Here's more on the Mutual Benefits recusal from Vanessa Blum...
Our previous coverage here.
From the Blum article:
Over objections from area newspapers, a federal judge today closed a court hearing on secret filings in a case stemming from one of South Florida's biggest frauds.U.S. District Judge Adalberto Jordan said he would consider releasing the secret documents and a transcript of the hearing, in whole or in part, after weighing concerns raised by the South Florida Sun Sentinel and the Miami Herald.The newspapers are trying to break through a wall of secrecy surrounding the latest criminal charges related to Mutual Benefits Corp., a now defunct Fort Lauderdale investment firm.
***
Deanna Shullman, an attorney representing the Sun Sentinel, told Jordan that federal law gives members of the public and media representatives the right to view court records, barring extraordinary circumstances.In a motion, Shullman stated that secrecy in such a high-profile case would create rumors and raise questions about the integrity of the justice system."Greater access is the best medicine to restore the public's faith and confidence in these proceedings," Shullman stated.Following arguments from Shullman and Herald attorney Scott Ponce, Jordan closed the hearing to the public. He said he would rule in the coming weeks."There are a lot of difficult and thorny issues here," Jordan said. "I'm doing my best to navigate my way through."Jordan received the case in January after two other federal judges stepped aside, citing undisclosed conflicts of interest. In addition, two officials in the U.S. Attorney's Office have recused themselves from involvement in the prosecution.The Mutual Benefits case has also drawn interest because the company had deep ties to elected officials in Broward County.
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
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Helio Castroneves
I was at the courthouse today and popped into the Castroneves trial. I lasted there about 5 minutes. After the DOJ prosecutor asked the following question, I left: "Now, we've been discussing general ledgers for some time -- please explain to the jury what a general ledger is."
And now I get to post another picture:
Speaking of the Castroneves case, Judge Graham is being honored today at the University of Miami: he's receiving the William M. Hoeveler Award for ethics and leadership in the legal profession.
Monday, March 23, 2009
New administrative order on text messaging, emailing, twittering, typing, and cellular phone use
Judge Moreno issued a new administrative order today allowing reporters to bring their cells into the courthouse, but:
prohibit[ing] text messaging, emailing, twittering, typing, and any cellular phone use from inside courtrooms. These actions by persons inside the courtroom violate the sanctity of the courtroom and disrupt ongoing judicial proceedings.
ADJUDGED that emailing, text messaging, twittering, typing, and using cellular phones
shall continue to be prohibited inside the District's courtrooms. It is also
ADJUDGED that to balance the interest in preserving the sanctity and conduct of judicial
proceedings against the public's right to know what occurs inside the District's courtrooms, this Order amends Administrative Orders 2006- 16 and 2008-07 to allow news reporters to bring cellular phones, Blackberries, iPhones, Palm Pilots, and other similar electronic personal digital assistants (PDAs) into the courthouse consistent with what is permitted of attorneys, as long as the news reporters agree in writing not to email, text message, twitter, type, or use their cellular phones or other electronic device inside the District's courtrooms. A violation of the agreement will result in contempt of court. The Clerk of Court shall keep the list of reporters who have signed such agreement and make that list available to Court security personnel assigned to each courthouse. The Clerk of Court shall also make space available in each courthouse for those listed reporters to use their cellular phones and other electronic devices outside of the courtrooms. Of course, District and Magistrate Judges retain the discretion to maintain order in their courtrooms, which includes the right to lock their courtrooms should the entry and exit of news reporters become disruptive in a particular proceeding.
I applauded Judge Moreno for the last administrative orders on cell phones, allowing jurors to bring in their phones and allowing lawyers to have cells with cameras (as long as they weren't used) and his propensity to have an open courthouse with a free flow of information, but this order doesn't get it all right. True, the part of this order allowing reporters to bring in their cells is right on.
