Monday news and notes

1. The government has asked Judge Cohn to sentence Scott Rothstein to 40 years, a (meaningless?) variance from the statutory maximum of 100 years. (pg. 2: "The Government concedes that a variance in this case is supported by several salient factors. While the Defendant’s criminal activity in this case can only be described as reprehensible, it is beyond dispute that his post-offense conduct has been extraordinary.")

I say meaningless because 40 years is basically a life sentence for 48-year old Rothstein. It may turn out to be important what Judge Cohn does though because a motion to reduce Rothstein's sentence will be coming, so the starting point will be important. If Rothstein gets 30 years this week, and then gets a third off, he will likely have something to look forward to...
Govt Response to Rothstein

2. Nice story on Willy Ferrer today by John Pacenti.

3. The Supremes decided Krupski today. Our prior coverage here. This is the relation-back case that Robert Glazier argued. Unfortunately for Mr. Glazier, he was on the wrong side of this one.

Scott Rothstein asks Judge Cohn for 30 years...

...and I'm a bit surprised. I thought he'd ask for less. The PSI calls for life (a level 52), but the statutory maximum is 100 years. Rothstein will be 48 the day after his sentencing this week.

Here's his sentencing memo (by Mark Nurik):

Rothstein Sentencing Memo Rothstein himself wrote a 12-page letter to Judge Cohn, asking for leniency, "[b]ut I do not feel sorry for myself nor do I want anyone's sympathy. I deserve and expect the punishment I will receive. What I am deeply and sincerely sorry for is the horrific pain and harm I have inflicted on so many people."

There were also some letters filed on his behalf, one by his parents, but missing was one from his wife Kim Rothstein.

So here you go readers:

What will Judge Cohn sentence Scott Rothstein to this week?
	30 years
	35-40 years
	40-50 years
	100 years, the stat max
pollcode.com free polls

Summer time

Professor Rick is finished grading his exams, and is back to blogging. His latest -- on the most recent Supreme Court Miranda case -- is hilarious. Go check it out.

11th Circuit issues 112 opinion reversing one of its own

The case is United States v. Farley, and I confess that I haven't read the whole thing yet. What struck me is that the court reverses Judge Beverly Martin, the newest member of the 11th Circuit, in an opinion she wrote as a district judge. She held at the district level that a 30-year min/man sentence was unconstitutional as cruel and unusual. The 11th Circuit, per Judge Carnes, reversed. This case might have legs to the Supremes...

Quick news and notes

1. Former Broward School Board member Beverly Gallagher gets 37 months in prison. That was the agreed-to sentence. Here's the Sun-Sentinel article.

2. A bodyguard in the Scott Rothstein case pleads guilty. Here's the Herald article:

A Broward County bodyguard pleaded guilty to conspiring to shred financial records at the behest of Scott Rothstein as the Fort Lauderdale lawyer's $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme was collapsing last fall.
Enrique Ros, who came to know Rothstein through security work at the former Versace mansion in South Beach, is scheduled to be sentenced on Aug. 27 on an obstruction of justice charge in Fort Lauderdale federal court.
Ros, 33, of Pembroke Pines, was indicted in March along with business partner Daniel Dromerhauser and reputed Italian Mafia figure Roberto Settineri following an FBI sting operation starring Rothstein. The now-convicted lawyer, facing the heat of a federal investigation into his investment racket, played the lead role as the FBI targeted Settineri and the two businessmen in November.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhh.

“Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?”

That's the question that Van Chester Thompkins was asked after 3 hours of questioning in which he remained silent. Thompkins said yes and the statement was used to convict him. The Supreme Court held 5-4 that staying quiet for 3 hours wasn't enough to invoke one's right to remain silent. From the NYTimes:

Criminal suspects seeking to protect their right to remain silent must speak up to invoke it, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday, refining the court’s landmark 1966 ruling in Miranda v. Arizona.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority in a 5-to-4 decision that split along familiar ideological lines, did not disturb Miranda’s requirement that suspects be told they have the right to remain silent. But he said courts need not suppress statements made by defendants who received such warnings, did not expressly waive their rights and spoke only after remaining silent through hours of interrogation.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her first major dissent, said the decision “turns Miranda upside down” and “bodes poorly for the fundamental principles that Miranda protects.”
Monday’s decision followed two in February that also narrowed and clarified the scope of the Miranda decision. One allowed police officers to vary the wording of the warning; the other allowed a second round of questioning of suspects who had invoked their rights so long as two weeks had passed since their release from custody.

At least the cops offered him a mint:

Mr. Thompkins then remained almost entirely silent in the face of three hours of interrogation, though he did say that his chair was hard and that he did not want a peppermint.

While the Supremes are chipping away at Miranda, I see that the 11th reversed a conviction yesterday on a suppression issue. Richard Klugh won the case, United States v. Lance Lall.

Sun-Sentinel profiles Judge Jimmy Cohn

Paula McMahon does a very nice job here, describing him as "a true Southern gentleman" and "tough but fair." He's being profiled because he's got three huge sentencings coming up -- Scott Rothstein, Beverly Gallagher, and Fitzroy Salesman. Judge Cohn did what more judges should do and agreed to be interviewed for the article...

