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, AND THE POPE. POST YOUR COMMENTS, OR SEND RUMPOLE A PRIVATE EMAIL AT HOWARDROARK21@GMAIL.COM

Sunday, December 11, 2005

HERE'S....BOBBY!

Mr. Reiff’s wonderful post follows.

Careful readers will note that Mr. Reiff, Mr. Hersch, Mr. Catalano, and Mr. Tannebaum (who also posts his picture) are all unafraid to sign their names to their posts. We are pleased to announce these fine lawyers and faithful Bloggers are all in the running for our monthly prize of “Post Of The Month”.

December’s winner can choose among the following: A $20.00 Starbucks Card; An Autographed Copy of the First Rumpole Omnibus; or finally, an autographed copy of the soon to be released, guaranteed to be a best seller, the unauthorized biography of Judge Ed Newman: “From Shula to Soundings; From Dolphins to DUI; From Trap Blocks to Entrapment: Tough On the Field and Tough On The Bench- the completely unauthorized biography of Judge Ed Newman.”. (We think Judge Newman is a great gentleman and we hope he laughs and takes this in the spirit it was intended. He is a fine Judge and a credit to the bench.)

Mr. Reiff, unafraid to sign his name, wrote the following:


Dear Rumpole:

Thank you for creating this interesting and clever site and for your insightful (if not warped) observations on the Richard E. Gerstein Justice Building.

I feel compelled to respond to the comments made by the anonymous writer in "Pando, Pando, Pando."

Quite frankly, I don't know what disturbed me more; that I was somehow lumped in with Catalano (only kidding Mike) or that the writer somehow perceived that I hold myself out as having never lost a DUI case.

Unlike a certain heavy-set lawyer who we have not seen in court since well before certain public defenders were chained to their desks and Danish, I have never held myself out as being perfect or having never lost (or entered a no contest plea in) a DUI case. However, I am concerned about several of the misstatements made by the anonymous writer.

1. I have never donated to Judge Pando's campaign, although I would be happy to do so if requested. I never found Judge Pando to be anything but polite and well mannered to the lawyers who appeared before her who were professional and prepared. At worst, you could say she "does not suffer fools gently", a trait I'm sure several judges would plead guilty to.

2. I would like to think that the respect given to people such as Catalano (as well as numerous other well-respected criminal defense lawyers in town) and myself by judges such as Judge Pando are because we have earned it. Let's face it, the judges know who the good/honest/creative/trustworthy lawyers are (as well as their opposites) and I'd like to believe that any rulings we have received in our client's favor are because we earned it. If you believe that $500.00 (and I have only given that much to long-time personal friends who I have known long before they ascended to the bench) is enough to get a judge to grant your motion when you do not deserve it, or to give no jail where the offense calls for jail, you really need to start looking for a profession where you have respect for those you work with.

3. Sorry anonymous buddy, but I have not had a guilty verdict returned against a client of mine since 1995 (I looked it up). That does not make me infallible (and certainly not perfect; just ask my wife or the guys on my ice hockey team). It is a combination of luck, knowledge, hard work and luck (not to mention my boyish charm and good looks before the jury). The client in the '95 case was given jail time by Circuit Court Judge Marc Schumacher (not "no jail", as you claimed), but considering the fact that the jury found him not guilty of the more serious felony offenses (and he was a 3rd DUI offender), he could hardly complain about Judge Schumacher giving him jail time for the misdemeanor conviction. Prove me wrong if you are man (or woman) enough (and have the facts, not allegations), to do so (you know, that old proof stuff, not mere baseless allegations).

Try working hard and working smart and maybe you'll earn the respect (instead what sounds like the wrath) of such well-qualified judges as Judge Pando.

Not Afraid To Sign My Name,

Bobby Reiff



It doesn’t get any better than that. Well said, old chap (except for the "warped" riff).

See You In Court.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

HIGH STICKING ON RIEFF GO TO THE BOX FOR TWO MINUTES

I would like to respond to some of your points. Sorry but I would like to remain anonymous as I am the one taking the politically unpopular stand on this one.

First you attack me for a number of points that I didnt make in my post. I know this tactic works quite well when you litigate against the increasingly inept ASA's who staff County Court but I am not one of them.
1. Please make no mistake I am not saying that you gave money to Judge Pando. I dont even think a fair reading of what I wrote could even imply that. I simply wrote that it was my understanding that she was removed not for angering a dimunutive prosecutor but for some remarks she made on the bench. I said that this was what I heard and was far from expressing certainty. If Judge Pando was removed for granting too many motions to supress and anyone can prove that to me, I will accept that.
2. I Followed that up with my belief that no Judge would get removed from county court for being too pro-defense. I have been practicing in this town for many years and there have been many a Judge who wasnt afraid to grant a motion and many of them were later elevated to Circuit Court. Judges Schumacher and Pinero are excellent Judges and both would grant motions to suppress when they felt it was warranted when they were in County.
3. I then stated a thought which most with any intellectual honesty will admit. Now admittedly that group excludes you Bobby, but most people who were once Public Defenders will agree with the proposition that when thier clients who are roofers or landscapers go to trial, Judges often got thier brownie points and MADD awards by tacking on 30 days of jail to thier 1st DUI minimums. Most Pd's would also say that When members of the private bar took cases to trial thier clients would usually get extra community service hours tacked on to thier first minimums. Mr Stein drop the danish and back me up on this one. Or what about you Bobby Aaron stop collecting campaign checks and back me up on this one. It is one of those dirty little secrets that no one likes to admit.

I know Bobby it only helps your great stature among the Judges to defend thier honor and cling to the lie that no judge would treat your clients differently, but when you do this you sound alot like Bush when he says we dont torture. I am also not saying that your 500 bounty buys you no jail for your clients. As one former Judge once said "500 wont buy you a dismissal but It may get you a continuance down the line". Do you dispute that those words were said? Do you dispute that there isn't some kernel of truth in that departed Judges words?
5. You should actually take it as a compliment when I mentioned you about not losing a trial. It was meant as a compliment and I in no way meant to compare you to the man who does in fact make the claim that he has never lost a case or had a client plead guilty. The man who used to sign paychecks for you before you became the uber DUI lawyer.
6. I cant believe that you can actually play ice hockey and be as thin skinned as you are.

Anonymous said...

you dui lawyers are funny.

Anonymous said...

Do misd. trials even count? C'mon!

Anonymous said...

i thought it was only nancy grace who bragged about her perfect trial record. bobby you should get your own t.v. show.