But not allowing anyone -- even lawyers in the gallery -- to email or text doesn't fit with all of Judge Moreno's recent efforts to catch the court up with technological advances. Does it disturb the courtroom more to write a note to an associate to go outside to call the secretary to bring over a certain file into the courtroom during trial or to shoot over a quick email (or text) asking for the file to be sent over electronically? Is it better for a reporter to scratch notes on a legal pad, run outside to make a phone call and then run back in to hear more of the witness or to simply send an email without getting up?
Plus, the administrative order says that the use of blackberries by lawyers shall continue to be prohibited inside the courtroom. In every single courtroom I have been in, there are lawyers emailing -- A LOT. (In fact, I spoke to a lawyer yesterday who had a cortisone shot in her thumb for typing so much.) So this sounds like a new prohibition to me.
And let me ask this -- does the email prohibition inside the courtroom apply to judges and staff as well? Sorry, but there is always an awful lot of typing going on from everywhere inside the courtrooms, not just counsel table.
Well, the Chief has made a lot of advances with cell phone usage, so it's hard to criticize this order too harshly. And I do love that Judge Moreno knows what Twitter is...
UPDATE -- did I jump the gun? An emailer points out that the order prohibiting emailing, texting, etc may only apply to reporters, not to lawyers. Hmmmmm... It seems more broad than that, but I'd like to be wrong. Thoughts?
SECOND UPDATE -- I was right.
prohibit[ing] text messaging, emailing, twittering, typing, and any cellular phone use from inside courtrooms. These actions by persons inside the courtroom violate the sanctity of the courtroom and disrupt ongoing judicial proceedings.
Judge Moreno went on to explain:
The Court, however, must balance the interests of preserving the conduct of judicial proceedings against the public's right to know what happens inside courtrooms. Accordingly, it isADJUDGED that emailing, text messaging, twittering, typing, and using cellular phones
shall continue to be prohibited inside the District's courtrooms. It is also
ADJUDGED that to balance the interest in preserving the sanctity and conduct of judicial
proceedings against the public's right to know what occurs inside the District's courtrooms, this Order amends Administrative Orders 2006- 16 and 2008-07 to allow news reporters to bring cellular phones, Blackberries, iPhones, Palm Pilots, and other similar electronic personal digital assistants (PDAs) into the courthouse consistent with what is permitted of attorneys, as long as the news reporters agree in writing not to email, text message, twitter, type, or use their cellular phones or other electronic device inside the District's courtrooms. A violation of the agreement will result in contempt of court. The Clerk of Court shall keep the list of reporters who have signed such agreement and make that list available to Court security personnel assigned to each courthouse. The Clerk of Court shall also make space available in each courthouse for those listed reporters to use their cellular phones and other electronic devices outside of the courtrooms. Of course, District and Magistrate Judges retain the discretion to maintain order in their courtrooms, which includes the right to lock their courtrooms should the entry and exit of news reporters become disruptive in a particular proceeding.
I applauded Judge Moreno for the last administrative orders on cell phones, allowing jurors to bring in their phones and allowing lawyers to have cells with cameras (as long as they weren't used) and his propensity to have an open courthouse with a free flow of information, but this order doesn't get it all right. True, the part of this order allowing reporters to bring in their cells is right on.
But not allowing anyone -- even lawyers in the gallery -- to email or text doesn't fit with all of Judge Moreno's recent efforts to catch the court up with technological advances. Does it disturb the courtroom more to write a note to an associate to go outside to call the secretary to bring over a certain file into the courtroom during trial or to shoot over a quick email (or text) asking for the file to be sent over electronically? Is it better for a reporter to scratch notes on a legal pad, run outside to make a phone call and then run back in to hear more of the witness or to simply send an email without getting up?
Plus, the administrative order says that the use of blackberries by lawyers shall continue to be prohibited inside the courtroom. In every single courtroom I have been in, there are lawyers emailing -- A LOT. (In fact, I spoke to a lawyer yesterday who had a cortisone shot in her thumb for typing so much.) So this sounds like a new prohibition to me.
