UPDATE -- we still need one more team for the Blog Fantasy Football league. Email Miguel De La O at delao13@gmail.com if you want in.
1. Bill Barzee has filed a complaint against David Rivera. From the Herald article: "David and his campaign have to learn that you have to play by the rules,'' Barzee said of his complaint. ``All I'm concerned about is that this will stop.'' The FEC confirmed it received Barzee's complaint on Aug. 26. The commission does not comment on a complaint's status, which is confidential.
2. "Still a virgin" signs are cropping up all over Florida.
3. Here's a picture from my DC trip yesterday. That's the Main Justice building, which is harder to get into than Ft. Knox.
4. I didn't know what a "cramming scheme" was. But it gets you a lot of time in jail. From the Sun-Sentinel: Willoughby Farr went into the Palm Beach County Jail in October 2003 and became a multimillionaire behind bars.
It's doubtful he will be able to perform the same remarkable feat during his next stint in the lockup — a 21-year federal prison sentence handed down on Thursday for bilking telephone customers across the country out of $34 million.
Federal prosecutors and regulators say Farr ran his "cramming" scheme — billing telephone customers for nonexistent long-distance charges — from the county jail by using a pay phone to direct a few employees on the outside.
"When the unscrupulous and the dishonest line their pockets with consumers' hard-earned money, we will hold them accountable," Tony West, assistant attorney general for the civil division of the Department of Justice, said in a statement. "As this sentence demonstrates, the Justice Department has put a priority on protecting the public from fraudulent schemes. This case should also remind consumers to carefully review their telephone bills for unauthorized charges."
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
Friday, September 03, 2010
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Wednesday, September 01, 2010
Judge Carnes on the Armed Career Criminal Act
Like him or not; agree with him or not; Judge Carnes is a gifted writer. From United States v. Rainer:
- This is yet another felon-in-possession case involving yet another variation on the issue of whether a previous conviction qualifies as a “violent felony” for purposes of the enhanced penalties provided in the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1).
- Rainer’s non-frivolous contention is that the district court erred when it decided at sentencing that he qualified for an enhanced sentence under the ACCA, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1), which applies to a defendant convicted under § 922(g) who has three previous convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses.
- The question is whether “building of Richie’s Shoe Store, Inc.”and “building of, to wit: Whiddon’s Gulf Service Station” in the indictments show that Rainer’s convictions were for burglary of a shoe store and service station, places that fall squarely within the scope of generic burglary.
- But a vehicle could not be used to carry on the business of a gasoline service station, which is mainly to dispense gasoline for sale. While a shoe store theoretically could be operated out of a vehicle, that possibility is too farfetched to undermine our conviction that Rainer’s two previous convictions were for burglary of a building in the generic burglary sense of the word.
- The ACCA is part of the real world, and courts should not refuse to apply it because of divorced-from-reality, law-school-professor-type hypotheticals that bear no resemblance to what actually goes on.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
USAO adds to management team
I just received this announcement:
Eduardo I. Sanchez returned to the United States Attorney's Office on August 16, 2010, as Counselor to the U.S. Attorney in the Executive Division in Miami. Ms. Bowen, a veteran of the Office, will serve as the District Training Director. As Counselor to the U.S. Attorney, Mr. Sanchez will provide advice, analysis, and guidance on legal and policy issues, strategic planning, training, and other matters of district-wide significance.*** Assistant U.S. Attorney Dawn Bowen will serve as the District’s Training Director, effective September 1, 2010.
Ed and Dawn are both really good people; Willy is putting together a smart, respected team. Now we have to see if things are going to change...
Eduardo I. Sanchez returned to the United States Attorney's Office on August 16, 2010, as Counselor to the U.S. Attorney in the Executive Division in Miami. Ms. Bowen, a veteran of the Office, will serve as the District Training Director. As Counselor to the U.S. Attorney, Mr. Sanchez will provide advice, analysis, and guidance on legal and policy issues, strategic planning, training, and other matters of district-wide significance.*** Assistant U.S. Attorney Dawn Bowen will serve as the District’s Training Director, effective September 1, 2010.
Ed and Dawn are both really good people; Willy is putting together a smart, respected team. Now we have to see if things are going to change...
