Wednesday, January 20, 2010

3RD DCA ROUNDUP 2010 EDITION & ROSCOE PARRISH NOT GUILTY

UPDATE: Judge Langer writes in regarding the decision we summarized below:

Lester Langer said...

The Jass or Jasp program is not a state run program. Therefore it is not a DJJ program but is run by the county and the State Attorney's office. As I judge I can suggest, beg and try to convince a party to accept a diversion offer but I cannot impose it as part of a DJJ sentence. I do not beleive that is legally permissible when I made my ruling. I also do not think I could just dismiss the case because the State chose to go forward. If the 3rd DCA is now telling us, Juvenile Judges it is now state law that it is permissible to sentence a child to diversion, I think that is great. It now gives juvenile judges another option in our tool box which I did not think existed before this decision. This was not a trial tax or anything like that. I tried to the best of my ability to get the case resolved in the child's best interest. The facts based on the testimony showed she committed a battery. I sentenced her according to the law of the state as I understood it. Now it appears the 3DCA is telling all judges that we can sentence someone to diversion at least in juvenile cases. Bravo.

Lester Langer


Rumpole responds: Bravo to you Judge Langer!! This is why this blog works and is valuable. An important issue was raised, and we have now heard from the Judge involved. His response is reasonable and his embracement of diversion for Juveniles is applauded. His explanation re: the trial tax is reasonable and we accept it. Judge Langer has never been known as anything other than a reasonable and committed jurist dedicated to the Juvenile Division.




Here's our first 3rd DCA roundup for 2010: But first a word from the Colonel Of Court Court on the acquittal at trial today of NFL star Roscoe Parrish:

The Colonel: All right soldiers, take a knee and gather round.
The scene was Courtroom 5-1 as two (countem- 2) DUI Chiefs faced off against Broward defense attorney Adam Swickle and Dade lawyer Frank Garviria who successfully defended former UM start and current Buffalo Bills standout Rosco Parrish in a DUI case before Judge Miranda.

The February 17 ,2009 stop occurred on the McCarthur causeway and had all the usual Miami Beach DUI suspects/cops piling on for overtime. Officer K. Cosner was the arresting officer, and we have intelligence reports that he folded under a long and difficult cross examination by Swickle. Parrish was found not guilty of the DUI charge and unfortunately for him there is now nothing preventing him from returning to the hapless Bills.

Dismissed! And remember, there's gold in them there misdemeanors.



Thank you Colonel. First up is the TRIAL TAX, Juvenile version.
In TR v. State, TR was found guilty of battery by swinging her lunchbox into a fellow student in response to an imprudent remark. (Have we really come to this now? Circuit Judges siting on juvenile cases involving battery by a lunchbox over a bus stop scuffle? No wonder why people think lawyers are out of control.) Anyway, the battery having been proven, Judge Langer proceeded to sentencing and refused to impose something called "Jass" which is we guess is a diversion program, because as the state argued, she went to trial and lost.

This is what is known as the trial tax, and it strikes at the very heart of our justice system. If defendants went to trial secure in the knowledge that if they lost they would only be punished for their conduct and not for having the temerity of actually forcing the system to work, then our system would be a hell of a lot more fairer. Too many lawyers talk clients out of trials because of the possible penalties a judge could impose for going to trial.

Back to Judge Langer and Lunch boxes. TR appealed on the issue of the sentence and Judge Shepherd admirably wrote against the trial tax: Juveniles have a constitutional right not to be unfairly penalized for the assertion of innocence and demand for trial. A.S. v. State, 667 So. 2d 994, 995-96 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (“‘The law is clear that any judicially imposed penalty which needlessly discourages assertion of the Fifth Amendment right not to plead guilty and deters the exercise of the Sixth Amendment right to demand a jury trial is patently unconstitutional.’”)


