"Gotta get away from my lawyer. Sit tight. Say nothing. Write nothing. Brooklyn to bronx. I'll make u famous."

That was Scott Rothstein texting with Sun-Sentinel reporter Mike Mayo. They had nicknames for each other and everything. Rothstein kept up a con with Mayo, promising him that he would get the exclusive Rothstein interview -- I guess to keep Mayo from writing anything too critical about him. Mayo details the exchanges here. It's an interesting read.

Of course, the most comprehensive place to go for Rothstein news is the Daily Pulp. Bob Norman is just churning out news over at his site. Good stuff.

In other news:

1. Ex-Broward Commissioner Josephus Eggelletion to plead guilty (via Herald). Looks like Ben Kuehne is back to work -- he and Kendall Coffee are representing Eggelletion.

2. SFL covers Judge Moreno's decision to pay Roberto Martinez and Colson Hicks $4.5 million more than initially approved for work as a receiver. Although Judge Moreno gave less than Martinez was asking for, he still about double the hourly rate that was billed ($450 vs. $218). Any thoughts on this? Should CJA lawyers be able to ask for a kicker when they do good work?

3. Honest-services fraud is before the High Court this week. Should be really interesting. More on this later, but here's a primer from USA Today.

Ben Kuehne event and other weekend news

This should be something:

BENEDICT P. KUEHNE
In Grateful Appreciation of the
Overwhelming Community Support of his Innocence

Invites the Community to his
APPRECIATION RECEPTION
On the Occasion of his Vindication

Sky lobby
Bank of America tower
100 S.E. 2nd Street
Miami, Florida 33131
Thursday, December 10, 2009
5:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.
RSVP to: RSVP@kuehnelaw.com

In other news, former AUSAs Mike Tein and Richard Scruggs sqaured off before their state court trial, which starts Monday morning. Tein filed a motion alleging prosecutorial misconduct and the judge allowed Tein to cross-examine Scruggs. Apparently, there were fireworks:

Fri., Dec. 4 2009 @ 9:11PM




Richard Scruggs is usually the guy asking people tough questions and getting witnesses to spill the beans. But today Miami-Dade's veteran public corruption prosecutor was on the receiving end of an intense grilling. And he was not enjoying himself.It went down inside the courtroom of Judge Beatrice Butchko in the Miami-Dade criminal justice building at 1351 NW 12th Street. The man putting the screws on Scruggs was Michael Tein, the criminal defense lawyer representing Rev. Gaston Smith, who is facing grand theft charge for allegedly stealing $17,000 in county grant money.Tein accuses Scruggs of prosecutorial misconduct in Smith's case.During several hours of testimony this afternoon, Scruggs's answers went from terse to angry. At one point he growled: "Mr. Tein will you calm the rhetoric please."He repeatedly denied he acted with malicious intent when he waited a month to inform Smith and Smith's other criminal defense attorney that a Miami-Dade police detective had secretly recorded two conversations they had with Scruggs and investigators before the clergyman was indicted. Tein zealously quizzed Scruggs if he ever informed Smith that he was a criminal target during the pastor's interviews before he was arrested. "No, no, no, no," Scruggs grumbled. "You got that!"
***
Scruggs disputed comments attributed to him by Miami New Times staff writer Gus Garcia-Roberts in this profile of Smith. He claims he never told Garcia-Roberts Smith had rejected a plea deal in exchange for his testimony against suspended Miami city commissioner Michelle Spence-Jones. (Scruggs is prosecuting her for allegedly stealing $50,000 in county funds.) Scruggs also denied telling Garcia-Roberts that he had reported Smith to the Internal Revenue Service for possible tax evasion. "Absolutely not," Scruggs said under oath. "I don't recall talking about taxes at all."Judge Butchko appeared skeptical. She asked: "So how would the reporter know that if he didn't get it from you? Is the reporter clairvoyant?"Scruggs' reply: "I don't know." He said that alot during his inquisition. And the assistant state attorney conceded that he did tell Garcia-Roberts that Smith "was caught with his hand in the cookie jar." But he claimed it was off the record.Then Scruggs revealed something that just made no sense. When Tein asked him why he didn't complain to New Times editor Chuck Strouse or demand a correction, Scruggs says he decided not to because "no one reads this stuff anyway." Tein: "No one reads the New Times?"Scruggs: "Yeah, Uh-huh."

Apparently, court went until 9:30 Friday night with Tein throwing punch after punch against Scruggs. This trial (preview here by the Miami Herald) should be a fun one to watch.

UPDATE -- here's another New Times article on the hearing, and here is a portion of the transcript including part of Tein's cross of Scruggs and the judge's ruling.