Multiple Choice
Monday, August 30, 2010
Wet Monday Mornings stink
How annoying -- US1 basically turns into a parking lot if there is the slightest hint of rain. Combine that with Monday morning. Ugh.
Anyway, we're almost to football season, and I'm thinking of betting against all of Rumpole's picks this year. I don't know what to make of this Dolphins. I'm trying to stay optimistic...
Miguel DeLa O is running the blog fantasy football league this year. If you want to play, email me or him. Alex Gomez (at Scott Srebnick's firm) beat me in the finals last year. I will get revenge this year.
Please let me know what's going on in the District -- it's pretty slow news wise. I've been wondering when the Federal JNC is going to announce that they are taking applications for the two open judicial slots... Will it be the same group of applicants or will the list grow because there are two openings? It'll be interesting.
And for the record, I believe you Paris.
Okay, well, that's your stream of consciousness this morning....
Anyway, we're almost to football season, and I'm thinking of betting against all of Rumpole's picks this year. I don't know what to make of this Dolphins. I'm trying to stay optimistic...
Miguel DeLa O is running the blog fantasy football league this year. If you want to play, email me or him. Alex Gomez (at Scott Srebnick's firm) beat me in the finals last year. I will get revenge this year.
Please let me know what's going on in the District -- it's pretty slow news wise. I've been wondering when the Federal JNC is going to announce that they are taking applications for the two open judicial slots... Will it be the same group of applicants or will the list grow because there are two openings? It'll be interesting.
And for the record, I believe you Paris.
Okay, well, that's your stream of consciousness this morning....
Friday, August 27, 2010
Boy
I was about to write up this (unpublished?!) opinion by the 11th, but SFL beat me to it, as did the DBR:
During 14 years of litigation over his claims that he was denied a promotion because he is black, John Hithon has twice been awarded jury verdicts of more than $1 million. His case prompted the U.S. Supreme Court to say using the word “boy” to describe an African-American man could by itself be evidence of race discrimination. But Hithon and his lawyer have not persuaded the federal appeals court in Atlanta. On its fourth stop in the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the case generated a 2-1 unsigned opinion sending the case back to trial court for judgment in favor of Tyson Foods. The split panel reaffirmed an 11th Circuit ruling concluding evidence of the use of the term “boy” — allegedly by a white poultry plant manager to address Hithon and another plaintiff — wasn’t enough to support a jury finding of racial discrimination. Hithon’s lawyer, Alicia K. Haynes of Birmingham, Alabama, said Circuit Judges Edward E. Carnes and William H. Pryor Jr., who ruled Aug. 17 over the dissent of a visiting senior judge, missed something in their review of the paper record of the case. “The concern is that any time you present that type of evidence, it is the jury who is listening to how those words are being said,” Haynes said. “They’re listening to the tone that was used in saying those words. They’re listening to the inflection. They are able to judge who the speaker was and what effect those words had on the person that it was being said to, and the appellate court is missing all of that. They are reading a cold, written record.”
During 14 years of litigation over his claims that he was denied a promotion because he is black, John Hithon has twice been awarded jury verdicts of more than $1 million. His case prompted the U.S. Supreme Court to say using the word “boy” to describe an African-American man could by itself be evidence of race discrimination. But Hithon and his lawyer have not persuaded the federal appeals court in Atlanta. On its fourth stop in the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the case generated a 2-1 unsigned opinion sending the case back to trial court for judgment in favor of Tyson Foods. The split panel reaffirmed an 11th Circuit ruling concluding evidence of the use of the term “boy” — allegedly by a white poultry plant manager to address Hithon and another plaintiff — wasn’t enough to support a jury finding of racial discrimination. Hithon’s lawyer, Alicia K. Haynes of Birmingham, Alabama, said Circuit Judges Edward E. Carnes and William H. Pryor Jr., who ruled Aug. 17 over the dissent of a visiting senior judge, missed something in their review of the paper record of the case. “The concern is that any time you present that type of evidence, it is the jury who is listening to how those words are being said,” Haynes said. “They’re listening to the tone that was used in saying those words. They’re listening to the inflection. They are able to judge who the speaker was and what effect those words had on the person that it was being said to, and the appellate court is missing all of that. They are reading a cold, written record.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)