Judge Milton Hirsch, fresh off a well deserved re-election, declared Florida's Death Penalty Statute (Motto: "Send em all to death row and let the fed courts sort it out on Habeas") unconstitutional.
In the milieu of the machinery of death, there are various legal reasons why Florida's death penalty statute, to use a technical legal term, sucks. See, for example, Justice Breyer's courageous dissent in Glossip v. Gross, which raises fundamental Eighth Amendment issues.
But Judge Hirsch, no legislator on the bench he, stuck to the narrow issue of the lack of the requirement of unanimity in the death penalty statute. Where only North Korea, Mars, and some counties in Alabama allow for the execution of its citizens by a non-unanimous jury verdict, Florida proudly embraces its heritage of allowing a minority of its citizens to kill a majority of defendants, as long as they are mostly minorities.
So with no further ado, and with no quotes from Guy De Maupassant, Alan Alda, Buzz Aldrin, or Disraeli, we present the Honorable Judge Milton Hirsch's strike for the humanity and dignity of our troubled state:
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Monday, May 09, 2016
WE BUY INK BY THE BARREL
Mark Twain wrote: "You should never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel"
And we will update those wise words by adding "or someone who writes a widely-read, not to mention exceptionally well written blog."
But not everyone reads Twain, or follows his wise words.
And thus we received a comment by the suddenly popular Daniel Espinsoa, who can't leave well enough - or in his case-a monumental screw-up, alone.
Danny left us this comment which can be found in the preceding (the one below this one, Danny) post:
Danny Espinosa said...
To set the record straight, we posted the entire email you sent us, and below, is the entire response we sent you. Why you feel this is significant, is beyond us. But the mere fact we do not deign to correspond to our legion of fans personally, does not mean we have forsaken our desire, nay, our right to respond in public when someone sends a smug, somewhat threatening email.
Furthermore, the blog post in which we responded to the email from Danny Espinosa does not in any way portend (appear to be, Danny) to be a reprint of an email from us to you. Rather, as we said in our email to you, we don't correspond privately with fans, readers, or disgruntled, putative judicial candidates. Thus we replied more fully, publicly. Capiche? ( See below Danny, because we're gonna make ya an offer ya can't refuse).
But in the interest of making sure the full story is out (although why you want this to have legs, is beyond us. The DBR just ran a story today, and quite frankly one would think a lawyer who cannot read the rules and regulations properly wouldn't want that sort of thing to be publicly discussed ad infinitim (again, and again, forever).
Now, finally, to address your comment that we write "posts and comments" as if you wrote them. Let us explain to you how a blog works. We write the posts. Each post here identifies the individual who wrote it. There is nothing we wrote in any manner in which the post on the front of the blog appears in any way, shape or form, to have been words written by you.
In the comments section WE DO NOT WRITE THE COMMENTS. We will admit, Danny, that wiser men (and women) than you have also somehow misapprehended what is in the comments section and from time to time someone emails us asking why we wrote something in the comments section.
The comments are written by readers.
The comments are written by readers.
The comments are written by readers.
Rinse. Repeat.
Now, because you appear to be new to this whole blogging thing, (BTW- there's this really cool thing called "you-tube" which has videos you can view on-line, and something fascinating called twitter, but you cannot be as verbose as we tend to be on it) let us clue you in on some rules we have. We don't allow ad hominem attacks (....never mind). We don't allow personal information to be posted in the comments section. But when a public figure (and Danny, when you tried your best to run for judge, you became a public figure) does something noteworthy (and sadly, here in South Florida the noteworthy stuff tends to be more "Danny Espinosa stuff" than "Barak Obama stuff") we comment on it and allow our readers to comment on it. So to the extent you are upset with the comments, you have to live with it. Or as we say in criminal court "don't apply for judge and screw it up twice, if you can't do the time", or something like that.
