.... AND IN THIS CORNER
For the defence: A distinguished member of The Florida Bar for the past 47 years, PARKER THOMSON. (Horace, you may have the "Clarence Clemons" of criminal law, but we've got the Clarence Darrow of the courthouse).
Barrister Thomson is a member of the international law firm of Hogan & Hartson, founded in Washington D.C. over 100 years ago, in 1904. Holland & Knight, his counterpart, has been around a measly 40 years and was founded in Tampa.
Thomson has extensive experience representing clients before the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals (11th Circuit), the Florida Supreme Court, and various state and U.S. federal courts throughout Florida. He has presented oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court in three cases and before the Florida Supreme Court in dozens of cases. How many cases has Rudy argued before SCOTUS: ZERO!!! (But, fail not State, according to our crack research staff, since leaving the bench, Sorondo has been invited to teach at the Conference of Circuit Court Judges and has even lectured at the Miami Dade State Attorney's Office).
According to our sources, the State already has its work cut out for them trying to get past the issue of Standing. And, if they manage to get past that large hurdle, the Supreme Court of Florida, in 1990, stated, in part: "when excessive caseload forces the public defender to choose between the rights of the various indigent criminal defendants he represents, a conflict of interest is inevitably created." The same Supreme Court also mentioned in a 1980 case involving these same issues, that, "the acceptance of additional cases where an existing caseload precludes adequate representation may subject an attorney to disciplinary action."
We could not have said it better than FACDL Prez Rick Freedman stated today: "The legislature's answer to this problem [the excessive workload] is to create more crimes with new statutes, increase penalties for existing crimes and spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build more prisons. All of this results in more defendants being arrested, more cases being filed and an exponentially higher chance that an innocent man's freedom will be taken from him. In order for every accused American to have competent and effective counsel, the second branch of our government must stop ignoring, at budget time, the third branch."
Horace, pack in it and join the good guys on this fight. Stick a fork in it cause the State Attorney's Office is "done" in this battle.
CAPTAIN OUT .....
Great post El Capitan however you seem to imply that my previous post somehow supported Rudy Sorondo, when in fact it does not.
ReplyDeleteWho cares about this dispute between theses 2 losers. The economy is going into a tailspin and all of us will be broke with the "new depression". Oil prices out of control, record numbers of blue chip companies going out of business, inflation like we have never seen, China becoming a super power, Iran's nuclear capacity, no leadership in government, global warming and an increase in natural disasters, wars over oil and maybe even the end of civilization...
ReplyDeleteSo who really cares at this point about the public defender of a backward city in Florida? This has to be the worst city in America to live in and is totally corrupt in values and in theway it is governed. And worse yet, total apathy among its citizens!
I am personally scared at this point Rumpole.
Haven't the laws changed since the 1980 opinion? Isn't there a subsequent statutory subsection providing that resources, or lack thereof, are not a reason to withdraw?
ReplyDeleteUltimately, of course, this devolves into passing the buck. The ROC won't be able to take all the case and the budget for independent conflict counsel will last how long?
At some point, the court must confront the fact that the legislature screwed it.
http://www.dadecountybar.org/media/DadeBallot2008.pdf
ReplyDeleteCheck it out Manny Segarra is the winner. He got the most votes for "unqualified" of any candidate seeking office. With 154 votes Manny is the winner of the Dade County Bar Associations "UNQUALIFIED" candidate of the year.
Rumpole,
ReplyDeleteLet the SAO mind their own business and take care of their own home.
Read the 10 year discipline:
http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/0/A720FE61D448C7BA85256A830057EBA3?OpenDocument
Dade County Bar Poll results came out yesterday. The link to it is http://www.dadecountybar.org/media/DadeBallot2008.pdf
ReplyDeleteMarc Schumacher is the highest rated exceptionally qualified and qualified incumbent judicial candidate listed on the Bar Poll.
Abby Cynamon is the highest rated exceptionally qualified and qualified non-incumbent judicial candidate listed on the Bar Poll.
1436 Dade County attorneys responded to the Dade County Bar Poll. All 1436 did not respond about every candidate.
Rumpole your settings are cutting every person's web links. You should fix this setting.
