WELCOME TO THE OFFICIAL RICHARD E GERSTEIN JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG. THIS BLOG IS DEDICATED TO JUSTICE BUILDING RUMOR, HUMOR, AND A DISCUSSION ABOUT AND BETWEEN THE JUDGES, LAWYERS AND THE DEDICATED SUPPORT STAFF, CLERKS, COURT REPORTERS, AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WHO LABOR IN THE WORLD OF MIAMI'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE. THIS BLOG HAS BEEN CALLED "THE DEFINITIVE BLOG ON MIAMI CRIMINAL LAW" BY THE NY TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, THE POPE, AND DONALD TRUMP WHO ALSO ONCE SAID IT WAS "REALLY GREAT". POST YOUR COMMENTS, OR SEND RUMPOLE A PRIVATE EMAIL AT HOWARDROARK21@GMAIL.COM

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

DISCO

Feeling a little bored, maybe a little blue? Then we have just the thing for you. A little smattering of 3rd DCA justice. 

The ABC's of discovery are on full display in M.H. v. State, and Judge Rothenberg and company reach the conclusion that it is a discovery violation most foul when the State lists a "victim" (which every good defense attorney knows should be called "complaining witness") as category B witness. Category B means you won't B taking their depo, and Rothenberg says that is reversible error. 

"ABC
easy as 1-23
simple as do-ri-me-
ABC-123-list your victim as an A and you will A-OK"
(c) Rumpole and Motown Records, 2014. 

WHEN COPS ATTACK -warning- the following video contains graphic and nasty language including multiple uses of the F word. Not surprisingly, Officer Friendly is doing all the cursing. 




Miami Beach cops used to have a reputation for being mean, nasty, abusive, violent, thuggish...oh wait...they still do. 

No truth to the rumor the video will be playing on a loop at MIA welcoming visitors to Miami this winter. 


See You In Court. 

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

I believe that it is UNETHICAL and a JQC violation for the Chief Judge and other Judges to "strong-arm" law firms and lawyers to give money for the new courthouse construction lobbying efforts to get the vote.

Many lawyers and big firms have expressed much dismay by the efforts of the Chief Judge and her band of "knee breakers" ….

JQC???

Anonymous said...

It's MacLeod, Scottish spelling, don't forget it. I wonder if he'll show for my Depo today

Anonymous said...

MacCleod's the name, Scottish spelling. It's also on the bottom of your tickets if you don't like it.

Classic Miami Beach

Anonymous said...

Thanks to cameras, everyone is finally getting to see and hear what we all know happens every day.

When are the police going to learn to shut their fucking mouths.

By the way, I too feel improperly bothered by judges asking for money for a new courthouse.

Anonymous said...

I tried responding from my phone twice and neither post made it so I'm hoping this one does.....

I am one of the lawyers who donated money to the courthouse effort. I have also volunteered my time. I have not felt "strong armed" or pressured in any way. I also know the majority of the people who have donated and have never heard any of them say they were either.

The chief judge and the other judges who are working on this are doing so because one of our courthouses is falling down and is dangerous. It has been for years. We have someone who is willing to try and resolve it for the benefit of the Bar and the citizens of Miami but no good deed goes unpunished. Hacks like 1:12 am and 8:41 am just want to cause trouble, complain and disparage good people for taking a stand and trying to do the right thing.

I have been to the events and the meetings. There are no pressure tactics taking place. It's a voluntary effort. I also happen to know the judges involved. I have practiced before all of them. They are of the highest integrity. Especially the chief judge. No one is more conscious of ethics and professionalism than she is. No one wants to do a good job and the right thing more than she does. And there is no one with better integrity.

I would be willing to bet that 1:12 am is not a lawyer but rather one of the people conspiring for the effort to fail for their own personal gain. (By the way, having a piece of paper that says "J.D." doesn't make you a lawyer - going to court and making an argument does).

If you are a lawyer, however, I would encourage you to read the Bar Rules very carefully. It is my opinion that statements like the one you make is a clear violation.

I'm embarrassed to think you may be a member of my profession. The chief and the other judges are working very hard to make our profession better. What a thankless job.

Unfortunately there will always be lesser beings like you, 1:12 am, to complain and throw baseless allegations around. If it were me, I would channel Chris Christie and tell you and your cheerleaders to "Fu*k off". Luckily, our chief has more class and manners than I.

Anonymous said...

Courthouse amendment will pass shortly after voters approve another marlins stadium.

Anonymous said...

