(Updated with a hot fed rumor below)
David Young is back on the bench!
And he is really really excited about it and wants everyone to know how happy he is to be back.
We've been thinking about other Judges who have voluntarily resigned and then gotten their position back.
The only name that comes to mind is Judge Joe Farina. He left the bench, returned and then had a good run as chief of criminal court and then Chief Judge.
FED RUMOR
When compared to our humble REGJB, the feds rumor mill is downright G rated. But then everyone's favourite federal blogger dropped this rumor in his first working day post of 2017 imaginatively entitled "2017!" :
Speaking of District Judges, there is a rumor going around that one of our own DJs is interested in the new U.S. Attorney slot. Anyone else hearing this?
Considering DOM spent part of the holidays photo bombing and taking selfies with the President Elect of the United States on Trump's private golf course in Jupiter (belying his image as a defense attorney of the proletariat) , he would appear to know something about this.
This is a juicy one. Any ideas?
See you in court.
THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:
NEW CANDIDATE FILINGS FOR ELECTION 2016 .....
In our post dated January 26th, we discussed the first filings for the Judicial Election of 2016. At that time, Judge David Young had filed to run in retiring Judge Rodriguez Chomat's Group 39 seat. On the same date that Young filed, attorney Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts filed to run in the same Group. Before I was able to finish writing the post, attorney Carol "Jodie" Breece filed to run in Group 52, the group of retiring Judge Michael Genden.
Well, in the past few days, things got much more interesting. Where do I begin?
David Young is still running for Judge, and he is still running in Group 39; but now, nobody is running against him.
As for Group 52, it just got very crowded, with four candidates having filed in that Group. Jodie Breece is still in the group, and she is joined now by Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts, who filed papers with the Elections Commission switching from Group 39 to Group 52. Joining Breece and Rodriguez-Fonts are:
Elena Ortega-Tauler.*** Ms. Tauler has been a member of The Florida Bar for 26 years. She runs a solo practice and specializes in the field of Immigration Law. Now, I have not had the pleasure of meeting Candidate Tauler, but if she has ever read my columns on this Blog, then she would have known that this was coming. You see, there is no Elena Ortega-Tauler that is a licensed attorney in the State of Florida. There is an Elena C. Tauler. And Ms. "Tauler" even has a web site for her law firm. I read through the dozen or so pages on that web site. Do you think I found any, even one, reference to her being called "Ortega-Tauler"? NO. NADA.
Not only does Ms. Tauler list her name on The Florida Bar's web site as Elena C. Tauler, but we were also able to find that the home she apparently lives in, in the City of Doral, has her name on that deed as Elena C. Tauler. Also, there are no less than 24 corporations listed on Sunbiz where Elena C. Tauler is either an Officer and/or the RA. And, check the no less than seven documents that Tauler filed with the Florida Division of Elections in Tallahassee when she filed to run for Judge; all seven have a signature that clearly appears to read "Elena Tauler".
Why Ms. Tauler do you feel the need to attempt to pull one over on the voters of Miami-Dade County? Why are you running for a job where the public expects nothing less than for you to be the class of judgment and professionalism; yet your first act in running for Judge is one of deceiving the public by adding the name "Ortega" to your last name? We have outed several potential judicial candidates in the past on this Blog; you are not the first, and you most certainly will not be the last.
If you are going to run for Judge under the name "Ortega-Tauler", then at least have the decency to use that same name in the Member's Section of the Florida Bar web site and change your name on your own law firm web site so it reads "Ortega-Tauler".
***Addendum***. Thank you to Wannabe Captain. That commenter reminded me of a post I scribed on April 24, 2008, that can be found here. Now I remember how I earned my reputation. Six and one half years ago I first reported on Ms. Tauler when she filed to run against Migna Sanchez Llorens. (Shortly after my post, Ms. Tauler withdrew her name from the race). In that post, we alluded to the fact that Ms. Tauler had been recommended for Disbarment by The Florida Bar, but the Supreme Court overruled that recommendation and Suspended her for three years. We also made mention of the more than 30 lawsuits Ms. Tauler was a party to in Miami-Dade County. Please take the time to review our earlier post and thanks again to Wannabe Captain for the reminder.
Raul Alberto Perez-Ceballos. Mr. Perez-Ceballos has been a member of The Florida Bar for 12 years. He has a solo practice and specializes in the field of Family Law. He was interviewed by reporter Julie Kay for the Daily Business Review recently and he indicated that: "I like to read, and I like to write," ...... "That's why I want to be a judge."
Perez-Ceballos had this to say about the crowded field in Group 52: "This could be a record," .... "I've seen a three-way race but I've never seen a four-way race go through."