ReplyDeleteTHE REGJB WORD OF THE DAY
ReplyDeleteBrought to you by Holland and Knight.
NEED SORONDO? WE GOT SORONDO.
Haklaw.com
POTENTATE
def: one who wields great power. Use dates from the 15th cent.
USE: The Judge acts like an arrant potentate.
Use: Only Presidents, Pontiffs, or Potentates get breakdowns in DUI court.
8:43 Am. I didn't change anything. Tell me what to do to fix this. Blogger is run by 19 year old snot nosed kids from Seattle. You think I have any chance in understanding what they say?
ReplyDeleteIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
ReplyDeleteTHE FLORIDA BAR, The Florida Bar File
No. 2006-71,156(1 1M)
Complainant,
v.
MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER GRIECO, Supreme Court Case
No.
Respondent.
UNCONDITIONAL GUILTY PLEA AND
CONSENT JUDGMENT FOR DISCIPLINE
MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER GRIECO, Respondent, having been folly
advised of his procedural rights under the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar,
hereby tenders this Unconditional Guilty Plea and Consent Judgment for
Discipline pursuant to Rule 3-7.9(a), Rules of Discipline, and says:
l: Respondent, MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER GRIECO, is and at all
times hereinafter mentioned was a member of The Florida Bar and subject to the
jurisdiction and disciplinary rules of the Supreme Court of Florida.
2. Respondent is 32 years of age and has been a member of The Florida
Bar since April 28, 2000.
3. Respondent is currently the subject of a grievance file which has been
assigned The Florida Bar File No. 2006-71,156(1 1M).
4. Respondent admits that the following facts are true and accurate and
stipulates:
a. In or about November 2004, Messrs. Elie Parker and Ariel
Guivas assaulted Mr. Jeremy Powell.
b. The assault was investigated by the Miami Beach Police
Department.
c. During the investigation, Respondent, who was employed with
the Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office and was friends with Mr. Parker, met with
the detectives assigned to the case.
d. During this meeting, the detectives were misled into believing
that Respondent was involved in the investigation because of his role as an
Assistant State Attorney, not as Mr. Parker's friend.
e. Specifically, the detectives provided information to Respondent
which they would not have provided had they known that Respondent was Mr.
Parker's friend because the matter was still an ongoing criminal investigation.
f. Upon receiving said information from the detectives,
Respondent told the detectives not to arrest Mr. Parker because there was a lack of
probable cause and also instructed Mr. Parker to assert his Fifth Amendment
privilege.
g. Mr. Parker was eventually arrested and charged with a crime.
2
h. During the prosecution of Mr. Parker's criminal matter by the
Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office, on numerous occasions, Respondent met
with other prosecutors and/or supervisors assigned to Mr. Parker's matter and
asked that Mr. Parker's matter be scrutinized and given special attention.
i. Finally, when Mr. Parker was arraigned on the criminal charges
by the trial court, various individuals were misled into believing that Respondent
who was still employed as an Assistant State Attorney was going to represent the
interests of Mr. Parker.
5. Respondent admits that by reason of the foregoing facts Respondent
has violated Rule 4-1.7(a) (Representing Adverse Interests) of the Rules of
Professional Conduct.
6. Pursuant to Rule 3-7.9(a) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar,
Respondent hereby tenders this Unconditional Guilty Plea and Consent Judgment
for Discipline wherein Respondent agrees to receive a public reprimand to be
administered by appearance before the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar.
7. Respondent agrees to pay all costs reasonably incurred by The Florida
Bar in the investigation of the aforesaid matter within thirty (30) days of the entry
of the Supreme Court's final order, plus interest at the prevailing statutory rate to
accrue on all costs not paid within said time, unless time for payment is extended
by the Board of Governors.
8. Respondent agrees that the costs indicated below have been incurred.
Administrative costs
Rule 3-7.6(q)(l)(I) $1,250.00
Copy costs
TOTAL
$ 39.30
$1,289.30
9. Respondent agrees that he will not attempt to discharge the obligation
for the payment of The Florida Bar's costs hi any future proceedings, including but
not limited to, a Petition for Bankruptcy.
