News and Notes

Lots of district news:

1. Liberty City seven: The expert (Raymond Tanter) is testifying. If the defendants are convicted, this will be issue #1 on appeal. Reports from the Sun-Sentinel & Herald. (I've been told that the expert plans on writing a book about his trial experience in this case -- cross examination is today, so we'll find out more.)

2. Joe Cool: Although the government has yet to decide if it will seek the death penalty, defense lawyers have asked that Bill Matthewman be appointed for his expertise in death cases. (Via Sun-Sentinel). And despite the comments to previous posts, Judge Huck has indicated that he will probably set the trial in about six months -- plenty of time for both sides to prepare.

3. Julie Kay's NLJ column: Her first is here (Florida leads states in wage suits; clogging fed courts).

4. Coverage of US v. Williams oral argument, via HowAppealing:

"An anti-porn law that will survive?" Lyle Denniston has this post at "SCOTUSblog."
"Justices Hear Arguments on Internet Pornography Law": Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.
Today in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes reports that "High Court Surveys Child Pornography Law's Scope."
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that "High court weighs child porn law; Justices seek to establish whether a tool to punish online purveyors of illegal pictures infringes on the 1st Amendment."
In USA Today, Joan Biskupic reports that "Court puts child porn law to test; Justices appear skeptical of challengers' arguments."
And The Miami Herald reports that "Child-porn law debated; The attorney for a former Miami-Dade officer argued before the U.S. Supreme Court that a law to curb child pornography is too broad."
"Supreme Court hears arguments over child-pornography law": McClatchy Newspapers provide this report.
"Supreme Court Takes Up Child Porn Case": This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Dahlia Lithwick appeared on today's broadcast of NPR's "Day to Day."
And at "The Volokh Conspiracy," Orin Kerr has a post titled "Oral Argument in United States v. Williams."

Joe Cool jury hangs on first degree murder counts

That's a victory for the defense.

The jury did convict on 4 gun counts. The prosecution will be happy with some convictions after it looked like the jury would hang on everything yesterday, especially since the potential sentences on those counts are life.

Food for thought -- should Judge Huck order a new trial on all counts because the jury may have been confused on the gun counts based on its previous note and because it appears that the jurors compromised after the Allen charge? If the case has to be retried anyway, why not try the whole thing? What are your thoughts?

''He said if I blamed it on him, he was going to turn it around on me."

That was Guillermo Zarabozo, the Joe Cool defendant, testifying on Friday. Here's a snippet of the Herald article:

''I told them what he told me to say,'' Zarabozo testified at the murder retrial in federal court in Miami. ``It was the biggest mistake of my life. I lied. That's why I'm here.''
Zarabozo, testifying after the government rested its case, admitted that he and Archer lied that Cuban ''pirates'' had hijacked the boat on their chartered one-way trip to Bimini and then killed the crew. Zarabozo is charged with 16 counts of conspiracy, hijacking, kidnapping, murder, robbery and use of a firearm in commission of those crimes.
Archer, 36, pleaded guilty before the first federal trial in September and was sentenced to life in prison -- Zarabozo's fate if he is convicted of any of the offenses.
Prosecutors will return on Tuesday to cross examine Zarabozo. It is expected to be an intense confrontation. They have argued that Zarabozo has been lying about his role in the murders.
But rather than try to prove conclusively that Zarabozo fatally shot the crew, prosecutors have unveiled newly discovered evidence showing that he and Archer plotted for months to hijack the chartered vessel to Cuba. The evidence supports the conspiracy charge and refutes Zarabozo's claim that he thought the boat was a charter to Bimini.

No bond for the Joe Cool defendants

So ruled Magistrate Judge William Turnoff.

Press coverage here, here, and here.

Apparently the feds have more evidence -- like shell casings, blow gun darts, and knives. Plus it looks like they were headed to Cuba, where they couldn't be extradited to the U.S.

In this courtroom sketch, Kirby Logan Archer, 35, of Strawberry, Ark., left, and Guillermo Zarabozo, 19, of Hialeah, Fla., right, appear in federal court in Miami Wednesday, Sept. 26, 2007. (AP Photo/Shirley Henderson)

Will the feds retry Helio Castroneves?

As you all know by now, the jury acquitted Helio Castroneves and his co-defendants of all counts, save for one conspiracy count. Technically the government has the ability to retry Helio on that count. But will they?

In the past, this U.S. Attorney's office has retried defendants after hung juries -- for example, we are on the third Liberty City trial, and the office retried the Joe Cool case after it hung. But this is different because the jury acquitted Helio of every substantive count. I would be really surprised if the feds chose to retry this one count. The sense is that Helio won the trial and was vindicated, so a retrial would look petty and vindictive. Plus, there's no reason to believe that the next jury would have any more reason to find Helio guilty after the first jury rejected almost the entire case. What say you readers -- should the U.S. Attorney's office retry Helio on the one hung count?

