Friday, September 25, 2009


Update: Everyone's favourite federal blogger mentioned in  the Wall Street Journal here. 

And no, as suspicious as he sometimes appears, Mr. Markus is not being accused of running a ponzi scheme. His blog was cited with approval in a WSJ article on the 11th Circuit argument this week on the Ben Kuehne case.

The answer to yesterday's blog quiz
is that Tom Risivy was smiling because he was allowed to see his client at FDC despite the fact he was WEARING KHAKI PANTS!! Who among us hasn't decided to have a casual day when going to see a client in jail and thrown on a pair of comfortable Khaki's only to be denied entrance at FDC? But according to Miami FACDL President Hector Flores, Tom made it into the Magic Kingdom despite his sartorial selection.

Those of you who are federal practitioners know that FDC has a simple 1043 page rule book for seeing your clients and should you fail to follow any of the 1891 rules listed in the book, you will be denied entrance into the Magic Kingdom.

For instance, did you know FDC BOP rules frown upon an attorney seeing a client on any day that ends in "Y" in months January through December. Other days and months are fine.

Thats just one of the many helpful suggestions you will find in the FDC BOP rule book.

Other include:

Failure to strongly suggest your client accept a plea may necessitate the BOP recommending that your case be transfered to Judge Huck for a leisurely trial;

Carrying and displaying your "Dick Cheney fan club card" will get you priority seating once inside the Magic Kingdom;

Filing any motion to suppress may require the BOP to designate you "a trouble maker" and will require the BOP to suspend your visiting privileges inside the Magic Kingdom.

Feel free to include others in the comments section.


By now you know that the Feds have descended North Of the Border and started arresting politicians. Did you catch Acting US Attorney Jeff Solman's comments of something to the effect that there was NO cooperation with the the Broward SAO.

Can't you just see in your mind Mike Satz reprising the role in Casablanca and stating "I am shocked, shocked to find there is corruption in Broward"?

Our Fins are 0-2 and heading out west to play an angry San Diego Charger team that is talented and has a chip on their shoulder because they could not score last week inside the red zone. For those of you that saw the Chargers call a running play on 4th and 2 with about 3 minutes left from the 20, down 5, remember that we've been telling you for two years the Chargers have the second worst coach in the league behind Vanilla Phillips.

It's the start of another long weekend. For those of you engaged in religious introspection, have an easy fast on Sunday-Monday. For those of you not engaged in a conversation with your maker, have a nice weekend and don't forget those suicide pool picks.


CAPTAIN said...



Yes, our friendly governor has decided that, in addition to the constitutionally mandated JNC's, the governoir has added his own version of the "star chamber" to vet his judicial selections.

According to the editorial in today's News-Press, " Taking private advice on judgeship appointments is not unusual, but Crist appears to be setting up a parallel vetting system, which critics say reviews candidates for their politics and race or ethnicity, rather than their legal qualifications.

A vocal critic of the shadow panels, is Crist's opponent in the senate primary race, Marco Rubio, who said:

"It appears the decision is being made to appease certain demographic groups, certain parts of the electorate," Rubio said

To read it all:


Cap Out .....

Batman said...

Captain why is this news? This has been done by every administration for decades. The difference is that these "shadow JNCs" are more blatant and formal. The fact is that ethnicity, race, gender and politics have played a part in appointments are far back as appointments.

Every time a certain group (women, Jews, Arican-Americans, Hispanics, Asians) have gained political clout, attention is paid to the satisfaction of that group for inclusion in the political system. Appointments of any kind create a public face for that appeasement.

In this case Rubio speaks with a forked tongue. He has been very instrumental in promoting Cuban and Hispanic candidates for all kinds of appointments. Under Jeb he was part of that shadow group.

The JNC's have become so attune to this issue that members have taken "hints" from the governor of who he wants and nominated 1st timers consistently. The slates pretty consistently reflect a racial, ethnic and gender balance, not necessarily the "best 6".

So, your news is not news. It is just more of the same old, same old.

Anonymous said...

I tell what's not news but pisses me off- Judges threatening my clients with jail if they don;t take a plea. I just had two people in my office wanting to hire me who said that Judge Tunis told them in no uncertain terms that if they didn't take a probation offer they were going to jail.

Now these are unsophisticated people. And whether or not Tunis said it in those explicit terms, she said something that led these people to believe that's what she meant. Judges have a responsibility to communicate effectively with our clients in a way in which the client does not feel threatened.

If these clients hire me and end up taking a plea- during the plea colloquy they're going to answer YES to the question "Has anyone forced you or threatened you to take this plea?"

Shameful judge, just shameful.

Anonymous said...


Any chance we can get Stacy Glick's courtroom renamed "The Launching Pad?"

Granted, she went right from the SAO to the bench- but man give a defendant a break. She make her dad look like Mother Theresa.

I know Maximum Morphoneous rolls off the tongue, but Maximum Glick sounds pretty good too.

Please do the appropriate investigation and report back immediately.

Anonymous said...