Robinson v. State: Judge Leonard Glick catches a reversal in retirement over imposing consecutive 30 yr sentences AND sentencing the defendant as a habitual offender. The Florida Supreme Court has long held a trial court is not authorized to enhance both the defendant’s sentences as a habitual offender and make each of the enhanced sentences consecutive when they arise out of the same criminal episode.

What is a single criminal episode? Glad you asked: Generally, the courts have considered whether separate victims are involved, whether the crimes occurred in separate locations, and whether there has been a temporal break between the incidents.

That's all for now. This Commonwealth is abuzz over the results of the election yesterday, but we can report this: this was mostly about jobs and the economy and not health care as Massachusetts already has universal health care for its citizens (something Republican Governor Mitt Romney signed into law.)

See You in court.





45 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thank the good lord for langer. The city would be wild were it not for him ( according to himself).

Anonymous said...

The DUI Chiefs are morons and have lost every high profile case that has come into county court. Kelis, Pit Bull and now Roscoe. They do no better than the division ASAs do.

Anonymous said...

Rump,

While the State argued for a trial tax, your argument is horrible. This is basically like saying you rejected PTI, went to trial and lost, and then want PTI. I'm very much against a trial tax, but you can't expect a diversion offer after trial.

Shocked you are not crying over the FSC Nelson opinion that just came out that blows a Defendant's speedies if a continuance is taken after naturals have run.

Judicial Aspirant and Captain Wannabe said...

The quarterly reports are in. Remember folks, money talks, bullshit walks......

Open and contested seats – total monetary contributions

COUNTY COURT
Group 11
Michaelle Gonzalez-Paulson $4,985.22
Flora E. Seff (I) $23,000.00

Group 31
Silvia Perez $550.00
Lisa S. Walsh (I) $97,834.62

CIRCUIT COURT

Group 21 (Judy Kreeger retiring):

Miguel de la O $220,294.65
Patricia Kopco $10,000.00

Group 41 (Gerald Hubbart retiring)

Milton Hirsch $183,226.26

Group 45

Peter Adrien (I) $3,970.00
Samantha Ruiz Cohen $132,077.00
Jeffrey Swartz $2,410.00

Group 62 (Paul Siegel retiring)

Robert Kuntz $43,176.00
Juan-Carlos Planas $9,850.00

Rumpole said...

11:46- my argument is simply this- a Judge should impose a sentence based on only one factor- what is just. Nothing more. In Juvenile cases, which I have never done, am I correct in assuming the Judge must sentence based on what is best for the child and to promote rehabilitation? If so, PTI if available, should be used. These are children we are talking about- this was a LUNCHBOX INCIDENT FOR GOODNESS SAKES. If PTI was the right thing, don't you think Judge Langer wants to be known as a Judge who does the right thing?

Many years ago, in State court, on a very difficult manslaughter cases with unusual circumstances, I saw Fred Moreno as a Circuit Court Judge sentence a defendant was was convicted to half the time of the state's pre-trial offer, because in his opinion that was the right thing to do. So much for the trial tax. That was called "justice" and that's what should be done in every case. (Justice, not lower sentences.)

Anonymous said...

Amazing how some judges love to yell at clients and lawyers for being one minute late to their 830 calendar but have no problem rolling in at 8:45 and not even bothering to apologize.

And try talking to unrepresented clients in plain English; remember they didn't go to law school.

Anonymous said...

Congrats to Frank Gaviria who has won 10 dui's in a row.

Anonymous said...

More troubling than the trial tax is the fact that Miami-Dade police officers are taking the time to arrest and the SAO is dedicating time and resources to prosecute a a child who swings a lunchbox at another student.

Most of us don't practice in the juvenile system because it's boring, hopelessly misguided, and is more akin to social work than anything. But us former ASAs and current ASAs have all been through there.

There are disturbingly violent teenagers out there who commit armed robberies and shootings. A good number of them are sent to adult court. However, things as trivial as forcibly grabbing a sheet of paper out of a teacher's hand (a felony, no less - battery on a school official), or a lunchbox incident at the bus stop - are prosecuted here in Miami! I'm not an old timer by any means, but when I was in school, things like that got you sent to the principal's office. You had to deal drugs or pull a knife on someone in order for the police to get involved.

