Fresh off our amazing pick of the Dolphins to beat the Bears outright, and still sizzling in our over/under picks, we offer this for your fun and profit:
Jets +10.5 at Patriots. And take the under 39 while you're at it.
Chicago at Giants: under 37. This is an awfully low number, but the NY weather is storming, so go with a low scoring slugfest.
Chargers at the Bengals: Over 48. High number. Close your eyes, take a deep breath, and make the plunge.
Redskins at Eagles: under 43, and while you're at it, take Philly and give the 7.
Coming tomorrow (assuming we get up early enough to post and make our 8AM hearing:
SOUR SOUNDINGS REDUX: Can you guess which "newer" Judge decided to prohibit ore tenus motions for continuances at soundings? Didn't we fix this problem several months ago? Tune in and read all about it.
And finally the day you’ve all been waiting for: OUR ONE YEAR ANNIVERSARY. Read about the critics who said we’d be quickly discovered and banished to Hialeah branch court to serve the remainder of our days defending petit thefts and resisting without violence before Judge Schwartz.
Read excerpts from our early and awful posts.
Read about the triumphs and the tragedies, the humor and the touching remembrances of lost friends and colleagues.
Relive the exciting early days of the "not afraid to sign my name club", and watch as the internecine PD wars unexpectedly explode across the blog.
ALL THAT AND MORE. THIS WEEK.
Rump: I remember conversations of soundings a number of months ago, the talk of waiting in long lines, but do not remember that the issue was "fixed". There was some talk of the idea of doing away with soundings, for which there were pros and cons. But I don't recall talking about the idea of having a lawyer (both State and defense) being forced to put on paper the REASON they are not ready. As a prosecutor, I didn't like it when the defense got away with numerous continuances for the same depos to be taken over the course of numerous trial settings, and never getting done while my victims vanished. Now as part of the defense, I want the judge to know if the 'locate of a lost victim' is the same last three reasons given for continuances. It's amazing the power of the paper trail. Any thoughts on this?
ReplyDeleteThank god veterans day is over, now I can use this blog again to trash people and continue my miserable angry existence
ReplyDeleteTo 9:11- the problem at soundings was that Judge Reyes would not let attorneys ask for a continuance. You had to calendar a motion not less than 5 days before the sounding, or you were stuck. Everyone complained on this blog, Judge Larry Schwartz chimed in, and in a wise and judicial decision from a very well respected and liked Judge, Judge Reyes changed his policy!!! Now another Judge is doing to same thing. Read all about it tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteI'm confused Rump. Is there a problem if the motion has to be written before sounding-to give each side and the judge notice-but can be argued at sounding with no need to calendar it before sounding?
ReplyDeleteI agree, as a former ASA, I can tell you that alot of work goes into preparing for a sounding calendar, and as a matter of courtesy, defense counsel should contact the prosecutor and give them the heads up. Also, subpoenas have to be sent and resources used up when it is completely unnecessiary. Defense attonreys, whether required to or not, should file motions at least five days ahead of time and not play the Jim Best game of gottcha!
ReplyDeleteThen what is a sounding calendar for? If you want to require attorneys to file motions for continuance well in advance of trial, no problem. Abolish, the sounding calendar and then all of your arguments are correct. However, if you hold a sounding calendar, hold it for a reason. Or hold a continuance calendar and if you don't ask to be put on the calendar, then you are presumed ready. But to have a sounding calendar with no continuances, accomplishes nothing.
ReplyDeleteRump, are you saying there is a judge that refuses to grant continuances at sounding? That's one I never heard before. I thought the issue you were addressing was some robed one who wants continuance motions in writing for the time of sounding. I think putting the request for continuance in writing before the sounding calendar, so each side can read it (including the judge) and then have it heard and either granted or denied AT THE SOUNDING, gives everyone a fair shake. I would agree that forcing someone to calendar the Motion for continuance before the sounding is unnecessarily time consuming and creates too many calendars and wastes peoples' time. What if the State (or defense) has asked for the last three continuances verbally, FOR THE VERY SAME REASON, and there is no way for the judge to remember why it was granted. Then both sides get into this yelling he said/she said to argue to the judge the reason for the previous continuances. If it's in writing, then all parties and the judge will know it's time to say no to a state continuance and force the state to drop or try their case; or say no to a defense continuance if it deserves to be denied. Or grant all of it, if it's reasonable and fair. I guess I'm still missing the problem. What's wrong with a written motion for continuance to be filed a few days before sounding, but be heard at the sounding? It only requires one court appearance.
ReplyDeleteHey--does anyone want to fill in the blanks on the details of the SAO Major Crimes phone sex scandal that led the Griselda Blanco prosecution to collapse?
ReplyDeleteguess I'm still missing the problem. What's wrong with a written motion for continuance to be filed a few days before sounding, but be heard at the sounding? It only requires one court appearance.
ReplyDeleteTo see what is wrong with that, tune in tomorrow, as we give a rousing defense of ore tenus motions to continue.
Looking forward to your post tomorrow. But when you (at 9:21) talked about Judge Reyes' previous policy (which he changed), you said that the problem everyone had on the blog was that he wouldn't hear a motion for continuance unless it HAD ALREADY BEEN CALENDARED and heard before sounding. That's different than having something in writing filed and then heard at the sounding, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteYes that is true. Judge Tunis's rule is slightly different than that of Reyes's, but I really question your assertion with all that Judges and prosecutors have to do, that in Judge Tunis's division they are all going to be waiting by the mail box for motions to continue in writing so they can read them, study the issue, ponder the possibilities, and then hear the issue at sounding. Can it be in that division they have that much free time? We see this as nothing more than a tactic to prevent attorneys from asking for continuances because most lawyers are way too busy to send a motion for continuance in writing five days before the sounding. Does it take 2 minutes to write one on a computer, sure? The real issue is that day in and day out many of us spend a lot of time putting out fires and do not have the luxury of pondering our schedules weeks in advance. With the time I spend trying cases and avoiding bill collectors and client's phone calls, I usually do not know when I will have lunch, much less what is going to happen the next day.
ReplyDeleteIn Tunis's courtroom, even going back to Fernandez, there has always been a policy of writing in the court file, the reasons why the state has asked for continuances in the past (the most notorious one being, no victim contact/locate being done). The second request for continuance on the same thing on behalf of the state is usually denied. So I would find it hard to believe its done more to check the state than it is the defense, but obviously it does apply to both equally.
ReplyDelete11:14, the blanco case collapse was caused by the star witness hitman aralya being mishandled by the homocide det. singleton. and the prosecutor had photos of his large pinga. and micheal band sexually abused (feltup) his secrectary. wasnt there a federal lawsuit against the SAO that resulted in a half million dollar verdict against KFR and the SAO.
ReplyDeleteAnd KFR was re-elected after all this?!
ReplyDeleteWHO GAVE YOU THE JETS? WHO GAVE YOU THE UNDER IN THAT GAME?
ReplyDeleteWHO GAVE YOU THE EAGLES? WHO GAVE YOU THE UNDER IN THAT GAME?
WHO GAVE YOU THE OVER IN THE BENGALS CHARGERS GAME?
WHO IS 5-0 ON HIS PICKS TODAY?
WHO HAS THE COURAGE EVERY WEEK TO POST HIS PICKS, AND WHO IS ON FIRE?
RUMPOLE! THATS WHO.