To whoever said:

What a bunch of cry babies who are former ASA's. When I worked for the office, the people who complained the most were the ones who worked the least. I did what I was told, prepared my cases, and never was treated badly. If you didn't abide by the policies of the SAO you got in trouble. Yeah, so what? It's the same at any other law firm. In fact, in private practice we have to take a lot more crap from partners than I ever did at the SAO. Don't blame the SAO if you couldn't cut it as a prosecutor. If you wanted to make a lot of money, then you shouldn't have gone there in the first place.

I say AMEN. Former PD who now has to listen to a whacko private practice partner - the same goes for you whining PD's who are appalled that you have to dress like a respectable human being.

Miguel M. de la O said...


I sat through one of these "shadow JNCs," and it was nothing of the kind. Obviously, I cannot speak to what has been done in other circuits. In this circuit, the "shadow JNC" is actually nothing more than the interview with the Governor's General Counsel, with a couple of extra people involved in the interview. In my case, Paul Huck, Jr. led the questioning, assisted by Gladys Perez (who was an assistant General Counsel at the time), and three "members from the community" (as they were referred to): Dan Gelber (then a State Rep.), Marcelo Llorente (ditto) and Robert Fernandez (then a lawyer at Akerman, who had previously worked in the General Counsel's Office under Gov. Bush). All five asked me questions, and all five had closely reviewed my application. Contrary to what has been implied in some press reports, there were no political questions asked; it was an in depth interview of my experiences and judicial views. I took Paul Huck, Jr.'s explanation of the presence of the "community members" at face value -- the Governor wanted input from lawyers in the community. Governors have a right to rely on any vetting process s/he prefer. And, as vetting processes go, this one makes sense. Nothing would have stopped Gov. Crist's staff from contacting Dan Gelber, Marcelo Llorente or Robert Fernandez to ask about any or all of the JNC's nominees. I think it is fairer, and produces better results, if the folks being asked for their opinion have read the background materials on each of the applicants and have had an opportunity to interview them. I don't understand why this process is controversial, much less why it is called a "shadow JNC."

Anonymous said...

4:02------You pretty much hit the nail on the head. With the exception of a few ASA's who fought (and fight) hard to improve the office, the vast majority of the whining is done by the lazy and incompetent. I NEVER had a Chief refuse to allow me to waive a min man or go below guidelines. Why is that? It's because I knew my cases cold and always had good reasons to depart. The folks who can't get permission to do what they want don't, as a general rule, deserve it. I can't tell you how many times I watched other ASAs provide asinine reasons for wanting to dump cases (I even saw one break down and admit that he was just trying to get his case load under control).

I'm not saying that some DCs aren't out of control (some of them are scary too). I'm just saying that most of the whining by the line ASAs is BS.

BTDT (another former prosecutor)

The Devil's Advocate said...

Hey Rumpole, if you thought a visit to the Magic Kingdom was problematic, then you really should try a visit to The Emerald City, a/k/a FCI Miami. When visitors first enter the small building (once referred to as the sally-port) there is a large gray floor-to-ceiling velvet curtain that the officers close across the entire desk area until they are ready to receive visitors - reminiscent of the curtain behind which the Wizard of Oz worked his magic. Until they are ready, you may not open the curtain, you may not speak with the officers, you may not ask a question, you may not get a visiting form to fill out, and you must sit quietly in the chairs on the other side of the room and wait patiently until they decide to open the curtain. Then it's Katie Bar the Door - and they do bar that door for almost everything you can think of - it's not just the fashion color police - visitors - and this means lawyers as well as social visitors, may not bring in a wallet, may not wear a watch, may not bring a cell phone, and may bring in ONLY ONE KEY - so if your car key and your house key are on the same key chain - too bad - you must separate them - and your car door lock device? Oh no, that is an electronic device and it is prohibited - AND NO, YOU MAY NOT HAVE A LOCKER for your cell phone, your other key, your wallet, your cell phone. The lockers are reserved for people who come to FCI on the bus to visit - WHAT BUS? WHERE DOES THAT BUS STOP? These are all good questions - but they won't get you a locker. You'll have to trudge all all the way back to your car in the hot sun, or the rain, or whatever the weather - to leave your stuff in your car - you may NOT have a locker - Welcome to the Emerald City. And that's just to get inside - once in - maybe you'll be lucky enough to get the attorney's visiting room - and then again, maybe not because another attorneys is already in there - so you can sit outside in that loud room with 200 social visitors to interview your client. What a great experience !!!

Anonymous said...


If it's not news, why write five paragraphs on it?

Anonymous said...

Hey, dip shit at Friday, September 25, 2009 3:03:00 PM.

Perhaps Judge Tunis had some compassion for your client because the charge carried some mandatory minium of 25 years for having 7 percocet/oxycodine pills that belong to his dying wife. Remember if convicted a Judge has no discretion and must sentence to 25 years in prison.

Remember last year when the defendant was offered 5 years on oxycodine case and his lawyer said we can win this and what happened? Convicted!

Maybe just maybe the Judge could give shit about your fees and continued request to delay trial because you want to bill and bill for each court date. Perhaps there is actually someone in the Court room not getting paid a penny from your client and actually cares if he gets probation or 25 years!

Dip shit did you ever thing about that?