3:33 you are incorrect, going to court and arguing does not make you a lawyer. Practicing criminal law makes you a real lawyer, you're probably just another paper pusher who claims to be a "trial lawyer" in your website; yet, I guarantee you a 2-3 year practicing ASA and/or PD has way more trials than you. Why would other lawyers have to pay for a courthouse they will not benefit from?

Anonymous said...

3:33 get off your high horse and come down to earth like the rest of peons. I dont see anything wrong with 1:12 and 8:41's post. They are entitled to their opinions and the expressed theirs. You express yours. That's what makes this blog interesting.

Anonymous said...

6:26 -it is you that is incorrect. I was a PD for 12 years and now am private. I guarantee that I have more trials - and more serious felony cases under my belt than you. I was an A and a training attorney before I left. Let me guess, you are a few years out of law school and think bc you're a "pit lawyer" that makes you cool. Why should we support the courthouse? Bc it part of our system of justice you arrogant dip sh*t. You don't need to pay money, they just ask that you vote yes on the issue. It will be $ 7 A YEAR for a house worth $ 100,000. For you, I'm guessing you won't pay anything bc you rent or still live with mommy.
But more disturbing is the insinuation that the judges fighting for us have somehow done something wrong. How incredibly disrespectful of you you snot nosed little jerk.

Anonymous said...

What the heck is wrong with you, 333? Can't you debate an issue without making things personal? The only thing you should be embarrassed by is your apparent inability to make an argument without insulting the other side or engaging in juvenile name calling. If you're half as knowledgeable about the Bar rules and professionalism as you suggest your are, then you should know that name calling doesn't fly in our profession (except, apparently, on the internet). I don't agree with 112, but he or she certainly is entitled to his or her opinion (one, I might add, that is shared by some other lawyers). You lose all credibility when you argue like a 12 year old.

BTDT

CAPTAIN JUSTICE said...


THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:

Biker Garb Causes Sex-Crime Conviction Reversal .....

That's the headline from the DBR about a 1st DCA opinion reversing a conviction for two counts of lewd and lascivious molestation and one count of sexual battery by a person in familial or custodial.

"A state appeals court Wednesday ordered a new trial for a man convicted of sexually abusing his former stepdaughter because of the possible influence on jurors of people wearing leather jackets emblazoned with the name "Bikers Against Child Abuse."

"In a 2-1 decision, the 1st District Court of Appeal said the bikers were seen sitting in a hallway with jurors on the morning that the trial of Brian Scott Long was scheduled to start in Duval County. The majority of the appeals court agreed with Long's attorney that "an unacceptable risk was created that the verdict reached was, at least in part, a result of the pre-trial encounter with the insignia-laden bikers."

Here is the opinion:

https://edca.1dca.org/DCADocs/2012/4615/124615_DC13_10292014_095524_i.pdf

And here is the DBR article:

http://www.dailybusinessreview.com/id=1202675071909/Biker-Garb-Causes-SexCrime-Conviction-Reversal#ixzz3HjvselGM

Cap Out .....
Captain4Justice@gmail.com

Anonymous said...

333, are you Jorge Luis Lopez or someone who works for him? (For those who don't know, Lopez is the lobbyist behind the courthouse campaign).

Anonymous said...

Rumpole or Captain ---

Will you please comment on your opinion regarding Judges speaking at events where the goal is to raise substantial money for the new civil courthouse?

How about Judges calling lawyers and asking for them to contribute to the fund created to promote the vote for the new proposed courthouse.

Lawyers feel great pressure when a Judge calls their office to speak to them -- and the topic of giving money to the campaign is brought up.

How do you say "no" to a sitting Judge asking you directly for MONEY?

Please share your wisdom.

George Frobisher said...

I am reading the back and forth peeing match about who has more trials in the voice of Ofc. MacLeod

Anonymous said...

The Professor says:

3:37, or should I call you 5:15 from yesterday.

I answered your question. I guess you did not like the answer. So that it finally penetrates your less than fully comprehending consciousness, I will explain again.

The Code of Judicial Conduct, specifically permits judges speaking on behalf of fund raising, directly soliciting funds for, or in favor of any issue which is for a public purpose. The levy for building a PUBLIC Courthouse is a PUBLIC purpose. It is not for the benefit of a private organization or for a campaign which benefits the judges personally or politically.

You can find all of the opinions regarding this on the 6th Circuit website. Look for Judicial Ethics Opinions. They go back several decades. It is easy to search.

If you don't want to contribute, I promise the judges won't even remember your name. They are not involved directly in the campaign, and in the end will have no interest in knowing who does, or does not, contribute.

Have a nice day.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe I am in agreement with that jackass professor. I may have to visit a therapists.