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, March 08, 2017

JUDICIAL TERM LIMITS ARE ON THE WAY .....?????


THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:

FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE JUDGES ...............

On Monday, we introduced you to the Speaker of the House, Richard Corcoran (R-Land O' Lakes).  On Tuesday, Speaker Corcoran called the House into Session.  In his opening speech, keeping with his theme of going to war with the Governor, Corcoran continued to press the fact that he intends to go after and eliminate Enterprise Florida and Visit Florida.

Richard Corcoran is much out of the mold of Donald Trump.  He has his own ideas of how to "drain the swamp" that is Tallahassee politics.  From Corcoran's opening remarks to his House colleagues:

"For anyone waiting for us to slow down, to drop the big ideas, to stop trying to shake up the system, to cower in the face of attacks, or to cave to the demands of special interests, here's our message to you: We will not."

"Because right now, there are some who are suggesting that we pass the largest budget in history. We will not. We will not. Instead of spending more money, we will fight to eliminate waste from the budget."

"Right now, there are some who are suggesting that we pass a massive property tax increase. We will not."

He closed with:

"When we began this journey together, we promised to be better, to do things differently, and to reach for a higher standard, and we will ... Let's fight."

In addition to Enterprise Florida and Visit Florida, Corcoran has also set his sights on the Florida Lottery; he sued them for allegedly misspending their budget.  Also, Corcoran has demanded an audit of the Department of Environmental Protection for mismanagement of a legal contract where DEP has been billed nearly $98 million dollars in legal fees from four law firms.  They have already paid nearly $72 million of the total bill. The four firms have been handling a 16 year lawsuit against the State of Georgia over water right to the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee and Flint River Basin.  $54.4 million of the total was spent in just the past two years after Florida asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene. (And you thought that the JAC paid well to our Private Court Appointed Counsel).

And now Corcoran is going after the Judges in our State.  In case I failed to mention it earlier, Corcoran is an attorney, with the law firm of Broad and Cassel.  And Corcoran is pushing for term limits for all Supreme Court and District Court judges.

The first bill filed in the House, titled HJR 1 - Judicial Term Limits has already cleared all Committees and made its way to the floor of the House.  Now, to be clear, the bill is a Resolution and even if passed, does not become law.  That's because it would require an amendment to the Florida Constitution for this to actually take place.  But that is what Corcoran intends to fight for.

The House bill can be found here.  The summary of the bill states:

TERM LIMITS FOR JUSTICES AND JUDGES.—Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to prohibit the name of a supreme court justice or district court of appeal judge from appearing on a ballot for retention if he or she has served more than 12 consecutive years in the same office and prohibit reappointment of a justice or judge for one year after leaving office. The term limit applies to justices and judges in office on January 9, 2019, and future appointees.

The Senate is nearly in lock-step with the House on this issue.  They have SJR 482 - Supreme Court Justices/District Courts of Appeal Judges.  The language of the Senate Resolution is slightly different.  The Senate bill can be found here.  The summary of that Resolution states:

ELIGIBILITY FOR APPOINTMENT AND RETENTION OF OFFICE OF JUSTICE OR JUDGE.—Amendment imposes a 2-term limit for supreme court justices, 3-term limit for district courts of appeal judges, and 50-year age minimum for both; requires 1-year service as judge to serve as justice. Currently, both serve unlimited terms, if retained, until age 70, or older if less than one-half term remains at 70; there is no age minimum or service requirement. The term limits do not include partial terms and apply to current justices and judges. (A term is six years in length).

No doubt some final version of these two Resolutions will appear on the 2018 ballot as a Constitutional Amendment.

Do you think that our appellate court judges should be term limited?  Will the quality of the appellate bench go down if term limits are passed?

CAPTAIN OUT .....
Captain4Justice@gmail.com

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

If it gets a few off the 3rd DCA, hell, I'm for it.
Can't wait to see Leslie Rothenberg back as SAO.

Anonymous said...

Rottenberg is the most intellectually dishonest judge in Florida. I cannot wait for her to retire in two years.

Anonymous said...

The judges have no one but themselves to blame. Many of Florida's judges, at the trial and appellate levels, have long ignored legislative intent in applying criminal laws, forcing the Legislature to minimizes the reasons justifying downward departures in criminal cases (which, in a lot of cases, is terribly unfortunate) and imposing minimum mandatories (many of which are WAY too long).

Of course, the courts have done the same thing on the civil side. Florida's trial courts, particularly in our region, are extremely plaintiff oriented. While the 3rd does a great job, some of the other DCs and Florida's SC bend over backwards for plaintiffs. Florida's SC routinely is recognized as one of the most plaintiff oriented courts in the country. Is it any wonder that the Legislature and others are frustrated?

As for the requirement that people be at least 50, that's a bit much. However, I would like to see a provision requiring at least 10 years of experience and a minimum of 10 trials or oral arguments on appeal. I have no problem with the term limits, though I'd limit all appellate judges to three four year terms (in a perfect world, I'd also like to see the USSC justices subjected to term limits as well. It's virtually impossible to get rid of anyone with a lifetime appointment and I don't think anyone should wield that much power over the course of decades, particularly in positions with no real accountability).

BTDT

Anonymous said...

Guess you have to be a multimillionaire to be a DCA Judge at 45 and then find a job at 57

Anonymous said...

12 years is enough time. Hope it passes.

Anonymous said...

Like Judge Rodriguez likes to say to Foreclosure Defendants. "Someone has to get paid."