This and that

Whew -- thankfully, I was able to see the inauguration before my Broward hearing this afternoon. Unbelievable! Even the Broward judge and prosecutor seemed to be in good moods today.

In that vein, we will post the positive article about Alex Acosta, by Julie Kay, not the negative one being discussed by commenters and another blog.

Here's the intro:

When he was named U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida, one of the largest and busiest districts in the country with 284 assistant U.S. attorneys, in July 2005, the question on many local lawyers' minds was, "Who is Alex Acosta?"A former assistant attorney general in the Justice Department's civil rights division and staunch conservative who clerked for Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. and served as president of the Federalist Society at Harvard Law School, Acosta, just 36, had little criminal trial experience and was unknown in Miami legal circles.But the Miami native has earned the respect of many in the South Florida legal community for his hard line on health care fraud, his prosecution of a whopping 13 public officials for corruption — including seven Palm Beach County commissioners and four Hollywood police officers — and his open-door policy with defense lawyers, agents, journalists and members of the community.As a Democratic administration prepares to take office — and he prepares his exit strategy — Acosta, now 40, talked to The National Law Journal about his accomplishments during the last 3 1/2 years, what he has learned on the job and what the future holds.

Some of the questions Julie Kay posed:

NLJ: You've been U.S. attorney of one of the largest, busiest and most prominent districts in the country since 2005. What have been your proudest accomplishments and biggest disappointments?

AA: The job of U.S. attorney is the best job that any attorney can have. The U.S. attorney has the ability to have a direct impact on his or her district. Some of the issues I've chosen to focus on are public corruption, healthcare fraud and more recently mortgage fraud. I believe I have left a lasting impact not only on South Florida but on the issues themselves.Public corruption is of the utmost importance. The fact that the largest law enforcement agency in the state has changed the way business has been done in the region is the most important legacy I'm leaving. Health care fraud is not something I fully understood and was disgusted by when I got here. We have now prosecuted $1.5 billion in health care fraud. This is not victimless crime. That is incredibly significant. To have that kind of impact is gratifying.As far as frustrations, public corruption cases are very important and I'm proud of the fact that we've done them right. In each of the cases, we've brought the charges with overwhelming evidence that resulted in guilty pleas of the officials. This is very important because when a public official gets up and says, "I did this, I broke the law," it sends a message, more than a long, protracted litigation. The flip side of this is [that] public corruption cases take time, and what is most frustrating is seeing and knowing the evidence we have but waiting until our cases are ready. Some people feel these cases are put together in weeks or months, and you can't do that, you have to be thorough. That is frustrating to the community — the fact that you want things to move quickly and they don't. I said in my press conference in Palm Beach, I wish I could say this is the final prosecution, but I fear it is not. There are matters that require additional work.

***

NLJ: Human rights groups like the Center for Justice and Accountability and Human Rights Watch have issued statements commending federal prosecutors for bringing the case. Have you gotten any other reaction and do you think this case will set a precedent?

AA: Human rights groups support it. We've also gotten reaction from victims in Liberia. They never thought that Chuckie Taylor Jr. could be brought to justice. They thought he was above reproach. They realize now that in fact these types of cases can be brought. I think it will set a precedent around the country and other cases will be brought.

NLJ: That was a successful case. A case that has not been as successful has the Liberty Seven/Liberty Six case. That case — in which seven Miami men were charged with scheming to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago — has been criticized by the press and other groups as far-reaching: that these men were Al Queda wannabes and didn't have the ability to pull anything off. One man was dismissed at trial and the rest were subject to hung juries twice.You're retrying the case for the third time, starting this month. Why, and do you regret bringing this case?

AA: Every case we have brought has been based on the evidence, and as prosecutors we have to review the evidence and if we believe it's worth bringing, we do so. It's a pending trial so I can't comment. There have been matters that have hung twice and been retried in this office. It does happen. But as I've said before, this will be the third and final time.

Wow, no more retrials. Interesting. I think two mistrials are enough and the case shouldn't be tried a third time. But it is noteworthy that he is saying in advance that it won't be tried again. Jury selection starts this week.... Stay tuned.

A New Hope

I am so bummed... Instead of watching the inauguration tomorrow, I will be stuck in state court in Broward. I kid you not. Shouldn't courts be closed tomorrow? Thank goodness for TiVo.

A big shout out to all the FOB (friends of blog) who are in DC. Please send pics and we will post them.

It's a very exciting time, no matter what political party you belong to. Some interesting questions:

1. Who will President Obama appoint to be the next U.S. Attorney? When will that happen? Any chance that it is Alex Acosta?

2. Who will President Obama appoint to fill the first open Southern District judgeship?

3. Who will sit on the federal JNC to help in these selections?

And finally:

4. Will Rumpole reveal himself?

"My innocent client is being dragged along for the ride."

That's Joel Hirschhorn on the Mutual Benefits case after two judges have recused and the U.S. Attorney and his chief have recused from the case. What is going on?

Here's Vanessa Blum's article, which is extremely interesting. The case is now assigned to Judge Jordan and Eric Bustillo is the AUSA who signed off on the indictment. From the intro:

The biggest financial fraud case in Broward County history is proving too hot to handle for several senior federal law enforcement officials and judges, who have removed themselves from having anything to do with it.Federal prosecutors announced new charges this month in the long-running investigation of Mutual Benefits Corp.--a defunct Fort Lauderdale investment firm whose managers are accused of operating a $1-billion Ponzi scheme.This week, two federal judges assigned to hear the case stepped aside in quick succession with no explanation, according to public court records.The back-to-back judicial recusals, unparalleled in recent memory, followed an unusual decision by the two highest-ranking lawyers in the local U.S. Attorney's Office to have no further involvement in matters related to Mutual Benefits.
Judges and prosecutors generally recuse themselves when they have conflicts of interest, for instance a personal relationship with someone involved or a financial stake in the litigation.Because of secrecy surrounding the recusals, it is not clear whether the Justice Department officials and federal judges have the same conflict.

Quick question -- should judges and prosecutors have to disclose why they recuse from a case?

First federal not guilty of the year?

Bill Matthewman got one yesterday before Judge Marra in a felon in possession case. First not guilty of the year in the District?

UPDATED -- Nope, Matthewman doesn't get the honors. The first NG of the year goes to Tim Day from the Federal Defender's Office before Judge Cohn.

"Nice off the bench"

Brian Tannebaum has been doing a bunch of provocative blogging over at his site. I enjoyed reading this post about Judges being "nice off the bench." Here's a snippet:

A standard description of judges is that he or she is "nice off the bench."When you say a judge is "nice off the bench," it naturally means they are not nice on the bench.Anyone in trial practice has seen this in action. See judge on bench, see judge lambaste lawyer. See judge at social event, see judge as a happy friendly person.