Some highlights from McMahon's article:

• Cohn, 61, is a lifelong Democrat nominated to the federal judiciary in 2003 by Republican President George W. Bush and confirmed 96-0 by a Republican-dominated Senate during a bitterly partisan era. His confirmation hearing was described by the Sun Sentinel as "a striking display of harmony in a contentious arena" but Cohn said that, as a Democrat selected by a Republican president, he was unlikely to face opposition.
• Growing up in Tuskegee, Ala., during the civil rights struggles of the 1950s and 60s, the Cohns owned a store and were one of two Jewish families in town. There was no synagogue so Cohn, his parents and his two sisters drove 40 miles west to the Reform temple in Montgomery for religious classes. "The worst part of it was I missed the first half of the NFL game," Cohn said wryly.
• "You want to assimilate, you don't want to be different, no kid wants to be different," Cohn said. "On the other hand, you want to maintain your Jewish heritage and traditions."For Cohn, playing sports was the best way to fit in. He was a quarterback on the Tuskegee High School football team, an all-star second baseman in baseball, ran track and played basketball.
• After passing his bar exams in Alabama and Florida, his sister and parents, who retired to South Florida, persuaded him to interview here. After a brief stint as a Broward public defender, then State Attorney Philip Shaler offered him a $1,000 raise — to $13,000 — to be a prosecutor. Cohn prosecuted cases from 1975 to 1978, working with two men who are still his friends, current State Attorney Mike Satz and defense attorney Richard Garfield.
• Jurors trusted his sincerity and people at the county courthouse still talk about how he won a "not guilty by reason of insanity" jury verdict on a first-degree murder case — a difficult feat under Florida's restrictive law. The defendant, Robert Lee Endicott shot and killed a young woman in Fort Lauderdale in 1979. Endicott is still involuntarily committed 30 years later.
• He awakes at 5 a.m., doesn't use an alarm clock and has never overslept in his life. He's at the gym by 5:30 a.m. and goes to bed by 9 or 9:30 p.m. "unless there's a ball game."

There's a whole lot more, including how Judge Cohn overcame a stutter in the ninth grade, the adoption of his son, how he tried 144 cases one year as a state judge (second place only to Judge Dimitrouleas), watching Seinfeld reruns, loving Alabama, and other gems.

The article is definitely worth a read.

Judge Davis' memorial service

It was a real tribute. So many friends, colleagues, judges, family turned out to pay their respects. Judge Graham spoke beautifully about Judge Davis, as did Ned Davis (the judge's son). We all shared stories about him over drinks, as he would have liked.

Chief Judge Moreno was in Europe and sent this email regarding Judge Davis:

He was a great man and a good friend. I tried cases before him and found him to be the perfect example of a judge I should emulate but whose qualities of patience,fairness and moderation I could never attain. The 10 years we were colleagues were an incredible experience that made him my best friend on the court. When I became Chief we continued our friendship lunching at Abbracci often where I welcomed his sage advice. What a great human being. I consider this loss like losing a second father within 2 months, as I lost my dad in March. I have been in Europe for the last two weeks and do not return until after the funeral. Please explain my absence at the Biltmore to Pat Davis as well as those others (past law clerks,AUSAs, FPDs, private lawyers) personally or even through your blog.Have fun on Thursday and toast to him as that is what Ned would want all of us to do. FAM

Judge Altonaga remembers Judge Davis

There are so many great comments about Judge Davis that were posted, but I thought I'd share with everyone on the front page, this letter from Judge Altonaga:

May 27, 2010

Dear David:

On Monday, May 24, 2010, you shared the story of U.S. District Judge Edward B. Davis, following his passing as a result of complications from open-heart surgery. I write you this letter in the event you would like to share some of my thoughts in the Southern District of Florida Blog.
I had the extraordinary good fortune of being hired by Judge Davis to be his February term law clerk, or "even" clerk as we were known, and worked for him in 1987. Since then, he has been my mentor, advisor, and kindest of friends. Words cannot describe the goodness and compassion of the man or his depth and integrity. Among the counsel and advice he would give his young law clerks or young lawyers as he would call us, was not to be "mean." I don’t believe Judge Davis had a mean bone in his body. Over the last 24 years I have never seen him angry at or impatient with anyone.

Judge Davis was always thoughtful and generous. I remember one time when he offered then-U.S. District Judge Stanley Marcus to share his office and chambers when the Dyer Courthouse was closed for asbestos removal. We shared chambers for several months with Judge Marcus and his law clerks, and while space was tight, the mood was always light and welcoming. On another occasion, when the late Senior Judge Joe Eaton had need of a law clerk for a particular assignment, Judge Davis asked me if I would mind being on loan to Judge Eaton to help him with that assignment, and proceeded to share me with Judge Eaton.

I clerked for Judge Davis during the days when memory typewriters and word processors were all the tools we had and files were brimming over with paper. The Judge would be in the courtroom every day with trials and all manner of hearings. It was his custom to bring in lawyers after the trials and talk to them privately, giving them encouragement and advice on trial practice. In the late afternoons, the chambers was filled with the sound of his laughter and that of the late Judge Eugene Spellman, for they were good friends and at the end of the day Judge Spellman would come to the Judge’s office where stories were shared and a moment of relaxation seized. When the Judge hired us, he would make clear the work day started at 8:00 a.m. and we were to stay with him until he left, which was usually after 7:00 p.m. He worked very hard, and while we all did as well, it was without undue pressure. Certainly I never felt any pressure from him; he always gave assurances that it would all work out.

Whenever I had occasion to travel with the Judge to Key West for trials, he and his wife Pat would include me in their dinners at the end of the work days. In keeping with the Judge’s casual and informal manner, the Courtroom Deputy, Michael Beck, and I would join the Judge and his wife in their hotel room, and from there we would all go together to share a meal.
I, along with countless of his law clerks, have had the extraordinary good fortune of having been offered the opportunity to share Judge Davis. We each became a part of the Judge’s family, so much so, that when after one reunion he sent me a copy of a group picture and signed it, "To Cecilia, my favorite law clerk and judge," I believed it. I came to discover later that he signed copies of the picture in the same way for each of his law clerks, letting each know he or she was his "favorite!" That picture, and another of the two of us in his chambers so many years ago, rests beside my computer where I am reminded daily of the "gentle giant" who has had such an impact on my life.

Judge Davis was my source of inspiration and I credit him with my desire to become a judge. He administered my oath as judge on three separate occasions, the last of which was as a federal district judge. When I joined the Southern District of Florida in 2003, I was humbled to occupy his former office and courtroom.

Judge Davis was the face of kindness, fairness and compassion in our court. May God bless and keep him.