And finally, we say this. We don't know you. Your bar profile lists that you have been a member of the Bar for a whopping six years. We have cases older than that. We litigate for a living. Which means we deal all the time with judges who were lawyers for five or six years, couldn't make it, and then all of the sudden think they are the lord's gift to jurisprudence when they don a black robe. Meanwhile, our client's life is on the line, and they've never done or heard of a "Franks hearing" or a "Garcia hearing" and are looking at the prosecutor for help. So you will have to understand if we have a pre-disposed bias against someone who has been a lawyer less than the average career of a NFL running back, who somehow wants to be a judge.
Okay. Here are the emails in their full glory. Enjoy.
If you want to be a judge, you can do it. There is precedent for this. Judge Newman ran for judge before he was qualified to do so. He was knocked out of the race, and came back a few years later and won. So, Danny, there are second acts in American Politics and in the Miami Judiciary. We would also refer you to the case of Judge Al Sepe, but you probably weren't born when all that went down. Google it. He resigned the bench under a cloud of suspicion, ran again a few years later for county court, and then was appointed to the circuit court. All is not lost. Perseverance has its rewards.
Danny, should you wish to continue this, or explain anything, including the errors that led to you not being able to qualify, we make you this offer: THE BLOG. Send us an email, and as long as it follows certain rules (see above) it will be posted UNEDITED.
See you in court, but just not on the bench for a few years.
And we will update those wise words by adding "or someone who writes a widely-read, not to mention exceptionally well written blog."
But not everyone reads Twain, or follows his wise words.
And thus we received a comment by the suddenly popular Daniel Espinsoa, who can't leave well enough - or in his case-a monumental screw-up, alone.
Danny left us this comment which can be found in the preceding (the one below this one, Danny) post:
Danny Espinosa said...
Hi, Rumpole. It would be great if you were to report the truth, including the entire email you sent me, instead of omitting certain things and adding language in your response that you did not send to me. Also, it's interesting how you write posts (and comments) as if I wrote them. In the end, it says a lot about who you are when you celebrate the mistakes of others. I wish you the best. But I hope going forward you wish the best for everyone, not just me.
To set the record straight, we posted the entire email you sent us, and below, is the entire response we sent you. Why you feel this is significant, is beyond us. But the mere fact we do not deign to correspond to our legion of fans personally, does not mean we have forsaken our desire, nay, our right to respond in public when someone sends a smug, somewhat threatening email.
Furthermore, the blog post in which we responded to the email from Danny Espinosa does not in any way portend (appear to be, Danny) to be a reprint of an email from us to you. Rather, as we said in our email to you, we don't correspond privately with fans, readers, or disgruntled, putative judicial candidates. Thus we replied more fully, publicly. Capiche? ( See below Danny, because we're gonna make ya an offer ya can't refuse).
But in the interest of making sure the full story is out (although why you want this to have legs, is beyond us. The DBR just ran a story today, and quite frankly one would think a lawyer who cannot read the rules and regulations properly wouldn't want that sort of thing to be publicly discussed ad infinitim (again, and again, forever).
Now, finally, to address your comment that we write "posts and comments" as if you wrote them. Let us explain to you how a blog works. We write the posts. Each post here identifies the individual who wrote it. There is nothing we wrote in any manner in which the post on the front of the blog appears in any way, shape or form, to have been words written by you.
In the comments section WE DO NOT WRITE THE COMMENTS. We will admit, Danny, that wiser men (and women) than you have also somehow misapprehended what is in the comments section and from time to time someone emails us asking why we wrote something in the comments section.
The comments are written by readers.
The comments are written by readers.
The comments are written by readers.
Rinse. Repeat.
Now, because you appear to be new to this whole blogging thing, (BTW- there's this really cool thing called "you-tube" which has videos you can view on-line, and something fascinating called twitter, but you cannot be as verbose as we tend to be on it) let us clue you in on some rules we have. We don't allow ad hominem attacks (....never mind). We don't allow personal information to be posted in the comments section. But when a public figure (and Danny, when you tried your best to run for judge, you became a public figure) does something noteworthy (and sadly, here in South Florida the noteworthy stuff tends to be more "Danny Espinosa stuff" than "Barak Obama stuff") we comment on it and allow our readers to comment on it. So to the extent you are upset with the comments, you have to live with it. Or as we say in criminal court "don't apply for judge and screw it up twice, if you can't do the time", or something like that.
