There are Judges who approach the REGJB pantheon of greatness. Judge Ed Cowart is the standard by which all REGJB judges are measured. In more recent times Judge Murphy was a favourite of both the state and defense for the way he ran his courtroom and his well reasoned and fair decisions. The same can be said for Judge Miguel De La O. He works hard at his job. Other judges have been known to commit felonious acts to get a copy of his well regarded case law email updates. And now Judge De La O finds himself at the center of a standoff between the criminal defense bar, which does NOT want to proceed via ZOOM for probation violation hearings, and Judge De La O, who reads into the Supreme Court's Administrative Orders on proceeding electronically nothing- nada-zilch- zero- reasons preventing a PVH taking place via zoom. Although he didn't say it, defense attorneys want their cake (bond hearings via zoom) and to eat it as well (no PVHs via Zoom). Can't we all just get along?
Apparently not. If you should find yourself awake in the wee hours of any morning, unable to sleep, take a gander at the below litigation: The FACDL's motion, and Judge De La O's DENIED order. Because he is a good judge, De La O has rescheduled the hearing giving time for the defense and FACDL to take a writ to the Third. No fear of appellate review is he. As the old joke goes: "How do you get to the 3rd DCA? Lose a motion and take a writ." Ba dum dum.
Here are the motion and order. The warning label states to not drive or operate large machinery after reading the motion and order.
Zoom Hearing Objection Clarington w Facdl (1) by HR on Scribd
Order Overruling Objection to Zoom Probation Violation Hearing (1) by HR on Scribd
With all do respect to my learnd coleague, eveyone here misses the point. Jurors and inocent victums should not be asked to risk they're lifes by hearing these cases the probation cases until there is a shot. I would ask the state to settle the case before asking a jury to come to court. If the state wuldn't settle the case I would ask the defense to setle the case and if they do not want to setle the case I would order the State court marshals to set up a tent in the parking lot and I wuld hold the tryal on the probation cases outside which the CDC said is safer than tryals in side. This is the experiance that a real litgiator brings like myself I am to the becnch and I am telling the Judge Soto I do not need to await until January haveing been dully elected as a Judge I can and should start tomorow and i can do all the probation jury tirls outside in the tent.
ReplyDeletewithout a doubt the person writing as Rosy Aponte is a genius! More more more por favor.
ReplyDeleteIf the voters of Dade had to elect an administrative judge and they had de la O's order and the above from Rosy they would still vote Rosy in as admin judge. We are doomed.
ReplyDeleteHey Rosy... take down your fucking signs. You won. Show some respect.
ReplyDeleteI voted for you. One day after being sworn in, you will be hit with a JQC complaint that will get you removed. Then, you and Dava can both go get a job.
Doomed you say? Doomed!
ReplyDeleteVery true that the late great ED COWART is the standard by which all judges should adhere to. Unfortunately, only very few come even close. Judge Hanzman is probably the closet. I miss ED and Bill Chalk, his trusty bailiff and fellow ex-MPD motorcycle cop.
ReplyDeleteDe la O is such an excellent judge that even when he rules against you, he makes it palatable.
ReplyDeleteRump. Have you no decency. This thing with Ms Ponte has gone on far enough with you zbd your Shumie buddies slandering her and suggesting that she is illiterate. Two circuit incumbents lost out this time and they lost for the same reason.. . . The perception of the bar that they treated lawyers and litigants badly. I know that you disclaim a friendship with one of them. Even though you served together as ASAs, but apparently your elitist, snobbish view is that a highly criticized judge should continue to serve unless he or she meets the your standards. You should stop this because you assume that other judges before whom you and your "enlightened" buddies will continue to respect you irrespective of how petty, vulgar, and chikdish you care to be. It is a cloak that does not fit well on a lawyer of your ability and stature Joe Klock
ReplyDelete"Can't we all just get along?"
ReplyDeleteNo.
Okay, so i thought about it egain. The kourt hearbye orders that it is not fare to have a juree risk its lives to hear this Parole Violation Heering. As such, the court reefers the state and defense to meediation to seddle this case.
ReplyDeleteSincerely,
Rosy " Your colored judge" Aponte
441- Judge Tunis was a PD so where does that put your allegations?
ReplyDeleteBTW my standards are that a circuit court should have taken a deposition not to mention tried a case before becoming a judge. Yup- that makes me an elitist. I also sort of hold to the standard that a judge should not have used runners to illegally solicit cases when a lawyer. You keep not addressing that because you have nothing to say about it. So yes, that makes me a Yalie/Harvard elitist.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny. I do not say a circuit judge should read the Times and LeMond daily like I do. Or that they read a book or so a week like I do. Or that they have tried over a hundred jury trials like I have. Or that be a polymath like I am. That they be able to intelligently discourse on cosmology, history, and be an oenophile. All I want is for them to have SOME experience and not be sleazy in their practice of law.
Henceforth I shall be changing the name of this blog to the Elitist Justice Building Blog.