Sincerely,

Cecilia M. Altonaga

RIP Judge Edward B. Davis (w/ updates)

UPDATE -- A public remembrance will be held from 5 p.m.-7 p.m. on Thursday in the Biltmore Hotel's Grenada Ballroom, 1200 Anastasia Ave., Coral Gables. In lieu of flowers, the family suggests memorial donations to La Amistad Foundation, Inc., 8400 La Amistad Cove, Fern Park, FL 32730. The foundation supports a community for mentally ill adults. Burial will be private.

UPDATE 2 -- Full Herald obit here.

Update 3 -- DBR article here.

Update 4 -- If you haven't read the comments, you should. There are some great stories about Judge Davis. Also, the Herald published a beautiful (and much longer) story here than the one that was online yesterday about Judge Davis.

Update 5 -- For those of you who were going to Jeff Sloman's going away party tomorrow night, it was changed to 7pm so that it wouldn't conflict with Judge Davis' memorial.

It is with great sadness that I report that Judge Edward B. Davis passed away today. I will post funeral arrangements as soon as I hear about them.

He was -- for a long long time -- the heart and soul of this District. He was old-school in every way.

My clerkship with the Chief was the best job I've ever had. Judge Davis really thought of the District as a small family, and I thank him for bringing me into it. He was the prototypical federal judge and really as good a person there could be. If you were thinking of how to make the perfect judge, Edward Davis would be the starting point. Lawyers practicing before him loved him even when they lost because they knew they were getting a fair shake and knew that they would get treated with respect. He's one of the last of the old guard of the District...

He led such a full life -- from his family to athletics to his career as a lawyer and then as a judge and then back to practicing. He knew how to balance all the different things we are always struggling to juggle. He also knew how to eat well, drink well, and laugh well.

Judges, practitioners, and friends, please post your stories and memories about Judge Davis in the comments. I will probably leave this up for the rest of the week.

I have so many great stories and memories; I'll share a couple of them here that are coming to mind:

-- During one trial, a prosecutor complained that he worked all weekend updating transcripts and he couldn't get in touch with the defense attorney, who the prosecutor said, was at a Heat game. Judge Davis replied: "I was at that game too."

-- When he introduced us law clerks to other lawyers or judges in town, he would always say, "This is my lawyer."

-- I will always remember Friday afternoon scotch with him where we talked about the week -- trials, hearings, orders we were working on, and what was going on next week. He had this calm to him that rubbed off on all of us.

-- Heat tickets in his shirt pocket.

-- Telling us not to worry about moving cases quickly or the case-load stats or getting reversed by the 11th Circuit. He always said to take your time to make sure it was done right. He never really understood why a lifetime appointee cared about whether he or she was first in the case-load summary statistics.

-- Chambers with Mary and Michael.

-- Asking why he couldn't figure out email and telling us not to be smart when we told him that he needed to plug his computer in (really!) before email would work.

-- Writing "to my favorite law clerk" to each one of his clerks on the clerk reunion photos that were handed out.

-- Ned.

-- Gentleman.

-- Fair.

-- Just.

-- A man's man.

Rest in peace Judge.

Monday morning Lost edition

Is everyone still deciphering last night's 2 1/2 hour Lost finale? I really liked it, and give it a solid B+. One of the great shows in the history of TV was the Lost Season I finale when they took Walt (there's the scene below). The show never really lived up to that moment, but it was still very good after that. I enjoyed how Jack had to fix the island and then how it was Hurley's turn to nurture/protect it. Plus, the purgatory twist in the Sideways world was cool. All in all, a good way to end the show.



Back to business -- John Pacenti is all over social networking and lawyering this morning. He references the 11th Circuit opinion we wrote about here. And yours truly is quoted. Here's a piece:

Social media issues have been litigated on claims of defamation, copyright infringement or violation of free speech, and platforms such as MySpace, Twitter, Facebook, Foursquare and others have become a vital investigative tool for some attorneys. “There is a lot of stuff out there that is totally irrelevant, but every now and then there is a gem, and it’s well worth mining for,” said Richard Sharpstein with Jorden Burt in Miami. “Most lawyers feel it’s an important source of information.” Bob Jarvis, a law professor at the Nova Southeastern University’s Shepard Broad Law Center, said social-networking sites are fair game for any prosecutor or defense attorney. “It’s really no different than a 19th century diary. It’s a person’s thoughts expressed prior to the time of litigation,” Jarvis said.

Miss me yet?

The Rekers scandal has reached the New York Times. The article raises the question of whether the lawyers who relied on Rekers' testimony as an expert witness have an ethical obligation to inform the court of what happened.

Do Rekers' lawyers have an obligation to inform the court of his scandal?
	Yes
	No
pollcode.com free polls

Okay, we are in a poll taking mood. Here's two more while we are at it:

Will Willy Ferrer and his new management staff change the way things are done at the U.S. Attorney's office?
	Yes, there will be a great deal of change
	Yes, but only minor changes
	Nothing significant will change
	There will be no change
pollcode.com free polls

And we'd like to see what you think about Rumpole's discussion of Graham:

Who got the better of the Graham argument re life for juveniles
	Justice Kennedy's majority opinion was correct and its reasoning was persuasive
	Justice Kennedy's opinion was correct but his reasoning was flawed
	Justice Thomas' dissent was right and its reasoning was persuasive
	Justice Thomas' reasoning was more persuasive but his conclusion was wrong
pollcode.com free polls

Ch-ch-ch Changes

Lots of change going on over at the U.S. Attorney's office. Multiple sources have told me that:

Ben Greenberg is now the 1st Assistant U.S. Attorney
Ed Stamm is Chief of Criminal
Ed Nucci has the new position of "Managing Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern Offices"
Marcus Christian is the "Executive Assistant U.S. Attorney" in charge of hiring and recruiting
George Karavestos is the Chief of Narcotics
Joan Silverstein is the Chief of Economic and Environmental crimes
Bob Senior is the Chief of Public Integrity

Congrats to all.

