New findings indicate that swapping sugar (calories) for fake sugar (no calories) may not be the best diet trick. Eating artificially sweetened foods may actually make you eat more than you would have had you eaten the regular version. Experiments conducted at Purdue University Investigative Behavior Research Center found that a group of rats fed saccharin-sweetened yogurt ate more calories, gained more weight and put on more body fat than a group fed yogurt sweetened with sugar. The study's authors explain that artificial sweeteners may affect the body's ability to regulate calorie intake and metabolism.
When you see something that is not right, not fair, find a way to get in the way and cause trouble. Congressman John Lewis
JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG
Thursday, July 15, 2010
SWEET REVENGE
New findings indicate that swapping sugar (calories) for fake sugar (no calories) may not be the best diet trick. Eating artificially sweetened foods may actually make you eat more than you would have had you eaten the regular version. Experiments conducted at Purdue University Investigative Behavior Research Center found that a group of rats fed saccharin-sweetened yogurt ate more calories, gained more weight and put on more body fat than a group fed yogurt sweetened with sugar. The study's authors explain that artificial sweeteners may affect the body's ability to regulate calorie intake and metabolism.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
MAYBE THERE'S STILL HOPE
``He was twice the legal limit. He should have known better,'' VanderGiesen said of Spencer's blood-alcohol level. ``However, he can't be locked up the rest of his life . . . These are young guys who all had something going for them. Everybody lost here.''
Here's our point- we all have for sometime now laboured in a criminal court system where the state almost always seeks the maximum penalty for most serious cases. The fact is that while many serious cases do mandate the maximum penalty, not all of them do.
Sometimes good people do bad things for inexplicable reasons.
Sometimes people who are not criminals commit criminal acts.
It used to be that participants in the criminal justice system laboured for justice. That included a just sentence. This was before the age of political correctness- and before the time that a victim's subjective (and fully understandable) desire for the maximum punishment outweighed what we all otherwise knew was a just sentence-
It is therefore refreshing to see prosecutors act with an understanding that this defendant- whose crime was horrible- does not deserve to have his life completely ruined.
This is a difficult proposition to defend. A young man made a tragic decision to drive impaired. In doing so, he killed his friend. He needs to be punished and its easy to say that he should be sentenced to prison for the rest of his life because he took a life.
We are not suggesting that people who drive impaired should not be punished. We are not in any way diminishing the never ending pain the parents and family of the victim are suffering. We are applauding the result which in some basic way recognizes that two wrongs don't make a right.
For over twenty years now the criminal justice system has been a pendulum swinging towards retribution and excessive sentencing . The momentum of this pendulum has been driven by politicians running for office on a "get tough on crime" platform. Not many people get elected by espousing the more sophisticated view that the punishment should fit the crime.
However, in this case, Judge Marin and two prosecutors in his division decided to not do the simple thing- which would have been to insist on the maximum sentence of 30 years. Judge Marin and the ASAs did the right thing. They sought a sentence that was fair and just. These two prosecutors sought justice, not vengeance. They are to be congratulated.
The unfortunate thing about this story is just how surprising this result is.
See You In Court.
Monday, July 12, 2010
HATCH TO VOTE NO
The first important standard is experience. Ms. Kagan has never before served as a judge — and, in addition, has little legal experience of any kind. Over the Supreme Court’s long history, justices who were nominated without past judicial experience have had an average of 21 years of legal practice. Ms. Kagan has two. Her experience is instead academic and political.
GOAAAAALLLL!!
Saturday, July 10, 2010
TEA TIME WITH RUMPOLE
Thursday, July 08, 2010
3rd DCA ROUNDUP-KEEPING COOL EDITION
It's hot. You're tired. Your client is cranky. The AC isn't keeping up with the heat and the pool feels like a warm bath. Welcome to Miami in July.

On May 13, 2009, before the present case was filed, this Court reversed a trial court order permitting PD11 to decline representation in all future third-degree felony cases by reason of PD11’s excessive caseload. See State v. Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, 12 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009), review granted, No. SC09-1181 (Fla. May 19, 2010). We held then, and continue to hold, that while a trial court must determine whether counsel is sufficiently competent, this determination must occur on a case-by-case basis. Id. at 802.
COME ON JUDGE MILLER- BE A JUDGE.
Here's the thing about Judges we don't understand. They spend all this time trying to get elected or appointed, and then when they get on the bench they don't want to do the scut work. It's "Tee-times" "and who's getting the check at Joes?" that they all worry about.
Rumpole's Fourth Rule of Law: When you rely on someone else to do the dirty work, it only makes matters worse.