And let me ask this -- does the email prohibition inside the courtroom apply to judges and staff as well? Sorry, but there is always an awful lot of typing going on from everywhere inside the courtrooms, not just counsel table.
Well, the Chief has made a lot of advances with cell phone usage, so it's hard to criticize this order too harshly. And I do love that Judge Moreno knows what Twitter is...
UPDATE -- did I jump the gun? An emailer points out that the order prohibiting emailing, texting, etc may only apply to reporters, not to lawyers. Hmmmmm... It seems more broad than that, but I'd like to be wrong. Thoughts?
SECOND UPDATE -- I was right.
Monday morning...
Ahhhh, it's Monday morning. Everyone had their cafecito yet?
I took the weekend off, trying to recover after the long trial I just finished. It's hard to unwind after being revved up for so long. I went to the NCAA games on Friday -- all four of em... There's nothing like March Madness.
I added some new fish to the tank this weekend as well.
Enough about me -- what about you? What's up in the District? I heard that the government will rest in the Helio Castroneves case this week. Will the defense put on a case or will they surprise the courtroom like Mike Pasano did in his trial (aided by Paul Calli & Marissel Descalzo) in Puerto Rico in which he represented Luisa Inclan an aide to the governor, which led to NGs across the board?
Only the Shadow knows...
I took the weekend off, trying to recover after the long trial I just finished. It's hard to unwind after being revved up for so long. I went to the NCAA games on Friday -- all four of em... There's nothing like March Madness.
I added some new fish to the tank this weekend as well.
Enough about me -- what about you? What's up in the District? I heard that the government will rest in the Helio Castroneves case this week. Will the defense put on a case or will they surprise the courtroom like Mike Pasano did in his trial (aided by Paul Calli & Marissel Descalzo) in Puerto Rico in which he represented Luisa Inclan an aide to the governor, which led to NGs across the board?
Only the Shadow knows...
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Amici support Cuban 5
John Pacenti covers the amicus briefs filed in support of the Cuban 5:
Nobel laureates, scholars and international organizations have flooded the U.S. Supreme Court with legal briefs in support of five convicted Cuban spies, arguing the defendants were sandbagged from the start because the Miami trial took place in a city defined by decades of anti-Castro fervor.
A dozen amicus briefs focus mainly on U.S. District Judge Joan Lenard’s denial of a defense motion to move the trial 25 miles north to Fort Lauderdale.
Her refusal "guaranteed that jurors would be drawn from a cross-section of a community inflamed by passion, warped by prejudice, awed by violence and menaced by the virulence of public opinion," according to a petitions filed by the Civil Rights Clinic at Howard University School of Law in Washington.
The Howard brief has particularly offended the Cuban-American community, said Roland Sanchez-Medina, president of the Cuban American Bar Association. If the Supreme Court decides to hear the case, he said his organization would respond with an amicus brief of its own.
"They obvious did zero actual research to do with anything about the Cuban-American community," he said. "It’s unbelievably inflammatory, ignorant and completely baseless."
Supreme Court stud Tom Goldstein is heading up the Supreme Court litigation for the five:
Tom Goldstein of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in Washington, who is handling the Supreme Court appeal for the convicted spies, noted support for the defendants has come "from people from all over the world."
Judge Lenard ruled anti-Castro hostility related "to events other than the espionage activities in which defendants were allegedly involved," and any partiality could be vetted during jury selection.
"This was a serious injustice, and it sent all the wrong signals to the world about our commitment to a fair and impartial trial," Goldstein said.
Interesting article, but Pacenti should have given a little more pub to Richard Klugh, who has been guy writing the legal papers throughout these proceedings.
Nobel laureates, scholars and international organizations have flooded the U.S. Supreme Court with legal briefs in support of five convicted Cuban spies, arguing the defendants were sandbagged from the start because the Miami trial took place in a city defined by decades of anti-Castro fervor.
