Wednesday, August 04, 2010


This is the transcript of the court hearing that started it all.

We offer no opinion on it's contents except to say this: not one of us deserves to be judged on one court hearing, one trial, one bad day. And we can already hear the chorus of attorneys saying it happened to their client. We have no idea if this is how Judge Newman runs his courtroom. We have said before that in this race we are endorsing Judge Newman because we believe he has done a good job. We also think his opponent- Manny Alvarez would make an excellent Judge.

Res Ipsa Loquitor:



Rumpole said...

We add this- clearly and especially after the Judge Aleman fiasco in Broward, all judges should be more cognizant of the fact that if a defense attorney makes a motion to recuse, the court needs to grant adequate time- like a few hours- for the attorney to go back to his or her office and draft a proper motion. If Judge Newman did anything wrong, it was not giving Rob enough time to draft a motion.

FACDL listserve leaker said...

So in the end, the case gets nolle prossed anyway, correct? The State doesn't have it and Newman makes it clear to them they don't, right? And the argument for recusal was that Dorta hadn't contributed to Newman's campaign so Newman should recuse, right? (Like that theory -- I won't contribute to anybody but defense judges and all the rest will have to recuse.)

How's that again?

And Dorta's on the JNC now, right? And contributing heavily to judicial candidates who are not Ed Newman, correct? And is buddies with the guy who put Manny up to run against Newwman, correct? (And yes, we all agree Manny is a good guy, so nothing against him.)

Oh man does this all stink.

Anonymous said...

He was also bullying the defendant into taking a plea on a charge the State couldn't prove because the officer charged the wrong statute and the ASA didn't bother to file an amended citation or a superseding information.

That is typical of Judge Newman. Sometimes it helps our client to have that fear put into him/her when they insist on taking a bad case to trial, but there has to be a line. Newman also gets upset when you say you have to go to another courtroom to handle a case there. What kind of temperament is that where a judge doesn't want you to handle your other cases because the other case may also roll to trial?

I won't vote for Newman. A prosecutor in the pit and on the bench do not a good combination make.

Anonymous said...

The prosecutor was grossly unprepared and was about to go to trial on a case they absolutely could not prove. And to make matters worse, they announced ready prior to realizing that they had no case. If the prosecutor would have taken 10 minutes prior to trial to read the a-form, check the witness availabilities, and check the charging document to make sure the case is filed correctly, this could have been avoided.

Newman has scared my clients into taking pleas. He is a bully. But without this exchange, the prosecutor never would have realized that they had no case. In the end, the defense attorney got what he came for.

I think Newman does a good job and puts pressure on the state as much (if not more) than the defense. He understands that non-DUI cases, for the most part, should not go to trial.

And as for the dog and pony show, lots of judges do it. We've discussed it before on this blog. It may be predictable, but sometimes it helps us defense attorneys convince stubborn clients to take pleas.

I don't think the judge was trying to strongarm the defendant, but he was informing him of the minimum and maximum penalties as every judge should do before a case goes to trial. Some defense attorneys do not inform their clients of the possibly maximum sentence.

Anonymous said...

Well Rumpole what about the colloquy where he tries to intimidate the Defendant by insinuating that he is NOT going home after the trial ,without the evidence being presented? .........What about the section where he helps the Prosecution shop for other charges when it isclear that the charges must be dismissed?.....How about the fact that this particular defendant did not send his name out of the JNC on the two occasions he applied for a circuit seat?Do you chalk this up to coincidence?....how do you explain his aggresive behavior in failing to allow the lawyers sufficient time to file a motion for recusal as required by law?...lawyers who had recently refused to serve on Newman's re-election committee?

His conduct, in my opinion , is indefensible. Is this what we want in our Judges....really?

Anonymous said...

oh no somebody didnt a Caba players ass. what a disgrace!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

these lawyers were all acting like first year puppies. how embarrassing. newman does that song and dance in every case trying to move bullshit cases along. i like al and rob but this was pure bush league. and the recusal motion was utter crap. my client cant get a fair trial and is afraid of u but rule on my motion to dismiss? yikes.... learn the law people.

Anonymous said...

Judge Newman did nothing wrong. Looks to me like the defense attorney simply wanted to pick a fight. Talk about much ado over nothing.......

As for the prosecutor, let's remember that he or she is a rookie. Yes, the prosecutor wasn't prepared adequately, but, let's get serious. We all know that the CC prosecutors are brand new, don't know squat about the law, and don't have time to meet with the witnesses ahead of time or to catch everything they should. So get off your high horse 10:33 and cut the ASA a break.


Anonymous said...

Who was the private attorney with Roberto Pertierra? His attitude seemed almost disrespectful towards the judge and was not doing any favor to the client.

Why was not an attorney with expertise in traffic law brought into the case? Frankly, with a JOA guaranteed by the wrong statute and without a victim in court, there was no reason for all the jockeying around with the motion to recuse.

The private attorney took a risk making the motion to dismiss based on the wrong statute. The way things were, I would have waited to make it until jeopardy had attached. What if Newman had granted a state continuance and the state had gotten hold of the victim and filed a bind-up information?