And finally, we say this. We don't know you. Your bar profile lists that you have been a member of the Bar for a whopping six years. We have cases older than that. We litigate for a living. Which means we deal all the time with judges who were lawyers for five or six years, couldn't make it, and then all of the sudden think they are the lord's gift to jurisprudence when they don a black robe. Meanwhile, our client's life is on the line, and they've never done or heard of a "Franks hearing" or a "Garcia hearing" and are looking at the prosecutor for help. So you will have to understand if we have a pre-disposed bias against someone who has been a lawyer less than the average career of a NFL running back, who somehow wants to be a judge.
Okay. Here are the emails in their full glory. Enjoy.
|
7:54 AM (9 hours ago)
 | | ||
We’ll be in touch soon, Howard.
Very Truly Yours,
Danny
Daniel Alberto Espinosa, Esq.
ESPINOSA LAW GROUP
10625 N. Kendall Drive
Miami, FL 33176-1510
Direct Line: 305.655.1501
|
11:24 AM (6 hours ago)
| | ||
sorry. We don't correspond with fans
BTW, your email called us "The National Enquirer of blogs" which we find some what offensive, but Donald Trump does not. The NE should only be as well written as this humble blog is.
Danny, should you wish to continue this, or explain anything, including the errors that led to you not being able to qualify, we make you this offer: THE BLOG. Send us an email, and as long as it follows certain rules (see above) it will be posted UNEDITED.
See you in court, but just not on the bench for a few years.
BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE A DIME
WE HAVE A NEW FAN!!!!
We received this email today:
"Brother, can you spare a dime?" perhaps the best comment we received, that summarized the failed attempt of Daniel Espinosa, Esq., to qualify to run against Judge Rosa Rodriguez. As detailed in these blog pages, Mr. Espinosa tried twice to qualify against Judge Rodriguez.
The first attempt was when Espinosa sent a check from his office account to pay for the filing fee. Filing fees can only be paid from campaign accounts.
Swing and a miss. Strike one.
Mr. Espinosa was then apparently able to find his way to the bank and fill out the documents in a successful manner that enabled to him to open a campaign account. Congratulations! We're very proud of you.
Mr. Espinosa then sent the clerk a new check from his campaign account. He was on his way to fulfilling his dream job as a Judge. But there was one, insy, binsy, teeny, weeny problem. He wasn't a day late, but he was twenty cents short.
The check was for the wrong amount. And there was no more time to get a new check to the clerk's office in Tallahassee.
Swing and a miss, strikes two and three. You're out. Do not pass Go. Do not run for Judge. Do not collect over three quarters of a million dollars in salary and benefits for the next six years.
"Of all the words of song and pen, the saddest are these....It Might Have Been."
Rumpole's Choice for Judges:
In the upcoming election, we are endorsing the following candidates.
Milena Abreu over Fred "Trump" Seraphin.
Judge Wendell Graham.
Judge Ed Newman.
Judge George Sarduy.
Judge Robert Luck.
We haven't made up our minds in the other races. In most of them, we aren't familiar with any of the candidates.
See You In Court.
We received this email today:
|
7:54 AM (3 hours ago)
| | ||
We’ll be in touch soon, Howard.
Very Truly Yours,
Danny
Daniel Alberto Espinosa, Esq.
ESPINOSA LAW GROUP
10625 N. Kendall Drive
Miami, FL 33176-1510
Direct Line: 305.655.1501
Dear "Danny"
(We didn't know we were on a first name basis)
We are in receipt of your email of 9 May, Monday, 2016.