A dozen amicus briefs focus mainly on U.S. District Judge Joan Lenard’s denial of a defense motion to move the trial 25 miles north to Fort Lauderdale.
Her refusal "guaranteed that jurors would be drawn from a cross-section of a community inflamed by passion, warped by prejudice, awed by violence and menaced by the virulence of public opinion," according to a petitions filed by the Civil Rights Clinic at Howard University School of Law in Washington.
The Howard brief has particularly offended the Cuban-American community, said Roland Sanchez-Medina, president of the Cuban American Bar Association. If the Supreme Court decides to hear the case, he said his organization would respond with an amicus brief of its own.
"They obvious did zero actual research to do with anything about the Cuban-American community," he said. "It’s unbelievably inflammatory, ignorant and completely baseless."
Supreme Court stud Tom Goldstein is heading up the Supreme Court litigation for the five:
Tom Goldstein of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in Washington, who is handling the Supreme Court appeal for the convicted spies, noted support for the defendants has come "from people from all over the world."
Judge Lenard ruled anti-Castro hostility related "to events other than the espionage activities in which defendants were allegedly involved," and any partiality could be vetted during jury selection.
"This was a serious injustice, and it sent all the wrong signals to the world about our commitment to a fair and impartial trial," Goldstein said.
Interesting article, but Pacenti should have given a little more pub to Richard Klugh, who has been guy writing the legal papers throughout these proceedings.
"Unequal Justice"
That's the title of this riveting Miami New Times piece about prison rape at the Miami FDC. We blogged on this issue before here. Below is the intro to the in depth article that is worth a read:
On the fifth floor of the Federal Detention Center in Miami, a short and stocky inmate stood sweeping the floor. Her name was Shonda Ross, and in her 32 years, she had seen the inside of more than a few prisons like this one — Tallahassee, Raleigh, and Danbury, Connecticut, among them. She had learned to survive in prison; she knew how to make friends with people who could protect her and get her the things she needed, such as the girlfriend in Tallahassee who smuggled in drugs from the back fence. But nothing prepared her for this place.
Built in 1995, the prison featured a Depression-era Art Deco exterior that was a cheery nod to South Beach, but other than that, everything was standard: a white-washed concrete shell for a room, a metal bunk with a thin mattress, a toilet made of steel. There were television sets in the common area, a rec room with Ping-Pong tables, and a place to smoke and get a bit of fresh air. But here in her room with the metal door shut, she was blocked off from all of that. She couldn't hear the traffic humming outside on NE Fifth Street; she couldn't feel the muggy summer heat or hear the music from cars going to the beach. She was sealed off, a stark fluorescent bulb above her, alone with her thoughts.
She churned her broom, picking up dust bunnies off the gray linoleum floor. She was an attractive woman, with disarming, fawn-like brown eyes that had attracted both men and women. The name of one lover decorated her right arm; a tiny red heart adorned her left breast.
She heard the door click open. Through the reflection of the stainless-steel plate that served as her mirror, she could see the figure of a large black man entering her cell.
He sported the uniform of a federal corrections officer: crisp white button-down shirt, neatly pressed gray slacks, sharp black tie, and shiny black shoes. He stood five-foot-nine — four inches taller than her — and carried 200 pounds of taut, sinewy muscle. She recognized him right away. He'd been here before, and every time it was the same thing.
As he moved closer, she could feel his hot breath on her neck. He unbuttoned her jumpsuit, pulled it off her soft shoulders, and let the red cotton garment fall to the floor. He led her to the bottom bunk and sat her down. He didn't have to say anything. They both know why he was there. She leaned back, closed her eyes, and waited for it to end.
On the fifth floor of the Federal Detention Center in Miami, a short and stocky inmate stood sweeping the floor. Her name was Shonda Ross, and in her 32 years, she had seen the inside of more than a few prisons like this one — Tallahassee, Raleigh, and Danbury, Connecticut, among them. She had learned to survive in prison; she knew how to make friends with people who could protect her and get her the things she needed, such as the girlfriend in Tallahassee who smuggled in drugs from the back fence. But nothing prepared her for this place.