"Put simply, Epstein believes he is above the law."

That was the statement by Peter Prieto and Steve Marks after they filed a civil complaint against Jeffrey Epstein for violating his agreement to pay the victims of his sexual offenses. The case landed before Judge Gold. Here's the AP story by Curt Anderson:

Billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is violating an agreement with federal prosecutors by refusing to pay more than $2 million in legal fees to attorneys representing a dozen of his victims, according to a new federal lawsuit.
Epstein, a New Yorker who owns a Palm Beach mansion, a Paris apartment, a 70-acre Caribbean island and a 7,500-acre New Mexico ranch, could ultimately face federal prosecution stemming from his alleged assaults on mostly teenage girls if he continues to refuse to pay the fees, the victims' attorneys said Tuesday.

***
Under the deal Epstein signed with prosecutors in 2007, he would avoid federal charges and potentially lengthy prison sentences as long as he abided by several conditions — including paying fees for lawyers representing victims.
His failure to pay, according to the lawsuit, is a "material breach" of that agreement that could open the door to federal criminal prosecution, according the lawsuit filed in Miami federal court late Monday. An attorney for Epstein did not immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment and the Miami U.S. attorney's office — which signed the agreement with Epstein — declined comment.
Epstein, a 57-year-old investor, pleaded guilty in Palm Beach County in 2008 to two state prostitution counts and was designated a sex offender. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail following by a year of house arrest, which he is currently serving at his $6.8 million Palm Beach residence.

I guess today is civil day at the blog...

Judge Cooke to get a piece of the Scott Rothstein case

Well, SFL hasn't used Scribd in a while, so I figured I get in on the fun. Here's a complaint filed by David Mandel against Scott Rothstein and TD Bank for civil RICO that landed before Judge Cooke:

Coquina Complaint

Coquina, an investment partnership based in Texas, alleges that TD Bank was complicit with Rothstein in the Ponzi scheme. According to the complaint, Coquina’s representatives met directly with Rothstein and Regional Vice-President Frank Spinosa at TD Bank’s corporate offices in Fort Lauderdale. At that meeting, Spinosa allegedly vouched for both Rothstein and the safety of the Coquina’s investments.

Also of interest, last week Spinosa’s counsel informed the parties in the RRA bankruptcy proceeding that his client intends to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and will refuse to answer deposition questions.

This is the case that keeps on giving...

In other news, Rumpole is railing on Justice Scalia because he dissented in the Graham case yesterday. What Rumpole doesn't tell you is that Scalia also dissented in United States v. Comstock, in which the Supreme Court said that federal law allows a district court to order the civil commitment of a mentally ill federal prisoner beyond the date he would otherwise be released. Scalia said that Congress didn't have authority to pass such a law under the necessary and proper clause. He's not perfect, but Scalia is the best friend a criminal defendant has in the Supremes.

Heroes vs. Villians

Update-- I guess this is Justice Kennedy day. Today he wrote for the Supreme Court that a life sentence for a juvenile was unconstitutional where the defendant did not commit murder. He cited evolving standards of decency and also world standards. It's a fascinating read, especially in light of his comments on Friday regarding empathy and sentencing. More to follow.

Justice Kennedy doesn't like to pick sides or call himself the swing voter. On Friday, I posted John Pacenti's coverage of Kennedy's speech to the Palm Beach County Bar Association. His quote about being the swing voter is traveling around the blogosphere: "It has to me the imagery of these wild spatial gyrations. I don't swing around the cases. They swing around me. My jurisprudence is quite consistent."

In addition to Pacenti, the Palm Beach Post covered the talk here and the Palm Beach Daily News here:

"The Constitution doesn’t just belong to a bunch of judges and lawyers — it’s yours,” he told the students. “The principles of the Constitution and of freedom must be taught ... That’s how our heritage is handed down from one generation to the next.”
Kennedy told the group about a friend of his who had been an appellate judge for six months, when he listened to an argument from an attorney about how the trial judge had erred. The attorney closed his argument by saying the trial judge was new and had only been on the bench for three months.
“My friend leaned over and said, ‘It may interest you to know I’ve only been on this bench for six months,’” Kennedy said. “And without missing a beat, the lawyer said, ‘It’s surprising, your honor, how much a judge can learn in 90 days.’”
While speaking before a group of attorneys and judges, Kennedy was asked how he reads the enormous amount of briefs.
Kennedy told them he sometimes takes difficult cases home to read as he listens to opera music.
“I sometimes have one-opera cases and sometimes two-opera cases,” he said. “An attorney in the room raised his hand and said, ‘I have a rule like that when I write those briefs. I have a one-six-pack brief and a two-six-pack brief.’”

Justice Kennedy speaks to PB Bar Association

John Pacenti has the details here. The whole thing is definitely worth a read, but here is a part:

Under Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Kennedy voted with the majority 92 percent of the time in the 2008-2009 term. On the 23 decisions decided by 5-4 votes, Kennedy was in the majority in all but five. “I don’t swing around the cases. They swing around me,” he said. “My jurisprudence is quite consistent.”

In one of his many jokes during the speech, Kennedy was asked what makes an “activist court.” He replied, “An activist court is a court that makes a decision you don’t like.”

But Kennedy also was serious. He said it’s important to teach the young about the Constitution and its importance because the law in other countries is considered a threat, not a blessing for society.

When asked if empathy has a place in judicial rulings at the highest levels, Kennedy said absolutely. He said prison sentences in the United States are eight times longer than in other Western countries for the same crimes.

“If lack of empathy means you close your eyes to the law’s decree, that’s just silly,” Kennedy said. “Capital defendants in a single windowless 12-by-8 cell for 20 years waiting for their sentence. You are not supposed to know this when you are a judge?” He said mandatory minimum laws passed by state legislatures are cost foolish and have created a failing penal system. In conclusion, Kennedy said he expects the dynamic to change among justices when Kagan, if confirmed, joins the court. “It’s a new table. It’s a new court,” he said.