10. Respondent recognizes that the disciplinary sanction to be imposed
will ultimately be determined by the Supreme Court of Florida which will not be
bound to follow the recommendation of either The Florida Bar or the Board of
Governors hi these proceedings.
11. Respondent agrees that this Unconditional Guilty Plea and Consent
Judgment for Discipline and every factual admission contained herein, and
specifically the admissions set forth in paragraphs four (4) and five (5) shall have
full force and effect regardless of any subsequent recommendation or action taken
with respect to the terms of discipline offered by Respondent pursuant to this
Unconditional Guilty Plea and Consent Judgment for Discipline.
12. Respondent agrees that hi the event that the terms of discipline offered
herein are not approved by the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar (or their
designee), or the Supreme Court, this matter will proceed solely on the question of
discipline.
13. Respondent acknowledges that this document is tendered freely,
voluntarily, and without fear, threat or coercion.
DATED this? day of. li'l/H ^3008.
CHRISTOPHER GRIECO
'Respondent
Florida Bar No. 255490
80 SW 8th Street
Miami, Florida 33130
(305) 857-0034
WILLIAM MULLIGAN
Bar Counsel
Florida Bar No. 956880
The Florida Bar
444 Brickell Avenue
Suite M-100
Miami, Florida 33131
(305) 377-4445
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the original of the above and foregoing
Unconditional Guilty Plea and Consent Judgment for Discipline was mailed to
William Mulligan, Bar Counsel, at The Florida Bar, Suite M-100, 444 Brickell
Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131 on this I2- * day of Mfaf 2008.
CHRISTOPHER GRIECO
Respondent
Florida Bar No. 255490
80 SW 8th Street
Miami, Florida 33130
(305) 857-0034
Create your own blog, or are you a 19 year old snot nose kid in Aventura?
ReplyDeleteCongrats to Judge Shumacher and Abby Cynamon. I have been before Judge S and have met Ms. Cynamon. To the poster bemoaning the quality of life in Miami, I would say, if these two don't win (OK, Shumacher, justly has no opponent), you would be 100% correct. Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteFor the defence:
ReplyDeleteDo you have spellcheck?
If the court buys that the PDs are overworked, I hope the AG convenes a grand jury investigation into how the office has been run (or, more accurately, not run) for the past 20 years. THEN the truth will be known.
ReplyDeleteCrow, when consumed raw, is more bland than potentate cooked. Fake Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteRump, re the links, there's nothing to fix.
ReplyDeleteThey are embedded, but they don't display correctly. If you copy the link that you see, and paste it in the URL window of your browser, it's all there, and will get you to the location.
That Florida Bar discipline must have DJ Esquire "Singing the Blues". Maybe he can spin a few records for the Board of Governors when he makes his appearance.
ReplyDeleteMany is the winner is inaccurate.
ReplyDeleteMartinez-Scanziani or whatever her name is was 70% unqualified.
easiest way for people to post web links is to get a tiny url...they can go to this site to get one....http://tinyurl.com/....the link then will be converted to a tiny link and it will be easier to access....
ReplyDeleteThe winner of the most votes for unqualified for judge is Denise Martinez - over 70% of attorneys thought she was unqualified.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, who are these attorneys who vote and how did poor Denise end up as a black sheep of the poll. She is not that bad and it is a shame that only around 200 attorneys commented on her qualifications. I guess attorneys who do not know people who are running for the first time just write unqualified. If they instead did some research, they would find out that Martinez is really not that bad.
Who is Judge Esquiroz? She got 388 votes for unqualified to be a Judge. That is funny, maybe someone should run against her.
ReplyDeleteThe fight between the sao and pd is im-potentate. Very im-potentate.
ReplyDeleteThe members of Bar in Miami-Dade County should be ashamed.
ReplyDeleteOnly 1436 ballots were returned and counted in this latest Judicial Bar poll.
Approx. 17,000 ballotes were sent to every lawyer in Miami-Dade County. The Dade County Bar Assocation sponsers and administers the poll BUT the voting is not limited to teir membership rolls. EVERY LAWYER in Dade County get to have a say about the judges that are on the bench and those seeking judicial office.