Maybe it's the "pass the buck" culture of the Miami-Dade school system, or a district so terrified of being sued by parents that it refers all potentially volatle matters to the police. In any regard, there must be a line drawn between matters handled by the school with administrative penalties, and matters farmed out to the police. Not only is it an abuse of power to criminally charge a child over a matter that should be dealt with in-house, it's a drain on our already depleted resources.

Anonymous said...

Can a judge offer diversion over the State's objection in juvenile court? A judge can't do that in adult in court or traffic court.

Anonymous said...

GO FRANK. Big props to Frank Gaviria. One of the best and most underrated DUI lawyers in Miami...Good Guys win again.

Signed, one of your old Thursday night crew, but not the Rabbi, the Italian, or the Persian.

Anonymous said...

Money Talks, Bullshit Walks.

CYA "Camacho".

Anonymous said...

Enough of all this legal news (how about some of the money these people are willing to spend to be a judge in Miami), let's talk about the real important news of the weekend--NFL football, and, specifically, the biggest publicity junky of them all--Brent Favre. Today, I saw where Fran Tarkenton had noted that Brent was playing like he was 25 years old, and, after the game on Sunday, on a like note, the commentators were saying that Brent was making throws that no other quarterback in the league could make this year. Already the whispers are starting.

Has anyone stopped to ask themselves how a 40 year-old man can be having the best season of his life and throwing the fewest interceptions of an (admittedly) illustrious career? Of course, there are precedents for these accomplishments, namely guys like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemons who were juiced up on steroids and HGH at the time that they were having career years at the end of their careers. Isn't it suspicious that one of the consequences of Brent's annual summer "retirements" is that he is able to avoid NFL training camp urine tests while he is hanging out in the swamps of Kiln, Mississippi? I do believe that the NFL testing is at its most intense during the training camps in order to detect any illegal substance violations over the off-season.

This year, we were told that, instead of going to training camp, Brent was "working out" with the local high school boys. It seems much more likely to me that Brent was loading himself up with H.G.H., H.C.G., and all the other things that make old men play young and then letting the masking agents cleanse his urine before he reported to an NFL-regulated environment.

The Vikings--the East German women's swimming team of the NFL--were the perfect team for Brent. Not only do the Vikings have a history of doped up players (if you recall, their two star defensive tackles were caught with masking agents in their urine last year), but they have somehow or another come up with a system of beating the detected violations by filing lawsuits in friendly state courts where the judges probably have season tickets to the Metrodome. Nazi camp commadant look-alike and sound-alike Brad Childress was only too happy to welcome another doped up superstar into the mix.

The media hasn't said anything about these things (compare this attitude to its treatment of Barry Bonds), but, instead, has made Brent into the golden boy of the season. Brent Favre is a fraud, and I hope that the juice wears off and the Saints treat us to one of those 5 interception games that we used to see from Favre in the playoffs. Once the truth comes out, I hope that Brent suffers the same fate as Bonds, Clemons, and all of the other professional sports cheaters of the past and that, if possible, the NFL gives the Vikings a "death penalty" sanction (taking away their next 10 first round draft picks sounds good to me).

Anonymous said...

1:07 sounds like a disgruntled Packer fan to (nice pass defense, giving up 501 yards to Rothlesberger and almost as many yards to Warner). My brother told me that, in Green Bay, fans like 1:07 have taken to wearing T-Shirst saying "We'll never forget you Brent". Well, you cheeseheads had two chances to get your revenge this year, and you didn't even come close to beating the Vikings, so the HGH and HCG don't even matter.

Anonymous said...

11:46 is right. You can't get diversion after you ask for a trial. YOU were not diverted. Therefore, I think the "trial tax" lingo should only be used when the State offered a plea bargain (not diversion)that they then argue in sentencing is too lenient for the defendant. That's talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Anonymous said...

