JNC interview

I've just been absolutely swamped lately. I was in Savannah the last two days, and at the end of the month I'm starting my own law practice downtown and trying to get that up and running is insane... But I did have a minute to read a great article in the DBR today (by Julie Kay) about the JNC interview process. The article makes it seem like Acosta got some tough questions. Most believe that he is a shoo-in for the position. The article also mentions that many were disappointed that neither of the two women applicants made the final cut. Here is one snippet from the article:

The commission spent nearly an hour grilling Acosta, who is considered by some a shoo-in for the post due to his Bush administration connections. “An issue that is still hanging out there is your lack of trial experience,” said Scott Srebnick, a Miami criminal defense attorney. “In terms of street credibility, will you be able to make the tough decisions? If you decline a case an agency has been working on for awhile … will the agents think, ‘What does he know, he hasn’t really tried any cases?’ ” Acosta replied that as head of the Justice Department’s civil rights division since 2003, he took on some of the hardest cases. “I haven’t had any pushback from law enforcement,” he said. “Look, the issue of credibility has come up before,” he said. “One-third of all U.S. attorneys across the country have no trial experience. At the end of the day, it’s not just about what your experience is but whether you can sit across the table and know the facts and have the confidence to say, ‘Look, I disagree,’ or ‘Look, this is the argument we need to make.’ ” “The U.S. attorney’s office runs itself,” he added.

JNC recommendations for U.S. Attorney

The JNC sent up three names for U.S. Attorney -- Alex Acosta, Tom Mulvihill, and Ed Nucci.

More en banc coverage

Today, Carl Jones of the Daily Business Review covers the 11th Circuit's decision to rehear en banc the Cuban Spy case. I'm quoted in the article:

Miami criminal defense attorney David Oscar Markus, who’s not involved in the Cuban spy case, said the 11th Circuit doesn’t often grant en banc review of a panel decision. “It’s very rare,” he said. “If it happens a couple of times a year, it’s a lot. But you know what? It was very rare what the panel did.” Markus said there are two possible reasons why the court granted en banc review. “One possibility is they have taken the case to show unity from the court [in overturning the convictions and ordering a new trial],” Markus said. “The other possibility is the rest of the court just disagrees [with the panel] and wants to quickly get rid of this opinion.” Markus noted that the August panel ruling was the first known case of an appellate court overturning a district court judge on a venue question. Another unusual aspect of the case, he said, is that it typically takes months for the full circuit court to decide to rehear a panel decision. The speed with which the court granted en banc review, just weeks after Acosta’s request, took almost everyone by surprise. “Boom, the opinion
came out, the government asked for review, and review was granted almost immediately, which I think does not bode well for defenders of the opinion,” Markus said. No more than two of the judges on the original panel will be able to rehear the case and defend it, Markus said. Judge Birch was the only active member of the 11th Circuit to decide the original case, while Judge Kravitch has the option to take part in the en banc review. Judge Oakes was sitting by designation. Markus said if Judge Kravitch chooses not to participate, a single judge from the original panel “puts a greater onus on Judge Birch to get a consensus on the court.”

The next U.S. Attorney for the district will be...

...one of the six individuals detailed in this Herald article by Jay Weaver. Those are: Alex Acosta, Ken Blanco, Tom Mulvihill, Susan Tarbe, Ed Nucci, and Cynthia Hawkins. Most say that it's hard to imagine that it won't be Acosta, especially after he was named on an interim basis. But initially there was a lot of talk that the job was Tarbe's. I haven't heard anything lately. Anyone else? I wrote on this topic a while ago here.

Return to Normal...

I'm back from Orlando (there is nothing like seeing Disney World through your kid's eyes...) and I see that Chief Judge Zloch has announced that everything is back to normal starting tomorrow. I wonder how jurors selected to sit for long trials are going to feel about it now that they can just get back to work themselves... It should be interesting. Here is the release:

Return to Normal Operations on Monday, November 7, 2005
Chief United States District Judge William J. Zloch announced that the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida will resume normal hours and operations on Monday, November 7, 2005. Clerk’s Office hours are from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Jurors should call in for reporting instructions at (800) 865-1775. This announcement applies to district court facilities in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Key West and Fort Pierce.

UPDATE: Judge Zloch also issued an Order on behalf of the entire Southern District of Florida, tolling the speedy trial clock from October 24 through November 4, 2005 due to Wilma. Hat tip, Brian Tannebaum. I feel bad for the clerk's office because J. Zloch directs the clerk to file the Order in every criminal case and to give notice to all parties. What a headache...