See you all at this event

The Steve Chaykin Fellowship event is coming up:

When: Saturday, January 9, 2010

6:30 pm -- Cocktail Reception

8:15 pm -- Concert

Where: Gusman Hall
University of Miami
Coral Gables Campus

On Saturday evening, January 9, 2010, a Reception and Concert by Grammy Nominated Jazz and Blues Artist Marcia Ball, will be held at the Gusman Concert Hall, on the University of Miami Campus. All the proceeds will benefit the Steven E. Chaykin Fellowship at the Center for Ethics and Public Service, at the University of Miami School of Law.

More information about this event can be found on the web at http://www.chaykinfellowship.com/ or by calling Susan at (305) 374-7771. The Steven E. Chaykin Fellowship Trust is a 501(c)(3) corporation, and a portion of your donations may be tax deductible.

Ho hum

Well, it's a Friday in December. Awfully quiet around town.

I found interesting this Herald article about a state judge and a defendant being Facebook friends:

Several weeks ago, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Yvonne Colodny accepted a new friend request on the social networking site Facebook -- from Miami Commissioner Michelle Spence-Jones.

On Thursday, Spence-Jones was not a pal but a defendant whose grand theft case was on Colodny's docket for arraignment.

Colodny disclosed the tidbit to lawyers in the case, assuring them that she immediately unfriended the politician when she learned of her arrest on Nov. 13. Colodny also noted that she never once looked at Spence-Jones' Facebook page.

``We'll be leaving Facebook because of the issues arising from that website,'' Colodny said Thursday morning.

Defense lawyer Michael Band and prosecutor Richard Scruggs chuckled about the disclosure but had no problems with it. Band entered a plea of not guilty for Spence-Jones, who did not appear.

So, should judges abandon Facebook, Twitter, and Blogging altogether?

Other topics to consider on this Friday:

1. Who would release ladybugs at Art Basel?
2. Who would win in a fight between Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor?
3. Is Florida the ponzi scheme capitol of the world?
4. Here's a creative way to enforce a judgment -- have the Marshals seize paintings from Art Basel.

Did Scott Rothstein surrender or was he arrested?

There has been some debate about whether Rothstein was arrested or whether he was permitted to surrender. The answer is really neither. When a defendant surrenders, he is permitted to show up at magistrate court for his first appearance on his own (not in handcuffs). And when someone is arrested, federal agents show up at your house at 6:30 in the morning and bring you to court. Here, we had a little of both -- Rothstein wasn't arrested at his house (or the hotel he was staying at) and he didn't show up to magistrate court on his own. Instead, it appears he surrendered himself to the FBI office where they put him in handcuffs and brought him to court. The feds did this so that they could say they arrested him, but they allowed him to show up to the FBI office because it's pretty obvious he has been cooperating and so they gave him this small concession. Also, for some reason Rothstein's lawyer continues to say he isn't cooperating, so having him show up to court in handcuffs allows Rothstein to continue to say this even though I think everyone knows that train has left the station.

The whole surrender vs. arrest thing has always bugged me. If a defendant knows about the charges and hasn't gone anywhere, he should be permitted to surrender even if he isn't cooperating. The government should not be able to use the threat of arrest to coerce a person into pleading... It's a complete waste of resources. Obviously, this is not the typical case, so perhaps the government, for political reasons, couldn't allow him to simply show up to court on his own (especially since he's been sipping martinis for the past couple weeks in everyone's face).
The other topic being discussed is the information vs. indictment. Rothstein has been charged by way of information, meaning that the feds didn't have to go to a grand jury. This generally is a tell-tale sign that the defendant is cooperating. But again, the whole information vs. indictment thing has never made much sense to me. Who cares whether you are charged with an information instead of an indictment. It does absolutely nothing for the defendant whatsoever. I guess it saves an agent from an afternoon of explaining the case to a grand jury. In my view, we should just get rid of the grand jury altogether. That would require a constitutional amendment though, and we haven't had one of those in a while.