1:09 forgot to point out that Favre is a known and admitted doper with one strike (Vicodin addiction) already against him. It's not out of the question that he might resort to artificial help to keep his career going and, in a way, I don't blaim him.

Lester Langer said...

The Jass or Jasp program is not a state run program. Therefore it is not a DJJ program but is run by the county and the State Attorney's office. As I judge I can suggest, beg and try to convince a party to accept a diversion offer but I cannot impose it as part of a DJJ sentence. I do not beleive that is legally permissible when I made my ruling. I also do not think I could just dismiss the case because the State chose to go forward. If the 3rd DCA is now telling us, Juvenile Judges it is now state law that it is permissible to sentence a child to diversion, I think that is great. It now gives juvenile judges another option in our tool box which I did not think existed before this decision. This was not a trial tax or anything like that. I tried to the best of my ability to get the case resolved in the child's best interest. The facts based on the testimony showed she committed a battery. I sentenced her according to the law of the state as I understood it. Now it appears the 3DCA is telling all judges that we can sentence someone to diversion at least in juvenile cases. Bravo.

Lester Langer

Anonymous said...

I was assigned to Judge Langer as an ASA in Juvi, we fought and butted heads regularly...he is nothing less than FANTASTIC.

Judge Langer was allays interested in doing the best he could for the community if it needed protection and for rehabilitating the children in front of him. I never once saw him punish a defendant for asserting innocence, or doing any of the other number of disrespectful things children sometime do in the courtroom before the juvenile judges. Judge Langer is a credit to the bench, and the juvenile justice system.

Anonymous said...

"This is why this blog works and is valuable" Huh? What?

Once again you show your hypocrisy Rumpole. First you accuse Judge Langer of vindictive sentencing them you praise him. Why don't you check with the Judge first before saying he imposed a trial tax! That's how the blog should work in situations like this.

Circle K

Anonymous said...

Thursday, January 21, 2010 9:29:00 AM

The problem is that our schools now come complete with a set of "Rent-A-Cops" who have nothing better to do then arrest someone for putting bubble gum in someone's hair.

Exhibit A, remember the reporter arrested from Ch 10 TV, for being on the wrong side of the street. Honestly, this is why we have high property taxes so we can fund stupid crap like that.

KFR - shut down these prosecutions before they get to court.

Rumpole said...

4:54- the 3rd DCA called it a trial tax. I repeated that observation. I think I deserve credit for giving Judge Langer his say.

In my position- I can hardly pick up the phone and call someone and ask them to comment. But I believe I am fair and open and give people platforms to respond to complaints. I call it like I see it.

This is Hilarious said...

This is an actual e-mail sent to this guys boss, David J. Stern, Esq., owner of a huge foreclosure mill, and everyone else in the firm. HILARIOUS!

----Original Message-----
From: Wilner Marc, Jr.
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 9:54 AM
To: David J. Stern
Cc: Everyone-DL
Subject: URGENT FILE NEEDED!!!!!!

Dear Mr. David J Stern,

Can I call you David?...................No……Ok Mr. Stern it is. First and foremost I would like to take a moment to apologize for my message yesterday but sincerely I would like to apologize for my message today. I just want to thank you personally for employing all of these beautiful creations from the good Lord above that we carnivores(men) call women….moment of silence please…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Amen……See, I started here with the intentions of being the best file clerk I can be for my department(which I refuse to name under any circumstances….oh yeah shout to my dawgs smoke, ces… 7th floor stand up!!! And oh yeah my mid day love crew. (sorry lmao) but to my surprise, I started in a world I would’ve never imagined. A world full of dreams, fantasies, destinies, wants, wishes, hopes & lust for files. A world where woman look better than a plate of yams with extra syrup, all types of prototypes floating from the 4th to the 7th floor alone. And who knows maybe I missed out on the opportunity of meeting my wife, but I’m the type of guy that lives life one lost file at a time “You’ll never find me” but back to what I was saying. A world where mesmerizing fragrances captivate my senses and brain cells releasing endorphins that make me say such things like; “DDDDAAAAAAYYYYAAAAMMMMM!!!!!!!! I love my mother fucking job!!!!!!!!” and to that beautiful girl(s) you know who you are all 600 of yall ass!!! I love yall from the bottom of my heart, I mean it and I’m not leaving by choice but only to pursue my dream. Mr. Stern with gracious humility I do thank you for allowing me to be a part of the DJS family and I’d like to give you a personal invitation to my party next Saturday 01/30/10 $2 cups (but you don’t have to pay) 2 kegs and live music but I totally understand if you do not want to come.