It's Friday!

Took a quick trip to the Middle District yesterday. I think I can fly to Tampa, drive to the Pinelas county jail, see my client, drive back to the airport, and fly back to Miami quicker than I can walk across the street to FDC and see a client there.

I know this is off-topic, but this is too good to pass up -- from the Miami Herald: "Principal tells parent to 'eat s--- and die'." Whoops! The dreaded e-mail mistake where you hit reply instead of forward.

If you haven't had enough Kagan coverage, here's what Tom Goldstein says are 3 overlooked issues:

First, as Nina Totenberg first reported, Kagan signed this letter in 2005 strongly protesting Lindsay Graham’s amendment to limit the Guantanamo Bay detainees’ access to federal courts. This is far more direct evidence of Kagan’s views on executive powers in foreign affairs than the isolated statement in her confirmation hearings that has been invoked as supposedly showing her support for Bush-era policies. The letter should assuage liberal opponents, but raises the question whether Graham and other moderate Republicans may vote against her.

Second, as the New York Times reported, Miguel Estrada unambiguously endorsed Kagan’s confirmation. Estrada is a hero of conservatives, given his treatment when he was nominated by President Bush to the D.C. Circuit. The endorsement gives Democrats and the White House ammunition to argue that Republicans are simply playing politics.

Third, as Jim Oliphant reported, Kagan signed a memo while working in the White House stating that President should sign an assault weapons ban. And as Greg Stohr of Bloomberg has reported, while clerking for Thurgood Marshall, Kagan wrote that she was “not sympathetic” to the claim that the District of Columbia’s handgun ban violates the Second Amendment; that is the claim the Supreme Court accepted in the Heller case. Both statements by Kagan reflected the position of her employers – the White House and Justice Marshall – and her brief statement as a law clerk about the Second Amendment claim (literally a single short sentence) represented the view of every court of appeals. But those statements will almost certainly be enough to cause the NRA, with its considerable influence, to formally oppose the nomination.

Old debate pops up again

Jay Weaver is reporting that Judge Lenard didn't accept the plea deals in a health-care fraud case in which patient files were sold to personal injury lawyers. Judge Lenard is concerned that the punishment agreed to does not fit the crime:

Ruben E. Rodriguez, the ringleader, would face up to 12 years in prison. His wife, Maria Victoria Suarez, 52, would face up to five years.
``These charges are much too serious -- much too serious for our community,'' Lenard said. ``Violations of the law in the healthcare industry have become too much the norm [in Miami-Dade]. There are real victims here.''
Rodriguez, 62, who attended the hearing in a wheelchair because of poor health, has pleaded guilty to two conspiracy offenses and aggravated identity theft.
He admitted he stole Jackson records of patients' names, addresses, telephone numbers and medical diagnoses and sold them to several attorneys in exchange for kickbacks. He also admitted stealing records from an ambulance company dating back to 1995.
In exchange for the confidential information, lawyers paid Rodriguez hundreds of thousands of dollars after settling injury claims on the patients' behalfs, prosecutors say. One unidentified personal-injury attorney wrote 27 checks totaling $85,250 to a shell company incorporated by Rodriguez between 2006 and 2009.
On Tuesday, Lenard said she could not decide whether to accept Rodriguez's guilty plea until she reviewed sentencing guidelines for his offenses to make sure the penalties were tough enough.

We've discussed before the issue of whether judges should be able to reject plea deals -- the last time it came up was in the Robles case:

Query -- does a federal judge have the power to reject this sort of deal? Because this is a charge bargain deal, can't the government just dismiss the other counts on its own, leaving only the ten year maximum count? I think the real question is whether the government will have the heart to do this after Judge Gold has said he will not approve the deal. If in our adversarial system of justice the prosecution believes that a deal is fair, should a judge step in?

From another post on the subject:

The Louis Robles case has pitted prosecutors against the judiciary. The government and the defense had worked out a deal for Robles -- 10 years in prison plus restitution -- and that deal had the blessing of the receiver and almost all of the victims.Judge Gold, however, won't accept the deal, saying it's too lenient. The government recently filed a 16 page motion for reconsideration explaining why the plea made sense. Judge Gold denied that motion, which now leaves the government with two choices. It can try a case that neither party wants to try. Or it can dismiss the counts that carry more than a 10 year maximum, leaving Judge Gold with no choice but to sentence Robles to 10 years, even after a trial.Oftentimes, defense lawyers complain that sentencing is driven by prosecutors and that it should be left to judges to sentence, not executive officers. In this case, prosecutorial discretion is important in capping the sentence.Any thoughts on what the U.S. Attorney's office should do? Should they defer to the judge or stand up for their position?

What do you all think of this issue?

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.

It's Elena Kagan

That's the (leaked) word from last night and this morning. Tom Goldstein called it months ago and his coverage over at ScotusBlog is unbelievable. Here's Tom's summary of his recent posts, but there's a whole lot more over there:

1. On February 23, I wrote explaining that Justice Stevens would retire, Justice Ginsburg would not, and the President would nominate Elena Kagan to fill the Stevens seat. Most of the post is devoted to discussing why the President would choose her over other candidates.
2. After Stevens’ retirement, on April 27, I returned to the selection, explaining that I continued to believe that the President would select Kagan, albeit for reasons that had less to do with electoral politics than was true in February.
3. On Saturday, we published a very extensive piece on Kagan, discussing both her professional history and claims made for and against her, as well as the breakdown of likely votes in the confirmation process.
4. Earlier this evening, before the announcement leaked, I discussed at length both the likely confirmation process and the substance of the ten principal issues that will be debated by her defenders and opponents.

Item #3 is a 10,000 word essay about Kagan. If you have some time today, it's worth skimming.

In other news, the DBR (John Pacenti) covers the debate about whether PSIs are really needed after Booker. Professor Rick Bascuas said this: "Today's federal probation officers see themselves primarily as law-enforcement agents rather than agents of mercy." Rick has written extensively on the issue here.