Here's Jeff Sloman at the press conference yesterday:

Scott Rothstein to be arrested tomorrow (Tuesday) -- NUMEROUS UPDATES BELOW

The Herald broke the story here:

Scott Rothstein, the flashy Fort Lauderdale attorney who authorities say ran a $1 billion investment scam while acting like a philanthropic tycoon, is expected to be arrested Tuesday on a federal racketeering charge, sources familiar with the case said.
Rothstein, who had fled to Morocco in late October but returned in early November, is expected to appear at a magistrate hearing to face the RICO conspiracy charge at the federal courthouse in Fort Lauderdale.
While under federal watch in November, Rothstein cooperated with prosecutors and provided them with details of his Ponzi scheme, involving the sale of fabricated legal settlements to wealthy investors.FBI and IRS agents also raided his Fort Lauderdale law office and seized his waterfront home and other assets.
Rothstein could not be reached for comment, and his attorney, Marc Nurik, declined to say anything about his client's imminent arrest.
``Scott intends to see that all legitimate investors get paid back,'' Nurik said late Monday. ``Exactly how that's going to be done remains to be seen. He is sincere in his intent.''
Rothstein, 47, is likely to plead guilty soon while he is in custody. The U.S. attorney's office, meanwhile, will convene a grand jury to consider criminal charges against Rothstein's alleged co-conspirators -- including possibly former employees of his now-defunct firm.

Scott is still talking, this time to the Sun-Sentinel:

Rothstein called Monday, after I sent a text asking if he was about to turn himself into federal authorities, a rumor that was making the rounds."No, I'm not surrendering," he said. "I'm sitting here in the hotel with my attorney (Marc Nurik) and it's a very strange scenario."First we're fielding calls from people asking if we're in protective custody. No, I'm not in protective custody. Now we're getting calls if I'm about to surrender...So I guess you guys are giving me a heads up that I'm about to be arrested."

***

Said [Mark] Nurik: "Nobody's telling us that they're picking him up, and nobody's giving us any right to surrender...He's sitting here with me, talking about the case. He's mostly freaking out about being arrested."

So, he'll obviously be detained with no bond. But should he be?

UPDATE 9:30am Tuesday -- Rothstein has been arrested early Tuesday morning and he wasn't permitted to surrender. He will make his initial appearance this morning in Ft. Lauderdale before Judge Robin Rosenbaum.

SECOND UPDATE -- No bond... Stipulation to detention...

THIRD UPDATE -- Rothstein was charged by way of infomation, which means he is definitely cooperating. Still strange to me that they simply wouldn't indict him. Here's the information, which has been assigned to Judge James Cohn.

Would you do 40 months for a billion bucks?

Bradley Birkenfeld would. He's the UBS banker who helped the government makes its case against UBS and all the tax cheats. Here's the New York Times story:

Bradley C. Birkenfeld was sentenced to 40 months in prison for helping rich Americans dodge their taxes. Now he is hoping for a bit more — a few billion dollars more.
Mr. Birkenfeld, a former private banker at the Swiss bank UBS, won the enmity of his peers by violating the omerta of Swiss banking: He divulged the tax evasion secrets of UBS, the world’s largest bank by assets, and its well-heeled American clients. As part of a deal with federal prosecutors, he admitted to, among other things, helping to smuggle diamonds in a tube of toothpaste.
Now, as thousands of wealthy Americans seek amnesty for keeping illicit, offshore bank accounts, Mr. Birkenfeld and his lawyers hope to use a new federal whistle-blower law to claim a multibillion-dollar reward from the American government. If they succeed — and legal experts say the odds are pretty good — it would be the largest reward of its kind.
Mr. Birkenfeld, who is to begin his prison term as soon as January, is being represented by the executive director of the National Whistleblowers Center, Stephen M. Kohn. Mr. Kohn successfully represented Linda Tripp, who helped expose the Monica Lewinsky scandal of the Clinton years.
“We are seeking at least several billion dollars,” Mr. Kohn said.



So, how much would it take you to do 40 months in a federal pen:

I would do 40 months in federal prison for:
	$100,000
	$500,000
	$1 million
	$5 million
	no amount of money
pollcode.com free polls

Thanksgiving weekend blogging

The Miccosukee Tribe of Indians was certainly thankful to Judge Seitz on Thanksgiving Day. Just hours before we all headed home on Wednesday to defrost our turkeys, Judge Seitz issued an order stating that she was “convinced that the Tribe will succeed on the merits” after a two-day preliminary injunction hearing last week seeking to halt construction on 21-mile “Loop Road” in the Everglades. The DBR’s article is here. Judge Seitz found that “the Government failed to comply” with environmental laws prior to starting the project. Michael Tein represented the Tribe at the hearing and accused the National Parks Service of a “cover up.” Mike produced Interior Department notes and memos indicating that government viewed public disapproval of the project as a “high risk” that would be handled with an “internal memorandum to file” instead of the full-blown public environmental study that federal environmental laws require. Apparently, the government was going to use money earmarked back in 2005 for “emergency Hurricane Wilma relief,” to pay for repaving the road, which Mike said had no hurricane damage. Mike’s brief charting out the alleged “cover up” is a fun read and I will post it shortly. After the hearing, the government agreed to delay the project another two weeks to allow for additional briefing. Judge Seitz said she would rule by December 14.