You want to Zoom.
We want to Zoom.
So who doesn't want to Zoom?
Spoiled Judges who like dragging people to Court for five-minute hearings, global warming (which they are not allowed to say in Florida anyway) be damned as the beneficial effects of keeping hundreds of lawyers off the roads and home does not matter to the Judge who likes to have a big audience watching them say "I'm sorry counsel, but I am just following the law. If you want it changed, that is role of the legislature not the judiciary" in the hope that the ruling reaches the Governor's office.
But here are the new changes to the applicable rules from your Florida Supreme Court (Motto: "Respecting precedent in all cases that do not hinder the Republican Agenda").
Zoom Opinion Disposition by Anonymous PbHV4H on Scribd
Wonderful. Not a fan of Zoom.
ReplyDeleteLawyers should appear in court for all hearings.
ReplyDeleteShowing up is the second hardest thing in the morning.
DeleteWait. Are they calling the Shumie for zoom or not ? I’m confused.
ReplyDelete"Lawyers should appear in court for all hearings." - dumbest comment ever.
ReplyDeleteThe economics of physically attending civil calendar call for a 5 minute hearing are outrageous. Either the client gets billed well beyond the true value of the appearance, or the lawyer takes a bath on the time. Zoom has made the process better for clients and for lawyers. And that's just one example.
There is little need for physical appearance in civil cases unless there is an evidentiary hearing or a sanctions proceeding where the court wants to impress on a party the severity of the matter. But that's probably less than 5% of hearings in civil court.
Are you on drugs? You must be a lazy lawyer. Show up to court. This zoom is bullsheet.
DeleteThis should be mandatory reading for anyone applying to law school: https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/cew-roi_law.pdf
ReplyDeleteLaw schools should be required to make students sign a waiver acknowledging that they’ve read it before they can borrow money for law school.
The bottom line, this is a ranking of law schools by income 4 years after young lawyers graduate from law school. Here are the Florida schools (full chart starts on page 63):
#38. UF: $87,600 median income after student loan payments deducted.
#89. FIU: $70,700 median income after student loan payments deducted.
#92. UM: $70,400 median income after student loan payments deducted.
#93. FSU: $70,200 median income after student loan payments deducted.
#117. Stetson: $63,900 median income after student loan payments deducted.
#139. Nova: $58,200 median income after student loan payments deducted.
#169. Ave Maria: $49,500 median income after student loan payments deducted.
#171. St. Thomas: $48,800 median income after student loan payments deducted.
Motion to suppress in the Courtney Clenney case was granted today, excluding evidence due to prosecutorial misconduct. Does anyone have a copy of the order, as it was not posted on-line?
ReplyDeleteThat’s not right. Cruz didn’t publish full order but it was because state didn’t prove the Clenney knew they were committing a crime, not because of misconduct. The State had no reason to know of any kind of attorney client relationship
DeleteKeep drinking the cool aid…or is that vodka?
DeleteThe Court’s Order gave the state the benefit of the doubt that “albeit perhaps unknowingly” - when you have to write an order with two qualifiers like that re whether state knew parents represented, that is an issue. Additionally, if the state had no idea that Clenny’s parents were represented by counsel why contained within the search warrant for the parents phone is a whole discussion on a attorney, client privilege and why the crime product exception applies to the parents. The Court have you a gift with that order. I can bet you the state will not walk away from that evidence and compound the issue potentially ending up in yet another set of bar referrals and more misconduct litigation. Why spend taxpayer time and resources on this?
DeleteThe fact that these incompetent and dangerous fools (ASAs anonymously posting here) are still defending their actions and twisting themselves into pretzels in order to defend the indefensible tells us all we need to know. Some of the people are so blindly corrupt that they can’t even tell when judges, like Wolfson and Cruz, have gone easy on them. But that’s ok, they won’t learn, and they’ll keep shitting on that office and the other honorable and honest ASAs, until someone comes along and cleanses that place.
