It happened in the Corollo trial and Judge Rodney Smith is not happy. The Miami Herald covers it here:
The lawsuit involving Miami Commissioner Joe Carollo was throw into disarray Wednesday morning when the federal judge overseeing the case briefly threatened to send the commissioner’s attorneys to prison over a photo that was taken inside the courtroom. Taking pictures inside federal courtrooms is strictly prohibited and U.S. District Court Judge Rodney Smith was livid when one showed up in a filing from Carollo’s attorneys, Ben Kuehne, Mason Pertnoy and Marc Sarnoff. The picture, which the judge said was included in a sealed document and never shown in court, apparently showed an attorney for the Little Havana businessmen suing Carollo talking to a media member in Smith’s courtroom. Smith did not name them or six other people also shown in the photo, which he said was taken by another attorney, Jesse Stolow, who is part of the defense team and had been attending the proceedings. “This is one of the most egregious reprehensible disrespectful actions you could make against this court. It requires prison time. We will see how it can be avoided,” Smith said. “I’ve never seen something like this in my life. What happens here sets a precedent.”
I still want cameras in federal courts, but I guess that's a long ways away.
13 comments:
"This is one of the most egregious reprehensible disrespectful actions you could make against this court. It requires prison time. We will see how it can be avoided,” Smith said.
More egregious than cops lying during testimony? I guess it's just a matter of perspective.
Is he going after all the defense attorneys or just the inexperienced one that actually took the picture? Apparently they included it in a filing, not very smart.
“This is one of the most egregious reprehensible disrespectful actions you could make against this court. It requires prison time."
Huh? How? Why? Last I checked, the court are open to the public and court proceedings are public proceedings. I understand that there is an (arbitrary?) rule against cameras in the courtroom and that it was violated here. But "it requires prison time"? "Egregious"? "Reprehensible"? Judge Smith has lost his grip on reality.
Why is prison the solution to every problem?
Black robe fever
Judge Smith came up through Miami-Dade County and Circuit Court. I have a very difficult time believing this is "one of the most egregious reprehensible disrespectful actions you could make against this court" that he has seen.
Agree with 2:47.
Interesting how the article has been deleted from the Herald website....does Carollo have pull at the Herald too?
judges gone wild
I wonder if the term “due process” ever crossed his mind when he went on a public rant against prominent figures in the local community without holding a hearing and whether he will raise temporary insanity. This is the first amendment trial?
2:47 PM's comment for the win.
Does he realize that the first thing that comes up when you google him are photos from his investiture from inside a federal courtroom?
On its face it is not disrespectful. As a violation of a rule with no clear important purpose to it, it is not reprehensible either, it is "malum prohibitum." In state court, a judge who makes a statement that trivial offenses require prison time would be angling for a switch to a different division. Maybe the judge is just way too upset that it happened in his courtroom to be impartial? Sometimes the way we in state court look at these questions is the behavior makes it necessary for the taxpayers to pay a fortune every year to keep the person isolated from society. If any Article III judges need more help with Criminal Law 101, please contact your state bar members through this blog.
Post a Comment