Built in 1995, the prison featured a Depression-era Art Deco exterior that was a cheery nod to South Beach, but other than that, everything was standard: a white-washed concrete shell for a room, a metal bunk with a thin mattress, a toilet made of steel. There were television sets in the common area, a rec room with Ping-Pong tables, and a place to smoke and get a bit of fresh air. But here in her room with the metal door shut, she was blocked off from all of that. She couldn't hear the traffic humming outside on NE Fifth Street; she couldn't feel the muggy summer heat or hear the music from cars going to the beach. She was sealed off, a stark fluorescent bulb above her, alone with her thoughts.
She churned her broom, picking up dust bunnies off the gray linoleum floor. She was an attractive woman, with disarming, fawn-like brown eyes that had attracted both men and women. The name of one lover decorated her right arm; a tiny red heart adorned her left breast.
She heard the door click open. Through the reflection of the stainless-steel plate that served as her mirror, she could see the figure of a large black man entering her cell.
He sported the uniform of a federal corrections officer: crisp white button-down shirt, neatly pressed gray slacks, sharp black tie, and shiny black shoes. He stood five-foot-nine — four inches taller than her — and carried 200 pounds of taut, sinewy muscle. She recognized him right away. He'd been here before, and every time it was the same thing.
As he moved closer, she could feel his hot breath on her neck. He unbuttoned her jumpsuit, pulled it off her soft shoulders, and let the red cotton garment fall to the floor. He led her to the bottom bunk and sat her down. He didn't have to say anything. They both know why he was there. She leaned back, closed her eyes, and waited for it to end.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Judge Graham to receive prestigious award
Congrats to Judge Donald Graham who is receiving the William M. Hoeveler Award for ethics and leadership in the legal profession from the University of Miami School of Law Center for Ethics & Public Service. The reception is at 4pm on March 25th and the ceremony is at 4:30. If you are interested in attending, please RSVP to Susan Nelson at 305-284-3934.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Google Mistrial
The NY Times has an article about the mistrial in Judge Zloch's courtroom last week after jurors did internet research:
Last week, a juror in a big federal drug trial in Florida admitted to the judge that he had been doing research on the case on the Internet, directly violating the judge’s instructions and centuries of legal rules. But when the judge questioned the rest of the jury, he got an even bigger shock.
Eight other jurors had been doing the same thing. The federal judge, William J. Zloch, had no choice but to declare a mistrial, wasting eight weeks of work by federal prosecutors and defense lawyers.
“We were stunned,” said the defense lawyer, Peter Raben, who was told by the jury that he was on the verge of winning the case. “It’s the first time modern technology struck us in that fashion, and it hit us right over the head.”
It might be called a Google mistrial. The use of BlackBerrys and iPhones by jurors gathering and sending out information about cases is wreaking havoc on trials around the country, upending deliberations and infuriating judges.
Anything judges can do to make sure jurors don't hop on the internet, or is this going to happen in every case?
Last week, a juror in a big federal drug trial in Florida admitted to the judge that he had been doing research on the case on the Internet, directly violating the judge’s instructions and centuries of legal rules. But when the judge questioned the rest of the jury, he got an even bigger shock.
Eight other jurors had been doing the same thing. The federal judge, William J. Zloch, had no choice but to declare a mistrial, wasting eight weeks of work by federal prosecutors and defense lawyers.
“We were stunned,” said the defense lawyer, Peter Raben, who was told by the jury that he was on the verge of winning the case. “It’s the first time modern technology struck us in that fashion, and it hit us right over the head.”
It might be called a Google mistrial. The use of BlackBerrys and iPhones by jurors gathering and sending out information about cases is wreaking havoc on trials around the country, upending deliberations and infuriating judges.
Anything judges can do to make sure jurors don't hop on the internet, or is this going to happen in every case?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)