DeleteAt 6:07, you’re referring to the iCloud warrants?… because if not then what you’re saying doesn’t make sense
Delete8:39 sounds like a Pepsi or Coke maybe a Fresca?
DeleteThird DCA reverses Judge Hirsch on a confession suppression.
ReplyDeletehttps://3dca.flcourts.gov/content/download/2436460/opinion/Opinion_2022-2019.pdf
Rump that’s it. I’m never dating another girl named Parker. This is like the third one. They are all batshit crazy. I’m done. It always stares off good. Hot. Sexy. Sweet. Then they decompensate. And it’s all down hill. B shit crazy.
ReplyDeleteA girl named Eve from Pasadena?
Deletelittle Joe from Kokomo!!!
ReplyDeleteThe state attorney’s office is proud to announce the hiring of Hawk Tua! Girl as our new director if social media. She will bring a level of sophistication to what is already recognized as the best social media platform of any prosecutors office in the nation.
ReplyDeleteCan I get a State is seeking max everyone?
Can I get a state is filing pre trial detention ?
Can I get a state objects to the discovery motion?..
And now everyone on your feet for a 1…2…3. HAWK TUA!!!!
Yo yo yo fake SM OUTTA HERE
First we had the Fake Stephen Talpins now it’s the Fake Stephen Mitchell. Miami is in bad shape. All these fakes. Is there anyone that’s real?
DeleteJust want to say the best team in America has the best prosecutor in America. Kudos to Kathy. I love you Kathy!!! You’re the best Kathy! Kathy did I say I love you so much. Kathy Kathy oh Kathy. I have dreams of Kathy. I wake up think about Kathy.
DeleteRump must be in trial ( hopefully not on trial for his subversive blog) because he’s a bit behind on recent news:
ReplyDelete1. The Pearson - Miller interview on the Corey Smith case…interesting tidbits
2. The Clenney order…the SAO is the gift that keeps on giving
3. SAO recent hires….a former ASA, turned APD, from north Florida, to head “training unit” (must be a new unit) and another to be part of public records….reform in the making
4. Memogate at the Broward SAO after ASA forges an internal document….she’ll be hired by KFR before the end of the week
Details?
DeletePearson - Miller interview: https://www.youtube.com/live/nZr8NGLX7QE?si=U90b7VWgFr7lQjO-
DeleteBroward SAO Memogate: http://www.jaablaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Screen-Shot-2024-06-24-at-6.10.41-PM.png
"Lawyers should appear in court for all hearings." This might be the dumbest comment ever posted on this blog.
ReplyDeleteThe economics of attending 5 minute calendar call in person are not workable. Either the client gets charged way beyond the value of the hearing, or the lawyer takes a bath on the time. Zoom hearings fixed this.
In civil cases (at least), in person hearings should only be required for evidentiary matters and for sanctions hearings. That's about 5% of civil court hearings.
Mike Grieco suspended from practice for one year by Florida Supreme Court today.
ReplyDeleteSend me the cleeny order.
ReplyDeleteNever a dull moment #becausemiami
ReplyDeleteGuess all that shady stuff finally caught up to DJ Esquire Grieco……
ReplyDeleteWho cares about Grieco? I’d like to see some others suspended for a year or two.
DeleteDisbarred **
Delete#freeGrieco
Delete8:08AM:
ReplyDeleteJudge Cruz excluded the evidence because the State Attorney violated attorney-client privilege. The State argued there was a crime fraud exception - an argument not based in the actual law. Judge Cruz found that attorney client privilege was violated and the exception did not apply.
The State used the evidence that it illegally obtained in an affidavit to get a search warrant for the home of a defense expert - who is married to a defense lawyer. Let's stop pretending this is anything but more misconduct.