We do not correspond with fans or readers on a personal level. We are much too busy to engage in such chit-chat. And there is the whole anonymous thing to overcome. However, readers are important to a blog. Nay, one could say they are the lifeblood of a blog. Therefore, let us thank you for reading, and we wish you all the best in your future endeavors.
Yours, etc.
H. Rumpole, Blog Proprietor.
"Brother, can you spare a dime?" perhaps the best comment we received, that summarized the failed attempt of Daniel Espinosa, Esq., to qualify to run against Judge Rosa Rodriguez. As detailed in these blog pages, Mr. Espinosa tried twice to qualify against Judge Rodriguez.
The first attempt was when Espinosa sent a check from his office account to pay for the filing fee. Filing fees can only be paid from campaign accounts.
Swing and a miss. Strike one.
Mr. Espinosa was then apparently able to find his way to the bank and fill out the documents in a successful manner that enabled to him to open a campaign account. Congratulations! We're very proud of you.
Mr. Espinosa then sent the clerk a new check from his campaign account. He was on his way to fulfilling his dream job as a Judge. But there was one, insy, binsy, teeny, weeny problem. He wasn't a day late, but he was twenty cents short.
The check was for the wrong amount. And there was no more time to get a new check to the clerk's office in Tallahassee.
Swing and a miss, strikes two and three. You're out. Do not pass Go. Do not run for Judge. Do not collect over three quarters of a million dollars in salary and benefits for the next six years.
"Of all the words of song and pen, the saddest are these....It Might Have Been."
Rumpole's Choice for Judges:
In the upcoming election, we are endorsing the following candidates.
Milena Abreu over Fred "Trump" Seraphin.
Judge Wendell Graham.
Judge Ed Newman.
Judge George Sarduy.
Judge Robert Luck.
We haven't made up our minds in the other races. In most of them, we aren't familiar with any of the candidates.
See You In Court.
Friday, May 06, 2016
JUDICIAL ELECTION 2016 - THE LINEUP
UPDATE BY RUMPOLE
Rumpole gets the last word here on the putative candidacy of Daniel Espinosa, Esq.
Putting aside the sob story about how this is his "dream" and Mr. Espinosa begs the clerk to "allow me to go through with it", lets have a brief discussion about the writing skills of a man who wants to be called Judge, and have the power and ability to write orders that will cause millions of dollars to be won or lost, or cause a person to live or die.
"Knowingly, I enclosed a check for ... please advise at once so that I may appropriate issue a check from my campaign account once it is opened."
Hmm... so that I may appropriate issue a check. Can one "inappropriate" issue a check? Well, yes. If the check is twenty cents less than the amount due.
The verb is "issue" and the adverb, modifying the verb is "appropriately" not "appropriate". Adverbs describe the action. They may modify it as well. "I ate slowly". "The judge incorrectly decided the motion."
What Mr. Judge Is My Dream wanted to write was "so I can issue the check from the appropriate account for the correct amount" or "so I can have the check appropriately issued", although this sentence is still on shaky ground.
And what's the deal with "Knowingly?" Can one "unknowingly" enclose a check? Probably not, but one can improperly issue a check, and for the wrong amount to boot. The inclusion of "knowingly" is nothing more than an example of someone who has poor writing skills trying to write like he thinks a lawyer writes.
"...I am pleading with you to please accept my check, or in the alternative to allow the twenty cents (or a new check) to be issued."
Query: How does one issue twenty cents?
Answer: You are the United States Treasury and you are authorized by Congress to issue a new coin for twenty cents (the ol' "double dime").
So what was Mr. Beg, borrow and plead asking for? Well, he wanted the clerk to accept a check for a filing fee for an incorrect amount. FAIL. Or allow him to issue a new check, outside the deadline for the correct amount. FAIL. Or, somehow, allow a twenty cent piece of some sort to be issued by some individual or duly authorized agency that would cover the shortfall.
Why are we being picayune?