This can't be true, can it?

According to the JAABlog, a Broward judge said: "If the jury comes back not guilty, I'm going to slit my throat" in a DUI case: "Luckily for the Judge's throat, they did come back guilty, after which the defense attorney successfully disqualified Ireland from further proceedings. Now it's up to another judge to read the trial, and sort out a bunch of messy issues. Not to be outdone, another county judge was recently overheard commenting how people of Mexican descent 'love beer.' Only in Broward, baby!" This can't be true, can it?

Tons of great coverage of the Supreme Court while we wait for Obama to pick Stevens' successor.

On why Stevens wears a bow-tie: "The truth is that I can't tie a four-in-hand." The rest of the Washington Post article is great.

SG Kagan had to deal with a dicey political question while at Harvard. Here's Professor Mnookin on how she decided not to fight the feds even though she believed the government was wrong: "Elena is very good at reading the lay of the land, at having a sense of who is where on what issue and what the art of the possible might be, who can be influenced, who cannot. In that sense of being political, she is extremely gifted. She’s very purposeful."

Kagan is also watching the honest services cases very closely. For the criminal practitioners out there, let's make no mistake -- if Kagan is selected, she will not be even close to as liberal as Justice Stevens on criminal justice issues.

Speaking of honest services cases, NACDL and the Heritage Foundation just issued a report explaining how Congress is continuing to criminalize too many acts and is doing so without including a mens rea element. The entire report "How Congress is Eroding the Criminal Intent Requirement in Federal Law" can be read here.

Pictures Pictures Pictures

I know you all are upset with me -- I missed Star Wars day yesterday (May the 4th be with you). So, I won't miss Cinco de Mayo today...

Another day, another attack on JAABlog and Bill Gelin, this time from a lawyer upset with a picture he posted. Here's the basic question -- do the Florida Bar Rules apply to lawyer-run blogs? And if so, did Gelin violate any rules by posting the picture? Bob Norman (and now SFL and Rumpole) have weighed in. I'm sure you can guess my opinion -- Gelin has nothing to worry about on this one. (Yesterday, I had picture day at the blog. True, they weren't like the one posted at JAABlog, but one of them included a state rep looking at naughty pictures. Do the Florida Bar Rules prohibit me from posting that picture? No way.)

Okay, back to the news of the blog. Tony Mauro wrote an article about minority clerks. Our own Judge Martinez is quoted:

Judge Jose Martinez of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida said that, in recent years, he has seen "way more [minority] applicants for clerkships — and they're getting better."
Recruiting minorities for clerkships has long been a challenge, Martinez said, because of missed educational opportunities and also because good candidates often have massive law school tuition debt to pay off. "We're competing for the top-notch minority lawyers with the big firms," Martinez said. "We have to show them it is a long-range benefit to be a clerk — it's a hell of a stepping-stone."
One helpful tool for doing that, Martinez said, has been the American Bar Association's 10-year-old Judicial Clerkship Program, which has provided hundreds of minority law students with internships that expose them to clerkship possibilities on both federal and state courts. The students see that "this is a viable thing for them to do," Martinez said.
But Judge Reggie Walton of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said he has seen no recent increase in minority applicants for clerkships. "I don't receive the numbers I would like," he said. "They have so many other opportunities to make a lot more money than you can make as a law clerk."
Walton, who generally looks for applicants with a couple of years of law firm experience, said it is nearly impossible to hire minorities away from high-paying firms when he can only pay clerks less than $80,000 a year and when the firms are making "a big push to keep them on board." A recent clerk, Walton said, took a $100,000 pay cut from a major Washington firm to clerk for him.
Walton, himself an African-American, added that, with females outnumbering males among black law students, "the most difficult demographic to attract is the African-American male. The disparity is stark."

Picture day

Three pictures of the day:

1. State Senator likes porn:

2. Phillies fan tasered:

3. Supreme Court doors are closed:

and one item without a picture -- apparently the 11th Circuit is investigating a judge.

Monday morning...

Feels like summer is here, no?

SFL already has posted on the FBA BABC. It was a good event. Tons of people showed up, and most of the judges were there. Big shout out to Adam Rabin and Brian Spector for their hard work. From the criminal bar perspective, I thought it was interesting to see the prosecutors and criminal defense lawyers engaging each other on a variety of topics, including sentencing, discovery, cooperating witnesses, and so on. I got a lot out of it. To the left is one such discussion taking place. Good stuff...

Today is Willy Ferrer's first day on the job. Should be interesting to see how things shake out...

We miss you Paris

She wasn't in court today for a follow-up hearing on her case before Judge Moreno. The AP covers the hearing here.

See everyone tomorrow at the Doral for the Bench & Bar conference.

UPDATE -- Even though Paris wasn't in court today, Dan Marino was. He was testifying in O.J. McDuffie's state court med mal case.

Judge Kozinski says we need cameras in the courtroom

And I wholeheartedly agree. From the Above the Law post on his comments:

Kozinski started his talk by going over some of the arguments he has made before [PDF] in support of cameras (e.g., studies show cameras don’t affect the proceedings, quoting his “old boss” Warren Burger — “People in an open society do not demand infallibility from their institutions, but it is difficult for them to accept what they are prohibited from observing.”).
It wouldn’t be like the O.J. trial, which decidedly set the cameras-in-the-courtroom movement back. Kozinski advocates stationary cameras that would not zoom in, zoom out, or otherwise overly dramatize the courtroom events. Kozinski acknowledged that if you were to choose between a O.J. media circus or reports from informed journalists like Nina Totenberg or Linda Greenhouse, one might be happy to live without cameras.
But that’s not usually the choice one has. Kozinski pointed to the “long, slow decline of the newspaper industry” and the “rise of a much more diffuse style of coverage” as a major reason why cameras should be brought into courtrooms. Increasingly, the public is relying on “pseudo-journalists” (aka bloggers) for their instantaneous legal news.
“On the Internet, the loudest voice gets the most attention,” said Kozinski, who said that tends to lead to a distortion of the coverage of a case. He also raised the risks of relying on unknown bloggers, pointing to the case of “Dr. Flea.”