(p.s. Rumpole, let me know if you want to double down on your last bet).

Joe Cool

Jury picked.

Opening statements starting up now.

"We should start from scratch, because justice hasn't been achieved.'

That was AFPD Brian Stekloff for Guillermo Zarabozo in the Joe Cool case asking for a new trial on all counts. He continued: "Everyone in this courtroom knows how this jury reached this inconsistent and irrational verdict: They didn't understand the law." AUSA Karen Gilbert responded: "This scenario is not one where the court should set the verdict aside. We live with it. That's the verdict."

Judge Huck took the matter under consideration and set trial for January on the hung counts. Judge Huck did note that the jury's verdict "raises on eyebrow."

(via Sun-Sentinel, AP, Herald)

Jailhouse snitch?

Apparently someone at the federal jail claims that a defendant in the Joe Cool case confessed. Smells fishy to me. Here and here are the articles.

Life for Archer...

Kirby Archer pleaded guilty today, agreeing to life in prison for his role in the Joe Cool murders.

Guillermo Zarabozo is proceeding to trial. The government announced that the death penalty is also off the table for Zarabozo. When Judge Huck heard this, he moved the trial date up to August, and discharged the court-appointed death penalty lawyer, Bill Matthewman.

Here's the Sun-Sentinel coverage, the AP's and the Herald's.

Dead Friday

Anyone working today?

Back to regular blogging on Monday.

2009 should be exciting -- trial #3 of Liberty City 7, trial #2 of Joe Cool, trial (or dismissal) of the Ben Kuehne case, Dolphin playoffs, and possibly 2 new district judges in the SDFLA because of judges taking senior status. What else?

Have a nice long weekend.

Openings in the Joe Cool case

The jury was picked in a morning and both sides already have given opening statements. If this was state court, it may have taken a week to pick a jury in a murder case. Not in federal court....

Here's Vanessa Blum and Curt Anderson on openings and Luisa Yanez on jury selection.

Jeffrey Tsai opened for the government.
Tony Natale for defendant Guillermo Zarabozo.

Co-defendant Kirby Archer, who pleaded guilty to life in prison, is not expected to testify for the government. The defense has painted Archer as the criminal and stated in openings that Zarabozo was also a victim.

Is It Friday Already?

By SFL

Boy the federal court beat is...a little beat today.

Does it count as SD FL news that I saw Judge Moreno having a nice lunch at La Loggia yesterday?

No, guess not -- darn, where's Julie Kay when you need her?

Anyways, the always-in-trial big man already updated us on Joe Cool. Judge Huck set sentencing for May 6.

Third time's the charm in the Liberty 6 retrial, which is starting to feel like Jarndyce and Jarndyce -- only longer.

What do you all think of this line from the defense opening:

“This case is a 100 percent setup; this is a manufactured crime,” the lawyer, Ana M. Jhones, said in her opening argument, which drew several objections from the prosecution, most notably when she remarked that “taking an oath to Al Qaeda is not a crime.”

True, but do must jurors think it should be?

And finally, more details on the IRS v. UBS showdown unfolding right here in sunny South Florida:

With today’s lawsuit, the U.S. asked a federal judge to enforce its so-called John Doe summonses. On July 1, a federal judge in Miami approved an IRS summons seeking information on thousands of UBS accounts owned or controlled by U.S. citizens. Negotiations between the U.S., Switzerland and UBS have been at a standstill since then, according to a Justice Department filing.

UBS said in a statement that it expected today’s filing.

“UBS believes it has substantial defenses” to the U.S. attempt to enforce the summonses and will “vigorously contest” the case, the bank said in the statement. The bank’s objections are based on U.S. laws, Swiss financial privacy laws, and a 2001 agreement between UBS and the IRS, according to the statement.

Anyone know who has been retained to represent UBS on this? I know a certain humble blogger who's available.

Have a great weekend all!

Zarabozo sentenced to life

Judge Huck imposed five consecutive life sentences plus 85 years on 21-year-old Guillermo Zarabozo for his role in the murders and other crimes committed aboard the Joe Cool. Zarabozo maintained that his accomplice Kirby Archer, who is serving a life sentence, was solely responsible for the killings.

No surprise here...

Kirby Archer, the Joe Cool defendant who pleaded guilty, was sentenced to life in prison today. No ruling yet by Judge Huck on the co-defendant's motion for a new trial on all counts.

Joe Cool verdict

Guilty.

I am loving guest-blogger South Florida Lawyer. Great stuff below...

Thanks.

Joe Cool case to Judge Huck

The parties better get ready for trial!

"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.

Monday Morning Blogging

It's Monday morning -- messages to return; weekend mail to go through; getting to stuff we couldn't get to Friday afternoon...