Much love and Respect

Wilner Marc Jr.





This message is dedicated to all the guys who can’t

Speak their mind due to the fraternization rule.

Anonymous said...

Judge Langer's explanation doesn't seem to hold up under even mild scrutiny. When a juvenile is determined to have committed a delinquent act and the judge decides to withhold adjudication, the statute calls for a community-based sanction. Fla. Stat. section 985.433(8). The JASP program has been held to be such a community-based sanction. C.M. v. State, 658 So.2d 1178, 1179 (2d DCA 1995); see also State v. M.C., 666 So.2d 877 (Fla. 1995); S.G.K. v. State, 657 So.2d 1246 (1st Cir. 1995) (both cases involving a finding of delinquency and a disposition requiring completion of JASP). Moreover, to accept Judge Langer's explanation, one would have to believe that the JPO did not know what s/he was doing when the JASP program was recommended at the disposition hearing. Unfortunately, Judge Langer's actions do appear to be unfairly penalizing a juvenile for exercising her right to go to trial.

Anonymous said...

Judge Langer - thanks for the response. Your response however is quite different from the actual words you used during the sentencing hearing. If you thought you couldn't legally impose JASS, you probably would have said so on the record. You didn't. Instead you said that the child had decided
to go trial. Sounds like a trial tax to me.

Anonymous said...

LOL. I would never rely on the Third to determine what the facts are. They are so quick to hang trial attorneys and judges that I wouldn't rely on their interpretations. I know of at least one case where they slammed an attorney without even having the entire transcript. Frankly, I think it's disgusting. A public reprimand by the judiciary is a serious manner. The Third (and judges in generally) shouldn't be nailing attorneys who have no opportunity to be heard and no recourse of appeal. Especially in the name of due process. What a joke.

Anonymous said...

To the person at 11: 19 am, who said the DUI chiefs are morons, maybe you don't know them.

I do county and circuit defense and have delt with them. They are very nice and competent. They are not morons.

Remember fun with emails? Thanks to the Blog and that Calley guy, Catalano no longer sends anyone anything by email. I cannot blame him.

Thanks guys. Many of us used his stuff to win our DUI cases.

I guess it is true, no good deed goes unpunished.

Anonymous said...

It's pathetic that some people feel the need to call second year attorneys (ie. the SAO DUI Chiefs) morons, etc. Especially anonymously on the web.

This may shock you, but these young attorneys are human beings. How would you feel if people trashed you on the web when you were a young attorney? What the hell is wrong with you 11:19?

BTDT

Anonymous said...

Will the recent US Supreme Court case re corporate donations to political campaigns result in the cost for a M-D judgeship to exceed $500,000.00? Looking forward to those fundraisers, mailings, and emails all for the purpose of filling a seat. The amount of money spent on these judicial elections is obscene and a catastrophic waste of resources. When you consider the quality of the people who ultimately occupy the bench, we may as well subject ourselves to political appointments and put ouw funds to good use such as payig our own bills.

I will conceed that it is refreshing to see that people such as Peter Adrien and Jeffery Swarz are not able to raise funds based upon their past performance, I do believe these campaigns are an excessive wast of money especially in Miami, where the need for resources, besides a baseball stadium, are so great. See you at the next coctail party for aspiring judicail canidate "X".

Anonymous said...