By neglecting their duty to vote and assist the public in assesing the quality of candidates and sitting judges, they embarrass the profession and do a disservice to the community.
When you fail to vote you lose the right to complain and you get exactly what you deserve.
6:20, why else do you think lawyers love Miami? We feed off this city's corruption.
ReplyDeleteRumpole as a snot nosed kid I resent the continued comments by you accusing us snot nosed kids of every problem you have in life.
ReplyDeleteJudge Sorondo was an eminently qualifies assistant state attorney in Miami,a well qualified circuit court judge,and a well qualified Third D.C.A.Judge.
ReplyDeleteParker Thompson is well qualified.
Disparaging comments about either must be coming from nthose unhappy because of their prior contacts with either counsel.
Sorondo however may have signed on to a loosing cause based upon the past case law.Perhaps however,the argument may be made that the Miami P.D.has sufficient resourses if it were to dispatch attorneys to court for trial purposes and not having a top heavy administrative unit that does little.Yes the P.D.'s in court do a great deal of work,but should not the 100,000plus per year administrators not assist.
The State may follow because of the numerous B.S.charges being filed,especially in county court.Yes,the legislators and county commissioner are passing law that are useless.Police are filing charges to meet quotas.These area must be addressed.
You want a solution to the PD "overburden." Start with ending the BS Depos for 3rd Degree Felonies of simple coke possession and other F3's. They are a major waste of time and money. Why do you think almost all other states don't allow depos? Second, make the PD's stay at work past 3:30 pm.
ReplyDeleteManny is not the winner-
ReplyDeleteCheck the percentages. Denise Marinez-Scanziani got 136 unqual votes, which was 70.83% unqualified. Manny's 153 were only 60.47% of people who cast ballots. Not sure what my point is here...but that can't be much of a campaign boost for either of them
Rump:
ReplyDeleteYour blog has reached a new low. It sounds like a Billy Jean King Vs Bobby Riggs charade. (for those of you old enough to even remembr watching it that Thursday night, live). You should be stepping in to remind readers that BOTH Rudy Sorondo and Parker Thomson (no relation to J. Thompson) are exceptionally gifted appellate attorneys. Each commands high 6 figure incomes from national and internatinal clients. You are allowing both of them to be demeaned, resulting in the diminishment in importance, of your own site. It borders on the ludicrous to have lawyers who- no disrespect intended-handled matters they would and can relegate to a firm paralegal or runner, post about them on your blog. Is there really any part of you, Rump, on an intellectual basis that doesn't think they don't either know about your site or are jointly laughing at the absurdity of the comments over lunch in their private dinning quarters? (if you haven't been there, go look for the King vs Riggs match)
A dissappointed reader
PS are you possibly drinking martinis or a certain vino as a defense?
to 9:08 am:
ReplyDeleteYou must not read this BLOG too often. The "defence" is the international version; which our friend Rumpole uses all too often in his British style of writing.
I sometimes like to mimic the style in some of the words I post.
Got It.
I cannot believe Grieco only got a reprimand for what he did. When I was an ASA, an acquaintance of mine got arrested, and his case was set in my division. To make matters more interesting, we had a new C, who asked me for advice on the case.
ReplyDeleteI took the high road--told the new C I knew the guy and let my DC know, and that I would not go near the case. When my acquaintance's case was called in the division, I went as far as to leave the courtroom.
Grieco should have gotten a 30-day suspension.
"6:20, why else do you think lawyers love Miami? We feed off this city's corruption."
ReplyDelete-Thank God for corruption. How else do you suppose I afford my yacht, mansion and two summer homes?
I know the specifics of the thing with Grieco...I think it was several years ago and he got a raw deal.
ReplyDeleteteeny bopper magazine sez: DJ Esquire rulez
ReplyDeleteDJEsquire got spanked. Bad beau!
ReplyDeleteThe Grieco matter is from years ago, it appeared on this blog. Grieco's actions, as they are spelled out in the court documents, which he stipulated to, shows a gross breach of fiduciary duty to the people of Florida. Grieco should have had his license to practice law revoked.
ReplyDeletezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
ReplyDelete