But the Hurricanes beat FSU. That makes it all feel a little bit better, doesn't it?

Unfortunately, the Fins are the worst they have been in my lifetime. It's tough to watch. Rumpole has a funny post about them over at his blog.

As for SDFLA news, the Liberty City 7 trial is still going... Joe Cool arraignments should occur this week.

And it looks like we have a new Justice Watch columnist -- Alana Roberts. Welcome. She writes today about Jack Thompson, which we have covered in detail in prior posts.

Finally, a couple of you have asked about how to join the local chapter of the Federal Bar Association. Go to this site, pay by credit card, and make sue you pick the South Florida Chapter. You'll want to join soon -- our first speakers in November are Judges Barkett and Marcus. Should be fun.

Joe Cool conviction affirmed...

... in a short non-published opinion, without oral argument. It seems to me that an appellate court should at least have oral argument after a trial that results in a life sentence. I mean, it's just a half an hour to hear argument. Just saying.

In other 11th Circuit news, the court found that a district court errs by admitting a defendant's MySpace page. But, of course, it was harmless, and the defendant's conviction and sentence (of 2005 months) was affirmed. From the opinion:

The MySpace evidence is not evidence of identity: that is, evidence that Phaknikone robbed
banks like a gangster. The subscriber report proved nothing more than
Phaknikone’s nickname, the only name by which Lavivong had already testified he
knew Phaknikone. The profile photographs accompanying the subscriber report
and the photograph of Phaknikone and his ex-wife at a social event offer nothing to
support a modus operandi about the bank robberies. The photograph of a tattooed
Phaknikone, his face completely visible, in a car, holding a handgun sideways in
his right hand, and with a child as a passenger, proves only that Phaknikone, on an
earlier occasion, possessed a handgun in the presence of a child. Although the
photograph may portray a “gangster-type personality,” the photograph does not
evidence the modus operandi of a bank robber who commits his crimes with a
signature trait. The MySpace evidence is not evidence of a modus operandi and is
inadmissible to prove identity.

Because the MySpace evidence fails the first requirement of the Miller test,
we need not address its second and third requirements. The MySpace evidence is
classic evidence of bad character, which was offered by the government to prove
only “action in conformity therewith.” Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). The government
wanted the jury to infer that, because Phaknikone is willing to publish these kinds
of photographs online, under an incendiary alias, he is a gangster who is likely to
rob banks. The district court abused its discretion by admitting the MySpace
evidence.

I have always wondered what would happen if a district court read this opinion and then said -- well, I know it's error, but it's harmless so I will admit it.

The comments were active yesterday in the debate about the probation office. Good stuff.

SUBSTITUTE BLOGGER

While David battles the forces of evil in West Palm Beach (not to mention I-95 traffic)  I have agreed to post some thought provoking articles. It's either my drivel or staring at David's post announcing the start of the Joe Cool trial for the next few weeks. 

I realize this is the Federal Blog, and there is a certain level of decorum that is expected. (Click here for my idea of decorum). So I won't be duplicating my state court blog posts and ponder cross dressing judges or lawyers and clerks being caught under the bench canoodling. Just log on to the Broward Blog if you need more of that. 

This NY Times Article on the  diminishing impact of US Supreme Court decisions in foreign jurisdictions caught our eye. After years of Supreme Court Judges bashing Justice Kennedy and his citations to foreign decisions, the courts of other nations have decided to reciprocate. 

From the article:

"One of our great exports used to be constitutional law," said Anne-Marie Slaughter, the dean of the Woodrow Wilson  School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton. "We are losing one of the greatest bully pulpits we have ever had."

From 1990 through 2002, for instance, the Canadian Supreme Court cited decisions of the United States Supreme Court about a dozen times a year, an analysis by The New York Times found. In the six years since, the annual citation rate has fallen by half, to about six.

Australian state supreme courts cited American decisions 208 times in 1995, according to a recent study by Russell Smyth, an Australian economist. By 2005, the number had fallen to 72.

Rumpole asks: does it matter? Do we want to be recognized and admired for our legal system, or do we just not give a damn about what the rest of the world thinks about us?

Personally, we think this just highlights a trend of diminishing American prestige and influence among the rest of the world. 

When the Supreme Court issues decisions like it did in  Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. ____2007, closing the courthouse doors to a prisoner, who following a federal judge's instructions filed a notice of appeal on the 17th day after a decision, when the law only gave him 14 days, there is nothing much for us to be proud of. The decision in Bowles prompted this outburst from Justice Souter:"it is intolerable for the judicial system to treat people this way." He added, "There is not even a technical justification for condoning this bait and switch."

Based on how our system treats its own citizens, we think it's not surprising that the rest of the world relies less and less on what our judges write. Now how we treat our insurance companies and brokerage houses that go belly up- that's an entirely different story. 

Go get em David. 

See You In Court.