Rump…I don’t think the opinion allows a judge to use diversion for post trial sentencing. I read the opinion to be more of a criticism of Judge Langer’s language during the sentencing. Per the language of the 3rd DCA’s opinion, he acts like his sentence is different than the recommendation BECAUSE the kid maintained her innocence (i.e., “everybody walked away from an opportunity to resolve this case differently”). And to punish somebody for maintaining their innocence is a trial tax. I think 7:35pm is correct here. If Langer’s problem was that he COULDN’T impose JASS, that should have been said on the record. Rather, what was said was that he WOULDN’T b/c she took the case to trial. I don’t read the opinion as giving the judge the ability to enroll a defendant into diversion. I read it as a comment on Judge Langer’s poor choice of words.

But, I don’t think Langer was punishing the kid for going to trial. I think it was merely a poor choice of words at the time of sentencing. When he started to say that she could have walked away, and that there were countless opportunities to walk away, and then followed it by “But, she decided to exercise her right to go to trial”, it makes it sound as though it were a trial tax. However, given the sentence imposed – a norm for a first time offender in juvie– I don’t think it was. I think people are reading too much into the opinion, and I am certain that it doesn’t allow the judiciary to control who gets into the State’s program. JASS is a program run by the State Attorney’s office. Much like PTI/PTD, the JPO would not be able to decide whether a defendant can enter the program. He can recommend it, but it is up to the State whether to accept somebody in to their program. And I can assure you that if it does mean judges can control it, expect to see funding problems for diversion in the future.

Anonymous said...

Ok, they're not morons. They just think too highly of themselves as trial attorneys by cherry-picking high-profile cases from other ASAs...as if the state has a better chance with their "expertise."

Anonymous said...

BTDT,
I agree with you that the DUI chiefs shouldn't be callled morons.
But your response brings up an interesting point. Did you say "second" year attorney? Is a DUI 'Chief'? After two years of practice? Should someone with 2 years experience be in that position? I know, we let people be judges with only 5 years experience, (which is ridiculous also) but perhaps the SAO needs to look at who they have handling these cases.

Anonymous said...

Judge Blake: Please set up a wet bar in 6-3. Not only does every matter, no matter how simple, take ten minutes to get through, but it's so painful just walking in that court room that we need a little something to ease the pain. Nice lady, but......

Anonymous said...

Is there anyone else out there who is troubled by a sitting judge writing to the blog to justify his reversal on a case? Seems rather inappropriate and a little pathetic. Just take your reversal and move on.

Anonymous said...

Langer is just covering his ass. He very much intended to impose the trial tax, plain & simple.

Anonymous said...

I agree. If I were a young ASA and was called a moron, I would be offended.

I too have worked on cases with both of them and they are really nice and not morons.

Could we all please stop bashing people just for the fun of it?

Scott Saul said...

I need a referal for a DUI lawyer in the Winter Park/Orlando area. It's a refusal case so I need someone that tries cases. Send info to me via email SAUL6262@aol.com

Anonymous said...

It's Friday you bastards.

SHUMIE TIME!!!

Anonymous said...

Bob Levy please stay off of this blog. i.e. 7:16 we all know you work for Samantha.

Anonymous said...

Almost North of the border is a little courthouse formerly known as the Harvey Baxter Justice Center (not really but he was a character) but now simply NDJC. The purple robed one, Sheldon Schwartz, embraces a ridiculous number of criminal misdemeanor cases from several municipalies including N. Miami, Surfside, Aventura (City of Excellent Photos of you running the red light), Bal/Bay Harbor, etc...
I say embraces because he truly administers Justice in a manner entirely consistent with the Constitution of the United States and would make John Adams smile. He patiently tries dozens of cases at Bench daily without a hint of vindictiveness toward any party. He will gladly sustain his own objection if the State of Florida attempts to admit inadmissible evidence and will similarly slam a defendant deserving of his wrath. He sees the little old Jewish lady who "forgot" to pay for a blouse at Macys and the urban ghetto youth charged with marijuana possession. He deals with all in a respectful, yet stern, manner assuring respect for the bench which he clearly recognizes is larger then himself. He is not afraid to call out an unprepared lawyer, ASA or private, nor berate a defendant who clearly scoffs at our system. He will equally take the time to explain to a victim the impact of a decison and show compassion for a deserving defendant who simply made a one-time mistake I sat there for two hours and enjoyed every minute. Justice the way it was designed to be-efficient, decisive, no bullshit with a simple yet unyielding adherence to the presumption of innocence and burden of beyond a reasonable doubt. He makes it look simple. Rock on Shelly!