Raul, Raul. Yo soy El Capitan! The Captain only has to go back to Election 2004 to recall that Don Cohn, Catherine Parks, William Thomas, and Josie Velis ran for Judge in the same Circuit Court Group. Or, how about Election 2002 when Alexander Akpodiete, Xavier Cortada, Raul Ordonez, and Sarah Zabel ran in the same Group. Or, Election 2000, when Gina Mendez, Dennis Murphy, Martin Zilber, and Peter Sylvester Adrien ran for Judge against each other. For 100 points, who won each Election? And for 50 bonus points, who was in each of the Runoffs?
So, what can you take away from this post? Well, for one thing - read the DBR and end up with quotes like "I like to read and write; that's why I want to be a judge". Read Rumpole's Justice Building Blog with crack political reporter El Capitan, and you get the story behind the story; Ms. Tauler!
That's your Election Central update for our Judicial Elections 2016.
CAPTAIN OUT .......
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
Let's see… in no particular order of importance….
Today is NFL Championship Sunday. Four teams will vie for the right to go to the Super Bowl which has become a holiday of almost religious reverence in the United States. It's just a football game.
The oceans are collapsing at an alarming rate and ocean life is approaching a point of collapse from which there is no return. The NY Times has the article here.
And David Young is running for Judge.
The announcement of Mr. Young's candidacy drew a multitude of comments in the last post. But it's our blog so we get the last word. (Although actually Mr. Young would have the last word should he care to write in.).
First as to the Airline Pilots trial several years back. The pilots were charged with attempting to take command of a commercial airline filled with passengers while they were intoxicated from a night of drinking. It is an absolute rule of flying taught on the first day of flight school: "Twenty-four hours from bottle to throttle" and the pilots charged with a violating that rule were about twenty hours short of compliance.
It has been alleged that Mr. Young in his capacity as a Judge rejected plea offers in the case because he wanted to try the case and use the publicity and notoriety of the televised trial for his own personal aggrandizement. It is not disputed that after the conclusion of the trial that Mr. Young was offered- and accepted- a job as a "television judge" ala "The People's Court" (also headed by a former Dade County Judge- the Honorable Marilyn Milian.).
To accuse Mr. Young of turning down the pleas because of his desire to land a job on television, is akin to accusing Barak Obama's mother of faking the place of her son's birth because she knew that someday he was destined to be President of the United States. A far-fetched accusation, but one in which small-minded people are apt to believe. The same goes with Judge Young, and the logic is just as tenuous.
Judges accept pleas all day long to a familiar litany of crimes- possession, robbery, assault, battery, DUI. But as we enter our third decade labouring in the hallowed halls of the REGJB, this is the first case we can recall with these type of charges. At times DUI practitioners would see a private pilot charged with flying while impaired, but we have never seen commercial pilots charged with such a crime. The magnitude of a disaster that could have come about if the pilot's impairment caused error which resulted in a crash is almost unimaginable. Besides the unfortunate souls on the aircraft, Miami is a crowded urban center. The plane could have crashed into a school, or hospital, or the Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant or even the Dade State Attorneys Office!!!
If in the course of a career a judge rejects a plea or two, this is one of those cases ripe for such action. We see no nefarious plans behind Judge Young's actions. He had the authority, indeed the duty, to accept only a plea that he deemed acceptable in light of the nature of the crime.
In all other aspects we welcome Mr. Young's return to the bench. The qualities we seek in a judge are foremost the courage to do the right thing. Time and time again Judge Young spoke out for defendants he saw being mistreated. Defense attorneys applauded him for this, rightfully so. Shame on us for turning on Judge Young for his courage to reject a plea in a case where he thought the crime merited a more serious punishment. We should not criticize philosophical consistency; we should applaud the courage it takes to make a decision consistent with one's belief in the face of the criticism of the vox populi.
Seattle over Green Bay by ten, although we are rooting for the Packers. The Colts stun the Cheaters 34-31 when Luck leads his team on a last minute drive and game winning field goal.
Enjoy the long weekend. No court Monday.
THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:
BREAKING NEWS on JUDGE DAVID YOUNG (read below) .....
A SCENE FROM A COURTROOM INSIDE THE MJB, CIRCA 1990*** ......
JUDGE LNU: Clerk, call the next case.
CLERK: State v. James Williams
DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Good morning, your honor. The Captain, appearing on behalf of Mr. Williams.
JUDGE: Mr. Captain, good to see you. Can you please approach the bench.
CAPTAIN: Of course, your honor.
JUDGE: Mr. Captain, you know I am running for re-election, don't you?