The appellant appeals from the trial court’s order striking his motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 as facially insufficient. The order, taken verbatim from the State’s response, strikes the appellant’s motion without prejudice for failure to meet the requirements of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851(e)(2)(C).
Here's a judicial practice tip:
when you deny someone's motion, you need to cite THE CORRECT STATUTE!
Miller gets himself reversed, and we think publicly humiliated by cutting and pasting (or just old fashioned copying off of someone else's paper) from the State's response. No one bothered to read the statute. It's called fact checking. After he typed his order, did he bother to review it and double check the statute before signing it? NOPE.
And for that Judge David Miller, you get your own wing in RUMPOLE'S HALL OF SHAME. It's the "not checking your work and copying from the State" wing, and hopefully it will not get over crowded.
See you in court, where because of our lovely robed readers, there's never a dearth of things to chuckle about.
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
7/7
Adrien was accused of ethnic electioneering when he tried to run as Peter “Camacho” Adrien.
Adrien did not return calls for comment by deadline.
The poll also offered a glimpse of what could lie ahead for those in contested races.
While Adrien received the lowest scores of any sitting judge, his opponent received the highest scores of any judicial candidate.
Miami attorney Samantha Ruiz Cohen said she was humbled after hearing that more than 85 percent considered her qualified to sit on the bench, and she hopes the general public will trust the views of legal insiders in making their choices at the polls.
“Especially because I’m running against an incumbent, I think it speaks volumes, and I’m very humbled by these results and the support. The results speak for themselves. They really do,” she said. “It’s a strong message that the lawyers are sending out.”
In another race, Assistant Public Defender Manny Alvarez scored slightly better than the sitting judge he’s running against, Circuit Judge Edward Newman. Alvarez received an approval of 81 percent to Newman’s 78 percent.
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
TUESDAY JULY 6
5 ... Police Department, and you have provided
6 me proof of service for both of the officers, and the
8 What I would do is: Hold the subpoenas for two
9 working the days -- the second working day will be July
10 7th, 2010 -- for the officers to provide good just
11 cause. If the officer does, I will continue the
12 hearing with a permit, if eligible, and maintain the
13 subpoenas in effect; however, should the officers not
14 provide good just cause within the two working days,
15 you may seek enforcement of the subpoenas, and a
16 failure to appear will not invalidate the suspension
17 any longer.
18 If Counsel -- I'm sorry -- Counsel has the
19 responsibility to contact this office, after the two
20 working days of this review, to verify whether good
21 just cause was received or not. And, if not, you must
23 seeking enforcement of the subpoenas on ...
24 and ....
25 The record shall remain open for ten days, which
page 2
1 will be July 13, 2010, for the sole purpose of Counsel
2 providing written proof of seeking enforcement of the
4 If written proof of seeking enforcement is
5 received timely, a continuance will be granted without
6 a permit.
7 If written proof of seeking enforcement is not
8 provided by July 13, 2010, a final order will be
9 entered within seven working days of the close of this
10 review.
Saturday, July 03, 2010
HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY

Thursday, July 01, 2010
3RD DCA ROUNDUP-CORNERED EDITION
And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them....For in seven days I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground.
ITEM: BROWARD STATE ATTORNEYS OFFICE FLOODED. AGAIN.
ITEM: JUDGE PETER ADRIEN WORST IN BAR POLL.
The DBR reports that Judge Peter Adrien has scored the lowest bar poll rating for this last survey of lawyers.
We cannot confirm that 4 out of 5 lawyers indicated that they would rather have a "drunken sea slug" preside over their case. However, we can confirm that we have received a threatening letter from the Society of Sea Slugs threatening legal action unless we remove their name from the same paragraph of the embattled jurist.
DHSMV DISASTER!
Dear Rumpole:
The rumors appear to be true, with confirmation of this policy change having been received across the state from both hearing and police officers. Perhaps we will need to attempt to re-open the federal lawsuit filed in 1990 challenging the constitutionality of the statute [322.2615].
In their reply brief, counsel for DHSMV responded to the brief Scott Fingerhut and I authored by stating that "[a]micus challenges the constitutionality of section 322.2615 on the ground that it denies confrontation of the evidence and cross-examination of witnesses, including the arresting officer. This argument is fallacious [because the plaintiff's] suspension was invalidated when the arresting officer failed to appear at the hearing." See SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES IN ESSEN V. MELLON, Case No. 90-2243-Civ-Moreno, at p. 9 (emphasis added). I am no expert on the subject but I intend to see if we can file a motion to re-open that matter before Judge Moreno after I return from my vacation.
Enjoy the holiday!
Bobby Reiff