Someone explain to me why our federal courtrooms should be closed to the public.

More associates charged...

...but this time it isn't Rothstein's people; it's Lew Freeman's. Here's the information charging Jose Wong and Steven Jockers. Like Rothstein's COO, they are charged in an information, which is a clear sign that they've already cut a deal. According to the USAO press release:

Jose Wong began working as an employee at LBFP in1992. Wong held various accounting positions in LBFP, and was ultimately promoted to comptroller at LBFP. In this position, Wong performed all the bookkeeping related to LBFP’s operating accounts and managed Lewis B. Freeman’s personal finances. Wong also prepared financial reports, such as bank reconciliations and cash-flow reports, on a number of matters to which Freeman had been appointed as the fiduciary. Additionally, Wong deposited a large number of unauthorized checks payable to LBFP from the fiduciary accounts into the LBFP operating accounts.
Steven Jockers worked as an employee at LBFP since1998. Jockers frequently assisted Freeman and other principals of LBFP in the day-to-day functions required to maintain receiverships, liquidating trusteeships, and assignments for the benefit of creditors. Jockers also did bookkeeping and prepared financial reports, such as bank reconciliations and cash-flow reports, on a number of matters to which Freeman had been appointed as the fiduciary.
It is estimated that Freeman issued more than 100 unauthorized checks and consequently misappropriated more than $6 million from fiduciary accounts he was responsible for safeguarding.

The case is assigned to Judge Lenard.

Happy 50th...

... to SG Elena Kagan (soon to be Justice Kagan?). If you haven't been over to ScotusBlog recently, you should check it out. They have been doing incredible in-depth reports on the short-listers for Justice Stevens' seat. Here's one example -- an interesting post about how Stevens won a coin-flip to get his clerkship:

Art Seder and John Stevens, meanwhile, were both interested in the alleged Rutledge clerkship possibility. Dean Green and his colleagues gave the young men the impression that Northwestern could not or would not recommend one of them over the other. Seder and Stevens thus were told to decide between themselves, by flipping a coin, which of them would be the school’s nominee to Justice Rutledge. They did so, just the two of them, in private, at the law school and without particular drama. Stevens won the flip. And his friend Seder abided by that result—he did not ask, for instance, to change the contest to the best two out of three flips.

Scott Rothstein's right-hand charged

Chief operating officer Debra Villegas was charged Tuesday with conspiring to launder money from his massive investment racket (via Miami Herald). Here's the indictment which got assigned to Judge Zloch.

UPDATE -- an astute reader points out that it's an information, not an indictment, and that it says it will take the parties zero days to try the case. Looks like Ms. Villegas has worked out a deal to plead and cooperate...

Now that Manuel Noriega ...

... is gone (on a plane to France), who is going to get that special wing in the prison, which has a TV, window, exercise equipment and a phone?

“These two judges are fed up with the government’s efforts to clean up the Everglades.”

Nothing like a good Guy Lewis quote on Monday Morning. He's talking about Judges Moreno and Gold. He continues: “You’ve got two of the finest judges in the district, and both are as patient as Job, and they have come to the conclusion that enough is enough.”

The DBR article covering the Everglades cleanup is here. Some more:

Lewis said Gold and Moreno have drawn a line in the sand after giving government agencies the benefit of the doubt for years. “They want to believe their orders are going to be complied with and the government in good faith is going to clean up our backyard, and it’s not happening,” Lewis said. “It’s a shame it’s gotten to the point the tribe and others have to go in and say, ‘Please, judge, force government to live up to its lawful obligation.’ It’s extraordinary.” Everglades restoration has been slow going, but a $7.8 billion restoration plan signed by President George W. Bush and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in 2003 shows limited success. “Rule No. 1 in politics is the big dogs eat first,” Guest said. “There is a lot of talk and not much walk. … Everglades restoration entered into a Dark Ages under the Bush administration. The projects didn’t get funded even though they were spending money on all sort of things. They built up this giant budget deficit, and it didn’t go to Everglades restoration, and it could have.”

***

Lehtinen said Everglades water quality has been somewhat improved thanks to a judiciary that wants to see the cleanup project through. “If you beat them about the head and shoulders enough with court orders, you do see some progress,” he said. “These judges are critical.”

"Anything is possible when a criminal defendant makes himself the government’s darling in an effort to obtain a reduced prison sentence."

That was Paul Calli in this morning's DBR discussing Scott Rothstein and his upcoming (but delayed) sentencing. More from Paul:

Calli warned prosecuting a case built on the word of master criminals like Rothstein is especially unreliable. “You take a guy who is nothing but a con man and you rely on him to accuse others. He has a built-in incentive to lie,” he said.

Jeff Weiner represents someone that Rothstein has cooperated against:

He said it was “sad and pathetic” that the federal government would turn to the state’s top scam artist to entrap his client. He contends the government is delaying Rothstein’s sentencing in hopes of reforming his reputation for the witness stand. The postponement “is only to keep from being sentenced so the government can bolster his credibility, which he has none, against the many people he has cooperated against,” Weiner said.

I wonder if Jeff will be able to get Rothstein to pass out on the stand...

Sentencing is currently scheduled for June for Rothstein before Judge Cohn. My best guess is that he gets somewhere between 20 and 25 years. What do you all think?

Willy Ferrer confirmed

Congrats to him and 4 other new U.S. Attorneys.

Your Thursday Morning Laugh

"For the tremendous philanthropic support he provides, the University of Miami is proud to name the Student-Athlete Lounge after Nevin Shapiro."

D'oh!