CAPTAIN: Yes, your honor.
JUDGE: Please take this envelope, (slipping the Captain an envelope); I noticed that you had not given to my campaign yet.
CAPTAIN: No problem, your honor. Of course I will be donating to your re-election campaign.
***This actually happened to me while appearing in Circuit Criminal many years ago. The Judge, who has since passed away, was a well liked judge and was thought by most, on both sides of the isle, to be a very fair judge. But, to be clear, what s/he did was not legal under any of the judicial campaign laws at the time.
***And we all know that, when running for Judge, that it's all about that bass ($$$), and lots of it, that makes a campaign go; a treble (thin) bank account is a quick ticket back into private practice.
On January 20, 2015, SCOTUS will hear the case of LANELL WILLIAMS-YULEE, PETITIONER, V. THE FLORIDA BAR, RESPONDENT. The Daily Business Review covers the story here.
The case comes directly from the Florida Supreme Court and you can read that court's opinion here.
The Florida Supreme Court's opinion starts out this way:
"We have for review a referee’s report recommending that the Respondent, Lanell Williams-Yulee, be found guilty of professional misconduct. The referee recommended that the Respondent receive a public reprimand as a sanction. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.
For the reasons explained below, we approve the referee’s findings of fact and recommendation that the Respondent be found guilty of violating Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 4-8.2(b) (Judicial and Legal Officials, Candidates for Judicial Office; Code of Judicial Conduct Applies) for personally soliciting campaign contributions in violation of Canon 7C(1) of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct. We therefore reject the Respondent’s constitutional challenge to the ban imposed by Canon 7C(1) on a judicial candidate’s personal solicitation of campaign contributions, and hold that the Canon is constitutional because it promotes the State’s compelling interests in preserving the integrity of the judiciary and maintaining the public’s confidence in an impartial judiciary, and that it is narrowly tailored to effectuate those interests.
.......
We approve the referee’s recommended sanction of a public reprimand."
In September of 2009, attorney Lanell Williams-Yulee decided she would become a candidate for County Court Judge in Tampa. One of her first acts as a candidate was to sign a campaign fundraising letter where she personally solicited campaign contributions.
The Campaign:
Judge Dick Greco, Jr was elected to the County Court bench in 1990 and reelected in 1996, He left the bench and returned to private practice in 2002. In 2009, Governor Charlie Crist appointed Greco to an open seat on the County Court bench. He ran for "reelection" in 2010. Ms. Williams-Yulee filed to challenge incumbent Judge Greco. In the primary, Judge Greco garnered 80% of the vote, defeating Williams-Yulee.
The Bar:
The Florida Bar investigated the charges against Williams-Yulee, which included misconduct and minor misconduct, violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct, violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and violations of supervisory responsibilities.
The relevant part of the referee's findings, as they relate to the case before SCOTUS, is the finding of guilt by Williams-Yulee of directly soliciting for campaign contributions.
SCOTUS:
The Bar has retained heavy hitter Greenberg Traurig partner Barry Richard (he of Bush v Gore) to represent the interests of The Respondent.
The Petitioner, Williams-Yulee, is challenging on First Amendment grounds, Canon 7C(1) of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct, which bars judicial candidates from soliciting campaign contributions.
Amicus briefs were filed this week by some of the most respected attorneys in the State, on behalf of the Bar, including Major B. Harding, Harry Lee Anstead and Stephen Grimes, all former chief justices of the Florida Supreme Court; along with four others who are past presidents of the Florida Bar.
The Bar's amicus supporters believe that Canon 7C(1) "strikes a proper balance between a judicial candidate's right to free speech and the right of future litigants to due process, while placing a minimal burden on the former." (At least 33 other states have a judicial Canon similar to Florida's).
Let's face it, even though judges are not supposed to ask us directly for money, who's kidding who here. Every candidate, and Judge, running for reelection, knows who gave to their campaign and who gave to their opponent. It's online, it's public record. So, what's the big deal if we eliminate the middle man and just let the candidate/judge do the asking?
What do you think?
BREAKING NEWS ........
JUDGE DAVID YOUNG, is running for Judge, again:
Judge David Young, who served on the County and Circuit Court bench from 1993-2007, and then became a TV Judge (2007-2009), has most recently been mediating and serving our community on several boards. He announced today that he has entered the race for Circuit Court Judge in Group 39. That seat is currently held by Judge Rodriguez Chomat. Chomat is retiring (aged out) and therefore cannot seek reelection. Qualifying for the seat ends on May 6th of 2016 and the election will take place on August 30th.
CAPTAIN OUT .......
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