There was no need whatsoever for all the noise because the defense had all the cards to win. When you find yourself with steel toes in your boots, keep your mouth shut and just kick butt!

Anonymous said...

holy shit! i just noticed that he was acting like that toward gonzo dorta. lmao! at least newman treats everyone the same! dorta is very powerful... newman- not a very good move old buddy. ouch.

Anonymous said...

Judge Newman makes those rhetorical questions of the state and the defense all the time and it does help flush out bad cases that should not be taken to trial either by the state or the defense. That's the purpose of the proffer. He's pretty reasonable and will make it clear to the state how he'll rule so that they won't waste everybody's time with a loser case.

Statuteman said...

Let's go to the rule book and the law:

Rule 3.190. Pretrial Motions

(a) In General. --Every pretrial motion and pleading in response to a motion SHALL BE IN WRITING and signed by the party making the motion or the attorney for the party. This requirement may be waived by the court for good cause shown. Each motion or other pleading shall state the ground or grounds on which it is based. A copy shall be served on the adverse party. A certificate of service must accompany the filing of any pleading.

Rule 3.140. Indictments; Informations

(j) Amendment of Information. --An information on which the defendant is to be tried that charges an offense MAY BE AMENDED on the motion of the prosecuting attorney or defendant AT ANY TIME prior to trial because of formal defects.

(o) Defects and Variances. --No indictment or information, or any count thereof, shall be dismissed or judgment arrested, or new trial granted on account of any defect in the form of the indictment or information or of misjoinder of offenses or for any cause whatsoever, unless the court shall be of the opinion that the indictment or information is so vague, indistinct, and indefinite as to mislead the accused and embarrass him or her in the preparation of a defense or expose the accused after conviction or acquittal to substantial danger of a new prosecution for the same offense.

Love v. State, 450 So. 2d 298, 1984Fla. App. LEXIS 13023 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1984) (Information should be dismissed for vagueness under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.140(o) only when the information was so vague as to mislead the accused, affect trial preparation, or expose the accused to new prosecution for the same offense).

Stanfill v. State, 360 So. 2d 128, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16205, 99 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2493 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1978)(where an indictment alleged that a driver "unlawfully" left the scene of an accident in violation of Fla. Stat. § 316.027, instead of alleging that the driver left the scene "willfully," the indictment was defective or at variance with the statute under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.140(o), and the defendant's failure to move to dismiss the indictment before the jury was empaneled operated as a waiver of the deficiency).

Seems like some very poor/lazy lawyering by the defense, but then again, Rob P. isn't exactly known for his writing ability or motion practice. And sorry, but it seems like a macho latin v. anglo thing was going on too.

Anonymous said...

Newman displayed his true colors. The transcript convinced me my vote goes to Alvarez.

Anonymous said...

wow that is all it takes to get opposition. piss of some rich arrogant lawyer and you get an opponent.

just another example of why the job of judge blows

Anonymous said...

Gee, you think that the posts saying "my vote is going to Alvarez" based on this transcript are from that camp? LOL

No competent criminal lawyer could really be offended by what happened here. Newman did what any respectable judge would do. He held the lawyers' feet to the fire to ensure that time wouldn't be wasted. The end result? He sticks it to the State and dismisses the case. Somehow that makes him unfair or irresponsible? HAHA. The polical game being played here is disgraceful.

I have tremendous respect for Manny and hope that he is not condoning this kind of nonsense. I've always believed that Manny would be a great judge.....and wish this race wasn't going in the direction it is. Newman deserves to stay; Manny should run against one of the incompetents and tell his friends to stop playing these games.


Anonymous said...

Newman is a great place to practice law ass a pd or a asa. never gives a trial tax-- ever!! manny alvarez has a bigger chip on his shoulder them newman. in any regard- newman will will. he has the endorcement of the unions and cubans love the dolphins.

as for al milian, well, the transcript speaks for itself. newman should not have said those things but that is just the way his is. you gotta know that coming in. all that the defense had to say is that - the state does not have its witnesses judge-and the defense would never want to waste this courts valuable time- and newman would have forced a dump.

the problem here was that the judge did not give respect to dorta- this has nothing to do with al milian running alvarez- dorta is a king maker. bigger then lombada and the judge is a politician. he made a political mistep by acting the way he did and is now paying the price.

Anonymous said...

Newman did the same thing he did in every case in front of him. It's just his style. But for Milian and Pertierra to think that Newman should come down off the bench and kiss their ass is ridiculous.

The ASA was completely unprepared, which is not unusual, since most of them have been out of law school for three days. Pertierra was unprepared, which is not unusual. He's not exactly a legal eagle. But this last minute bullcrap for motions to recuse and brining in another atty as co-counsel is bush league. At least next year, he'll be able to keep Manny Alvarez in the bullpen as co-counsel and get the recusal right away.

Pertierra, Milian and the rest of the CABA mob expect white glove treatment everytime they saunter into the courtroom because they share cafecitos with the judges every now and again. That didnt happen here. Pertierra did a disservice to his client with his antics and was clearly unwilling to try the case. Next time try your case and stop hoping that the victim or the officer fail to appear. If you had done that this time, you'd have gotten a JOA and the case would have been gone forever. I hope the state re-files.