ACP is an evidentiary privilege. Bigger question is why a defense attorney had a stolen laptop to begin with
DeleteMisconduct?… it’s more like illegal abuse of power. Corruption maybe? But hey it’s the SAO it’s “Win at all cost”
DeleteWait The Sate used evidence that it illegally obtained? But isn’t The State the good guys that go after criminals? I’m so confused?
Delete9:36PM - Hi Khalil! Or is that Abuhoff?
DeletePlease address him as Professor Abuhoff.
Delete@4:07 both were in murder trials this week, doubt it was either of them
DeleteDon’t know what’s scarier….both handling murder trials or posting here defending their misdeeds when handling murder trials
DeleteShocker on the State v Myers case. Not really.
ReplyDeleteIn State of Louisiana v Demesme, the defendant said, “if y'all, this is how I feel, if y'all think I did it, I know that I didn't do it so why don't you just give me a lawyer dog cause this is not what's up.”
The lack of placement of a comma after the word "dog" (which was probably actually really "dawg") in the written transcript created a legal snafu of epic proportions. The state appeals court affirmed the denial of his confession suppression motion.
The Louisiana Supreme Court declined review, but in so doing, Justice Scott Crichton penned a brief opinion concurring in the court’s decision to decline review. He wrote that “the defendant’s ambiguous and equivocal reference to a ‘lawyer dog’ does not constitute an invocation of counsel that warrants termination of the interview.”
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/la-supreme-court/1878711.html
Poor Fido unknowingly used to trample Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.
The fact that the justice wrote this in all seriousness back in 2017, and not in jest, is a facepalm moment.
The Fifth Amendment just isn't what it used to be. No surprise in the State v Myers decision from the Third. At this point, as a defendant, you probably have to cross your arms, repeat, "I want a lawyer" over and over again ignoring the police saying, "Okay, last chance, you're in a heap of trouble and I won't be able to help you if you don't tell me your side of the story" - until the police tire of hearing you say it and finally leave the interview room.
And if they should come back and ask again, continue, rinse and repeat until you are taken away to a cell.
To all of the nonlawyer public: "Know your rights, it's shut the **** up, Friday!"
before the warrants were obtained sao asked frank directly who should be screened off from phone dumps to avoid breaking attorney client privilege. frank and sabrina failed to mention oh yeah we rep the parents too. it is convenient they had the retainer agreement suddenly appear after arrests were made
ReplyDeleteFantastic. Well done. We applaud you.
DeleteGrab a Fresca.
Delete2:48 pm….the Spin Master
DeleteStop trying to justify your corruption.
DeleteAbsolutely corrupted office.
ReplyDeleteUnethical use of power.
ReplyDeleteThe state asked defense who should be screened off as it related only to a search of Courtney’s phone, not parents phone. Had the defense known you were reading messages between the parents and defense attorneys, the list would have been longer. How many more things will you guys be lying about????
ReplyDeleteI’m surprised that a judge would sign a search warrant for the parents iCloud accounts where the warrant went out of its way to explain why the crime fraud exception applied to any attorney client messages that would be found and also said that because the parents were listed state witness they were not entitled to attorney representation or privilege. If I were the judge I would have ordered everything be returned to me and follow the proper procedures for a crime fraud hearing including that the state not use the evidence at issue as part of its proof of crime fraud. Whichever judge signed that warrant needs a primer in privilege and how to safeguard it even if a search warrant is at issue. It’s really not that complicated.
ReplyDeleteJudge shopping, perhaps? I’d be curious to know who the judge was.
DeleteWtf!! A determination of whether crime fraud applies can’t be made unilaterally in a warrant written by the state. That is a judicial determination after a hearing as set forth in US v. Zolin. This sounds like it was mishandled from the beginning and they are scrambling to cover.
ReplyDeleteWhy did Mike Greico get suspended?
ReplyDeleteBecause he’s a lying sack of shit. He should be disbarred.
Delete#FreeGrieco
DeleteWhich judge signed the iCloud warrants?