Newly minted SEC chief Eric Bustillo has come out of the box swinging with a $900 million Ponzi case against Mr. Shapiro. Shapiro is also charged in New Jersey and surrendered yesterday. He is represented by Mike Tein, Guy Lewis and Kate Meyers.

8-1 Supreme Court strikes down law banning videos of animal cruelty

Rick Bascuas and I have had a lot to say on this issue as we represented the plaintiff in a similar case involving cockfighting videos. After the oral argument in Stevens (the dogfighting video case), I had this to say:

From what I heard, the case will be 8-1 in favor of the criminal defendant Stevens, holding that Section 48 -- prohibiting the sale of depictions of animal cruelty -- is unconstitutional. The one Justice that seemed to say that Congress could pass such a statute was Alito.

Too bad I can't call football games that well! Today, the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in favor of the defendant Stevens and invalidated the statute. Alito was the one dissenter. From the New York Times:

In a major and muscular First Amendment ruling, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a federal law that made it a crime to create or sell dogfight videos and other depictions of animal cruelty.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority in the 8-to-1 decision, said the law created “a criminal prohibition of alarming breadth” and that the government’s aggressive defense of the law was “startling and dangerous.”

***

As a general matter, Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “the First Amendment itself reflects a judgment by the American people that the benefits of its restrictions on the government outweigh its costs.” He continued, “Our Constitution forecloses any attempt to revise that judgment simply on the basis that some speech is not worth it.”
Having concluded that the First Amendment had a role to play in the analysis, the chief justice next considered whether the law on animal-cruelty depictions swept too broadly.
The 1999 law was enacted mainly to address what a House report called “a very specific sexual fetish.”
“Much of the material featured women inflicting the torture with their bare feet or while wearing high-heeled shoes,” according to the report. “In some video depictions, the woman’s voice can be heard talking to the animals in a kind of dominatrix patter.”
When President Bill Clinton signed the bill, he expressed reservations, prompted by the First Amendment, and instructed the Justice Department to limit prosecutions to “wanton cruelty to animals designed to appeal to a prurient interest in sex.” But since then, the government has used the law in several prosecutions for trafficking in dogfighting videos.
Chief Justice Roberts said the law applied even more broadly. Since all hunting is illegal in the District of Columbia, for instance, he said, the law makes the sale of magazines or videos showing hunting a crime here.
“The demand for hunting depictions exceeds the estimated demand for crush videos or animal fighting depictions by several orders or magnitude,” he wrote.
The law contains an exception for materials with “serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical or artistic value.” Those exceptions were insufficient to save the statute, the chief justice wrote.
“Most hunting videos, for example, are not obviously instructional in nature,” he said, “except in the sense that all life is a lesson.”
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented, saying the majority’s analysis was built on “fanciful hypotheticals."

I demand a retraction!

Today's DBR (John Pacenti) covers the Jonathan Goodman imminent appointment as magistrate judge (filling Judge Garber's seat). We previously broke the story here. From the article: "U.S. District Chief Judge Federico Moreno wouldn't confirm blog reports last week that judges in the district have picked the Miami lawyer."

The article goes on to discuss how Kathy Williams and Willy Ferrer are still waiting for their appointments (Kathy to the bench and Willy to U.S. Attorney). Ferrer, at least, has been nominated (and will likely be confirmed this week or next). Kathy's file is apparently on the President's desk. I'm not sure what Obama is waiting for. It's really outrageous.

Pacenti says that Michael Caruso is "the odd-on favorite" to take over the Federal Defender's job when Kathy finally gets nominated: "David O. Markus, a former federal prosecutor, said Caruso is the natural choice. ... Markus, who runs the Southern District of Florida blog, ..."

Well, at least the blog got mentioned...

Kobie Gary gets 30 months

I'm not sure whether this was a guideline sentence or not as none of the articles explain. Here's the most in depth piece. Willie Gary had this to say about his son after the sentencing:

"I want to thank God for giving me my son alive because based on the guys he was hanging with and the things they were doing, rather than be in a courtyard I could be in the graveyard.”

Update-- from what I'm hearing, this was a win for the defense as the government was seeking a leadership enhancement which would have resulted in a much higher sentence of at least 5 years. Can anyone confirm?

Cocodorm case heard by 11th Circuit

You remember this case, right? It's the one where Judge Cooke ruled that operating a porn site from inside one's home is permitted in a residential area. The 11th Circuit heard argument yesterday, and John Pacenti covered it here. Judge Pryor wasn't sympathetic:

In 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel indicated Thursday that the keyhole should be closed on Internet porn sites broadcasting from private residences, saying the sites constitute a business and could violate municipal zoning ordinances. “We live in the world of reality TV. People will watch anything,” said Judge William H. Pyror, one of three judges hearing the city’s appeal. His comments came during oral arguments in the city of Miami’s appeal to enforce municipal codes at a two-story colonial home north of downtown Miami used by cocodorm.com, a gay sex site that provides in-home camera feeds to subscribers. The house at 503 NE 27th St. is essentially a production studio because independent contractors provide a service for a salary, room and board, the appellate judge said. But U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke ruled last year in favor of cocodorm’s parent company, Flava Works, citing a 2001 ruling by the 11th Circuit that concluded such homes did not constitute adult entertainment business because the product was essentially in cyberspace.
***
Benjamin told the panel, which included 11th Circuit Judge Peter Fay and Senior U.S. District Judge Jordan J. Quist, visiting from Michigan, that neighbors were undisturbed by the residents. The only difference is cameras were set up in every nook and cranny to record their daily lives, which happened to include lots of sex. The red house’s windows are whited out. There was only one vehicle parked there Thursday.

I was with Judge Cooke on this one, but it looks like it might get sent back for additional hearings:

Benjamin repeatedly referred to the 2001 decision when a panel ruled a home transmitting online images of copulating college co-eds did not violate Tampa’s zoning ordinance banning adult businesses in residential areas.
***
The court indicated it most likely would send the case back to Cooke with instructions that the Tampa case is not controlling.