe Cool defendant Guillermo Zarabozo talking about co-defendant Kirby Archer, who has already pleaded guilty. Zarabozo was testifying today at a motion to suppress.

More from Curt Anderon's AP article:

"What was going through your mind?" asked defense attorney Anthony Natale.
"That I would get shot. He had just shot four people," Zarabozo said.
The hearing Tuesday concerned whether statements Zarabozo made to the Coast Guard and FBI after he and Archer were rescued from the life raft will be allowed at trial. U.S. District Judge Paul Huck ruled those statements could be used because Zarabozo was not under arrest or being interrogated, but simply answering routine search-and-rescue questions.
"That would be a normal Coast Guard procedure and not a nefarious, underhanded attempt by the Coast Guard to obtain criminal information," Huck said.

His trial is scheduled for September.

Juror research

Julie Kay examines the new trend of investigating jurors here.

In last year's federal terrorism case against once-suspected "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla, a team of defense lawyers were sitting at a back table in the Miami federal courtroom with their laptops searching online all the jurors when they discovered one had lied on her jury questionnaire.
The woman, a Miami-area government employee who has not been identified, said she had no personal experience in the criminal system.
It turned out she was currently under investigation for malfeasance, according to Linda Moreno, a Tampa, Fla., solo trial lawyer who served as a jury consultant for one of Padilla's co-defendants. After the judge was informed, she dismissed the juror. See U.S. v. Hassoun, No. 0:04cr60001 (S.D. Fla.).
The Miami case was not unusual. As more and more information on people becomes available on the Internet, through posting on personal blogs, MySpace, Facebook and other social networking Web sites, the Internet has, in the last few years, become an important tool for jury consultants and trial lawyers.
Jury consultants say such sites are a treasure trove of information about potential and seated jurors that can be used in picking the right jurors, bouncing potential jurors and even influencing jurors through the trial and in closing arguments.
To mine the gold, jury consultants have begun turning to private investigators, some of whom have started niche businesses offering Internet jury research and "personality profiling" of jurors.
"If it's within the law, with peoples' lives at stake and millions and millions of dollars at stake, people will do whatever it takes to win a case," said Marshall Hennington, a Beverly Hills, Calif., jury consultant at Hennington & Associates. "The stakes are getting higher and higher, and it's becoming increasingly difficult to persuade jurors that have strong biases ... so we need information ahead of time. Everything is fair game."

One lawyer suggests it may be unethical to research jurors on the internet. I don't see the argument at all. Thoughts?