ReplyDeleteThere seems to have been 3 iCloud related search warrants. The first signed by Cabarga, the second by Wolfson and the third by Glazer. The one signed by Glazer is here:
Deletehttps://www.scribd.com/document/703153200/702721982-Kim-Clenney-Redacted
Which Judge signed these warrants???
ReplyDeleteI have little faith in judges actually reading warrants comprehensively before they sign them.
ReplyDeleteThey don’t if it’s after hours they are high or drunk.
DeleteYou all are like children conflating a whole bunch of stuff. The iCloud warrants outlined PC for the parents’ commingling of their accounts with the girl. The warrant that address attorney-client stuff was the arrest warrants from them based on MDPD’s investigation. The state never went looking for info on laptop, they were trying to get into the girl’s iPhone and access messages between her and her mom for the murder as well as the girl’s messages about the nature of her relationship with the boyfriend. You all need to get a grip on reality.
ReplyDeleteHere’s your reality 1:56 pm, another judge spanked your office, your case, your brethren for practices that were less than lawful, ethical, etc. Or are we conflating these as well? Idiot!
DeleteBlah blah blah blah …go sip on a Fresca.
DeleteGlazer or Cabraga
ReplyDeleteI bet it wasn't one of the adults in the room. Not Wolfson, Tinker-Mendez, De la O, Venzer, Hirsch or Hersch. It was a young or old Federalist for sure.
ReplyDeleteWolfson reviewed the iCloud warrant
DeleteWe all need a little Shumie in our lives.
ReplyDeleteWhat about bringing back the Big Easy E Elortegui from his retirement estate in Maine to run the SAO and have a steady hand in the tiler for six months. Deal with the MVZ scandal. Bring some professionalism to an office that sadly is lacking in it.
That’s are some of my thoughts.
Just sayin
1:36 you need to realize that each time you speak you make Rundle look like a fool. You violated the privilege and the court found that you did. Cut your losses and move on.
ReplyDeleteMs or Mr State Attorney. You, with a straight face, are calling us children when you have pretty much fucked this case up beyond saving. Whether the privilege issues were mentioned in the search warrant or arrest warrant doesn’t matter. What matters is you knew about the potential for invading the Attorney client privilege, admitted it, didn’t give a shit about it, made no provision for protecting it and you were dishonest with the court. You are ignorant and will continue to bring Rundle down with your absolute incompetence.
ReplyDeleteShout out to Gary. Gary you know who you are your are. That was was amazing work.
ReplyDeleteGary my man! You are amazing!!!
ReplyDelete1:56 your a horrible corrupt ASA. Infringing on people’s rights like that. We might as well rip the constitution. Abuse of power.
ReplyDeleteCan someone publish the bar complaints for MVZ and Mitchell?
ReplyDeleteDid someone mention the SAO is paying for an attorney to represent Mitchell’s bar complaint? If true can we request the attorney’s bill to the SAO? How much is this costing the tax payers?
ReplyDeleteThe level of ignorance displayed in the comments is at times amazing. Glazer didn't sign a search warrany she signed the arrest warrant. Can you really not tell the difference?
ReplyDelete11:37, careful not to miss the forest from the trees.
DeleteDid I mention that Kathy is the best? I just woke up and thought I’d publish an article about how great Kathy is. Think I’ll call her.
ReplyDeleteThe SA is paying for bar counsel at a minimum for both Mitchell and Hubner. The amount of, and who pays for, attorneys fees is not privileged and never has been. Just ask Khalil who sent Prieto’s retainer agreement in the Only Fans case to the Herald with some jokes for good measure. Yes we can request all of the information and should be provided it. As for a bar complaint, they don’t become public until the bar finds PC. That hasn’t happened yet. Right now the Bar is reviewing the Wolfson order and ordering (or ordered) responses from the 3 musketeers. Once they review the responses they will decide whether PC exists to order something more formal. The Bar news recently put out an article that explains the process in detail.