Anonymous said...

RE: DUI Chiefs experience levels

10:18----you are entirely correct that second year attorneys lack the ideal knowledge, judgment and experience to be Assistant Chiefs. One can reach no other conclusion when one considers the types of motions they handle, the responsibility of training the first year ASAs, and the need to effectively supervise them (and ensure honest/fair prosecutions).

However, the office has a hard enough time drumming up interest in the County Court Chief position and desperately needs felony prosecutors. Regardless, the MD SAO Chiefs have historically risen to the challenge winning all sorts of important motions (many en masse) that other offices have lost: DRE, HGN, and a whole slew of blood and breath motions (including the latest described on this blog). They deserve a lot of respect for that.

BTDT

Anonymous said...

I am not sure 11:19 meant that that there were actual "morons", but was using it the word (maybe ineffectively) to describe how these two young ASAs cherry pick high profile cases from the other ASAs who are in the pits everyday and should be the ones trying the cases in their courtrooms. When I was a PD, if my supervisors cherry picked my cases for their own desires to be in the limelight, I would be furious.

Anonymous said...

Yes, they cherry pick their cases, but they also take on attorney's like Hersch (no mean task if you have seen him in court) in motions which have consequence beyond a specific case. We can argue whether 2 years is enough to be an Assistant Chief in County Court, but let us not forget, it is County Court.

Anonymous said...

Rumpole,
Just curious - in light of the cases cited by Thursday 6:01 p.m. and the fact that Judge Langer never said on the record that he thought the JASS/JASP disposition recommended by the JPO was not permitted, as pointed out by Thursday 7:35 p.m. - do you really still think his response here was reasonable? Shouldn't an experienced trial judge know the law? Shouldn't an experienced trial judge who is given a recommendation he truly thinks is illegal say so on the record? Shouldn't you, perhaps, reconsider your applause of Judge Langer's explanation? I usually agree with what you write, but I think you're wrong on this one.

Anonymous said...

12:12, why don't these Chiefs then sit second chair with the division ASAs in these cases instead of just booting them off these cases? To this day I get more senior attorneys to sit on trials with me when I feel it is beneficial to my client for them to be there and the result will be better with them. Nothing is wrong with that. But to just boot these young ASAs off their cases for your own desires, that is just plain wrong.

Anonymous said...

Okay, let's get past the nonsense. The Chiefs don't boot ASAs off of the best cases or cherry pick as described below. They take cases that are most likely to have significant impact (yes, that includes media cases). The fact is that no first year lawyer should be handling media cases. Period.

And, they have more than enough work to do to second chair cases. In fact, their task is virtually impossible as it is........supervise dozens of new law grads and obtain decent results. Seriously, how many times have people talked about how they wished that more experienced lawyers handled the DUI cases? These cases are extraordinarily complicated as it is...........the ASAs have to deal with opinion evidence, lay testimony, expert testimony, scientific evidence, etc. and it's a crime of degree (in fact, those of us who have handled the gamut of cases know that DUIs are more complicated and difficult for the State to win than homicides).

BTDT

H. Guide said...

Many years ago, in State court, on a very difficult manslaughter cases with unusual circumstances, I saw Fred Moreno as a Circuit Court Judge sentence a defendant was was convicted to half the time of the state's pre-trial offer, because in his opinion that was the right thing to do. So much for the trial tax. That was called "justice" and that's what should be done in every case.