Anyway, I'll vote for Newman since I'm not contributing to the "hook up the CABA mob or we'll run someone against you."

By the way, the CABA mob and Alvarez have raised less money than my car is worth. Alvarez is about as serious about being a county court judge as he is about being the third base coach for the Marlins.


to 11:40

It appears here that the defendant was not charged by "Information". Does that make your cite to the rule 3.140 irrelevant here? Or is there case law that suggests that that particular rule is applied to citations as well?

On the Recusal Motion, did Judge Newman deny Rob's Motion each time because of a fatal defect? Doesn't the rule require the Defendant himself to swear to the Motion, in writing?

Two questions for our appellate hacks.

Cap Out ...

Anonymous said...

9:53:00 AM said:

"the problem here was that the judge did not give respect to dorta-"

I think that Judge Newman did give respect to Dorta. He just didn't pay homage to him.

Anonymous said...

Newman did the right thing...he has to make sure that the defendant understands the consequences of rejecting the plea offer - you know that cry baby would have made all kinds of allegations if he had gone to jail...I'd like to know why the defense was SO SURE that the victim wasn't coming to court?

Anonymous said...

Gonzalo, much as I love him, showed his ass on this one.

Anonymous said...

Newman's pre-trial colloquy works both ways. It makes the state realize that they have a crappy case and should nolle prosse or it makes the defense realize they have a loser and should work out a plea.

I'm quite ok with it, everyone who practices in 6-6 knows it's just a dog-and-pony show, and Pertierra and Milian should have known that, too.

What I don't understand is why all the brouhaha by the defense when they were in the catbird seat and had a winner in their hands.

When you have a winner, don't whine, just win!

Jose said...

Dear Anonymousees,

Let's chat. ASAP.

Jose Pagliery
Daily Business Review

Anonymous said...

Thank you. Now I'm going to vote for Manny Alvarez because of BTDT's (typically) smarmy and insipid comments

Anonymous said...

frankly, this transcrit reflects more poorly on the lawyers than the judge. though you can just newman's patience wearing thin unnecessarily. enough to campaign against him? no

Anonymous said...

I did not have a horse in this race, until I read Dorta's name. Now, I will do everything I can to help Newman get re-elected.

Anonymous said...

Hi Jose Paglieri from DBR, what is it that you would likle to chat about? No one even reads your newspaper. All you are looking for is for some dirt on a judicial candidate so that you could improve your ratings. Go get some tips from Soap Opera digest and get out of our blog.....and say hi to the rest of your loser friends from DBR!



Anonymous said...

2:08.......glad I could help. LOL. Have a good night.


Anonymous said...

Ed Newman is a bully.

That exchange was unprofessional in all regards.

The judge, the defense attorney and the prosecutor should all be ashamed of the way they handled that case.

A good judge would never have allowed everyone to slump so low.

Anonymous said...

I don't know about Manny Alvarez' motives for running against Judge Newman, but having practiced before Judge Newman more times than I care to remember, I know this: That transcript accurately depicts the horrific manner in which Judge Newman runs his court. Any lawyer who practices in that courtroom knows this is true - even his friends. Someone suggested Judge Newman might have been having a "bad day" - more like a bad 15 years.

Statuteman said...

To Captain:

A citation is considered to be the equivalent to an Information for a criminal traffic offense.

Anonymous said...

newman gets what he deserves

he is a block head, wiht no judicial temperment.

and behaves disgustingly all the time

he soiled his bed

now he lies in it

i cant wait to laugh in his face when he returns to his negligible law practice

Anonymous said...

Newman did what every judge does one way or the other-check out Judge Snyder circa 1995. State announced ready on a case they couldn't prove and Ed switched gears as soon as he realized it. Go Ed and go Fins.

Anonymous said...

There is no excuse for a judge to determine that a defendant should be charged with additional infractions. The point of our system is to have two opposing adversaries and one impartial judge. The judge here violated that (very important) framework. Sure, you can look at this as "don't piss off the powerful guy." Alternatively, you can look at this as, after pissing off all the other guys, you finally pissed off one who's willing to stand up for himself. It seems, from the comments, that the judge has had an attitude for quite a while. It, then, was only a matter of time when he angered one too many people. Although this particular defendant may have been a heavy straw, he was only one of many straws that contributed to the broken back of the camel, or dolphin, as it were.

Anonymous said...

Newman is a good guy. Nice man off the bench. But you can't compare Manny to Newman. Manny is incredibly more qualified. I spent my entire life wanting to be a lawyer. I wanted to be a litigator. When i think about a judge who will give me a good trial Newman doesn't come to mind. He is comical, entertaining, and sometimes I feel sorry for him because he is so out there. If your readers know both candidates there is no question in my mind who they would want on the bench. People who are routing for Newman, feel sorry for him, or are afraid of him, not because they respect his judicial skills or temperament. Come on people. Don't be retarded. Care about having qualified, competent, intelligent Judges who treat lawyers with respect and possess perspective.