ReplyDeleteIf they are paying for Mitchell they are paying for MVZ and Hubner also.
ReplyDeleteThis needs to be audited. We need transparency. Fiscal irresponsibility.
DeleteWhat a waste of money.
DeleteWhere does the money come from to pay for it? What’s the bill?
Delete11:37 it seems like you are the ignorant one and needlessly throwing Glazer under the bus —> Arrest warrants for parents: “Subjects 2 and 3 are not clients of Individuals 1, 2, 3, or 4 as defined by section 90.502. Subjects 2 and 3, as listed witnesses in Subject 1's underlying case, were subject to legal process and therefore could not be represented by Individuals 1, 2, 3, or 4. Accordingly, there is no attorney-client privilege contained within the messages. Additionally, because the conversations were sought or obtained to enable or aid
ReplyDeletethe commission of a crime, there is no attorney-client privilege to the conversations.” How could the state ever ethically put that language in any warrant, whether a search warrant or an arrest warrant? It’s not accurate and not the law. Just because someone is a listed state witness subject to judicial process does not mean they are not entitled to representation by a lawyer. You misled a judge into signing an arrest warrant that contained inaccurate legal conclusions re the AC privilege and the crime fraud exception. You misled a judge into signing the iCloud search warrants for the same reasons. The search warrant evidence should have been returned to the court under seal for litigation re: ACP and crime fraud. State does not get to make that decision. Once that litigation was completed an evaluation of the remaining evidence should have been undertaken by the state to see whether a crime still remained to support the arrest warrants. Judge Stuzin got it right in her ruling. The evidence was illegally obtained in violation of the privilege and ruled in defense favor. Next comes the misconduct hearing
Go GW!!
DeleteDefense needs to get Arrojo involved. He is a voice of reason and Rundle trusts him.
DeleteThanks Jude!
DeleteHey Jude….don’t let me down.
DeleteBar counsel are probably Rothman, Tannebaum, and another of the usual suspects. So they’re well represented.
ReplyDeleteJust wait until the Big Easy E Elortegui gets his hands on the office. Top heads will roll. Ethical lawyers will be hired. A return to high level ethical standards will be reinstated. State seeking max will not be heard and trial taxes will not be imposed. In other words - a very good ethical prosecutorial office.
ReplyDeleteYo yo yo Fake Stephen Talpins in da house on your Sunday night. We got ASAs prepping Monday calendars.
ReplyDeleteCan I get a STATE CERTIFIES JAIL y’all?
Can I get a VICTIM WANTS MAX y’all?
Can I get a TRIAL TAX y’all?
Let’s hear it for the most fair and ethical prosecution office in all the land. Put your hands together and get on your feet and stomp and holla for your STATE ATTORNEY a 2024 ethical prosecutor of the year finalist * KATHY KEEP EM IN KUSTODY FERNANDEZ RUNDLE
woo hoo y’all.
* The Michael Von Zamft Ethics In Prosecution Institute. All rights reserved.
Jose the ethics czar has entered the chat.
DeleteBar counsel - Jacobs Wyler and Scholtz. Those are the go tos if state paying. Wyler repped Aaronberg in something.
ReplyDeleteComplete waste of tax payers money.
Delete6:57 is he the one who threatened to run during the last election? Who is that?
ReplyDeleteAre you from the SAO community outreach AKA the secret political police?
DeleteDoes the SAO want to censor this blog? I’m pretty sure the characters that are mentioned on a daily basis would like to shut this down.
ReplyDeleteKathy’s political police is watching
DeleteYeah. Daisy the cow watches all social media and blogs.
DeleteSpoke with Daniel Wexler over coffee this morning. Things don’t look good for the Bar defense team.
ReplyDeleteJose is the man. Sorta like the James Bond of state attorneys. A good left winger.
ReplyDeleteI like Jose but your comment doesn’t make sense all the chiefs swing left.
Delete