4:41, I don't know how to break it to you, but the two incumbents losing elections had zero to do with "the perception of the bar that they treated lawyers and litigants badly." The voting public doesn't know and doesn't care about what the bar's perception is.
ReplyDeleteRumpole
ReplyDeleteYou forgot to tell us how many languages you speak
This de la O thing sounds vaguely familiar. Like when Rebull forced a non lawyer to pick a jury. Because of all the cases in his division, he had to try THAT particular case. No other litigants in that division needed Rebull more than this case.
ReplyDeleteIf you are forcing a person to a PVH via zoom when neither the state nor defense mind if the guy sits in jail, then you are just trying to crowbar THIS one particular case to a resolution. Seriously, arent there other litigants who need their cases resolved by de la O? Or maybe another division whose judge is swamped with work and could use a hand? In the time he took to draft this Order, he could have had a plea blitz and resolved 20 cases.
C'mon, lets be pragmatic here.
9:25 glad to oblige. Well obviously French because I read LeMonde every day- and that keeps me fluent. Surprisingly no real Spanish. But my real love has always been German. That's what I love to speak. So to recap, I am so much smarter than you because I am fluent in French, German, and obviously can write better is English than you and just about anyone else around.
ReplyDeleteSatisfied asshole?
I love it when Rumpole cleans Klock's clock.
ReplyDeleteHey Klocky- what the fuck do I have to do with any of this? Get your head out of your ass.
ReplyDeleteI haven't posted about any of this or done any post on this stupid blog in years. A friend told me you attacked me and once again I have had nothing to do with your pal Rosy or this blog in general for years so lay off.
Judge de la O was right. But his order was also shorter, crisper, better reasoned, and more articulate than the defendant's objection was. A vote by FACDL-Miami members on the point was no legal reason to argue in support of the objector, either.
ReplyDeleteI have thought for some time that the defense bar needed to give their rigid "no PVH on zoom" view more thought, as I don't think that the across-the-board opposition necessarily served all affected clients. But Judge de la O has now put the issue to bed.
Rumpole's praise of the judge was right on. (Btw, J dlO also avoided the prolixity which spoils otherwise witty stuff from Judge Hirsch.)
The position of FACDL-Miami is not “across the board opposition”. If a defendant and their attorney believe they will be better served by going forward to a PVH over Zoom, they can waive what we see as the Constitutional (and FRCP-based) right to have proceedings where the defendants liberty is at stake conducted in a physical courtroom and not a Zoom videoconference. Rights are waived every day in our system. Our issue is with Zoom PVHs being held over defense objection, and whatever arguments exist in favor of that happening, it is not reasonable to claim that one is that it is better for the criminal defendant.
DeleteDT
Why do so many cowards come on here an put so many fake facts as anonymous? Rumple, why dont you grow some guts and say your real name? Could it be because you are a coward? obviously. WHat the hell have you done that makes you so special? You love attacking women who work hard and do much more than you. GEt a life. I guess you dont get much at home when you stay up in the middle of night attacking people. your attacks against hard working folks is analogous to the Nazi soldiers.
ReplyDeleteRumpole: Why is it that someone with all of your brains and ability has never gotten anywhere in life?
ReplyDeleteWell moron, it's gotten me to the point where an idiot like you wastes his time and reads what I write. Have you ever thought about why you are so obsessed with the blog, other than the obvious great writing?
ReplyDelete3:16 see above. But while some women may be hard working, others take the short cut in trying to build their practice BY USING ILLEGAL RUNNERS TO GO TO ACCIDENT SCENES OR THE HOMES OF ACCIDENT VICTIMS TO SOLICT THEIR CASE. You call that hard working asshole? I call it a crime.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if the woman you are referencing is harder working than me, here is all you have to do- post one- just one case she tried to verdict. And I will respond with 100 cases tried to verdict. 100-1 I out work her. And in addition, that one case she tried to verdict will get my name revealed. So lets go jackass- show me the case - the one case she tried before a jury to verdict. Just one asshole. One. Only one. Show me the case.
By the way- I have done hundreds of things that makes me special- not the least of which is more than 145 jury trial wins- which means there are 145 people and their families who think I am special. Let's see....I created this blog which is special- so special that you obsess over it.
Hmm...I made mid seven figures trading stocks last year. That's special. I used the proceeds to buy a farmhouse in Europe. That's special. What else...hmmm...lots of things. I won a math bee in 8th grade. I solo sailed the north Atlantic from Georgia to Bristol, England when I was 19. That's special. Lots of stuff actually. What about you? Besides being able to put your head in your considerable ass what is special about you?
Rump, 9:25 here. I was just curious about how many languages you spoke since your on holiday in Europe. No offense meant, so why the lashing out. I actually thought I had. A clue yo your real identity. I was wrong, but do not deserve your cruel reply , do full of slings and arrows.
ReplyDeletePS I understand and support you use of a nome de plume
Do people still use "Comes Now?" Wow. Is this 1958?
ReplyDeleteMe doth think Rumpole protest too much. I doubt he's ever tried a case himself.
ReplyDelete