BECAUSE HE WANTS TO BE A JUDGE. He isn't applying for a license to sell ice cream. He isn't applying for a license to run the El Chapo Cafe, (where being several months late is no problemo). His wants to be a judge. It is his dream. It is his family's dream. He is saying, by running, that he is amongst the best and brightest of the entire legal profession of our county.
And yet he cannot even write a coherent letter convincing the clerk to accept his incorrect filing fee.
If he was a judge and had to run on a statute of limitations issue, how would he rule?
By virtue of his letter writing skills that would earn a D minus in our legal writing class, good riddance. The citizens of Miami-Dade County are saved from dealing with yet another completely unqualified lawyer who wants to be a judge.
(Any news on Judge Jackie Schwartz? )
THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:
UPDATED:
Thank you to the alert commenter for pointing out that challenger Daniel Espinosa has not been officially qualified to run against Judge Rosa Rodriguez. Mr. Espinosa turned over his check to the Dept. of State on Thursday, in the amount of $5,843.00. Only problem is that the filing fee is $5,843.20. By virtue of the check being 20 cents short, he may be out of luck.
FURTHER UPDATE:
There are actually two checks on file with the Department. The first one dated April 28, 2016 is for the correct amount but issued from the account of Espinosa Law Group. The second one dated May 5th, is twenty cents short and issued from the account of Daniel "Danny" Espinosa Campaign Account.
FINAL UPDATE:
The Florida Dept. of State has removed Espinosa's name from Group 30. Congrats to Judge Rosa Rodriguez who dodged two bullets this week. First when Jorge Lopez filed against her; only to withdraw. Then when Espinosa filed against her, only to pay with a law office check at first, and then replace that check with a campaign account check that was 20 cents short of the filing fee.
That decision was worth at least $876,480 to Rodriguez; the salary she will earn over the next six years.
SIGNS, SIGNS, EVERYWHERE A SIGN,
BLOCKIN' OUT THE SCENERY, BREAKIN' MY MIND .....
And there's going to be lots of them, scattered all over Miami-Dade County this summer as, at deadline, there are no less then ten contested judicial races.
While ten contested races sounds like a high number, it's not. In 2006, there were 16 contested races; in 2012 there were 12 contests; and in 2008 there were also 10. Anyone remember the likes of Shirlyon McWhorter, Stephen Millan, Michael Samuels, Migna Sanchez Llorens, Bonnie Rippingile, Josie Velis, Gina Mendez, and Jose Sanchez-Gronlier. Those were just some of the losers in 2006.
Here are your contested judicial races:
CIRCUIT COURT
Circuit Group 9 - Incumbent Jason Bloch v. Marcia Del Rey
Circuit Group 30 - Incumbent Rosa Rodriguez v. Daniel Espinosa
Circuit Group 34 - Mark Blumstein v. Renee Gordon v. Denise Martinez-Scanziani v. Luis Perez-Medina. (Judge Gill Freeman retiring).
Circuit Group 52 - Rosy Aponte v. Carol "Jodie" Breece v. Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts. (Judge Michael Genden retiring).
Circuit Group 66 - Incumbent Robert Luck v. Yolly Roberson
Circuit Group 74 - Incumbent George "Jorge" Sarduy v. Elena Ortega-Tauler
COUNTY COURT
County Group 5 - Incumbent Fred Seraphin v. Milena Abreu
County Group 7 - Incumbent Ed Newman v. Lizzett Martinez
County Group 15 - Ruben Yury Alcoba v. Linda Luce (Judge Judith Rubenstein retiring).
County Group 35 - Incumbent Wendell Graham v. Antonio "Tony" Jimenez
ELECTED WITHOUT OPPOSITION .....
Congratulations to the following 17 Judges/former Judge who have been elected to a six year term with an annual salary of $146,080 (Circuit Court) and $138,020 (County Court):
CIRCUIT
John Schlesinger
Rodolfo "Rudy" Ruiz
Scott Bernstein
Bertila Soto
John Thornton
Jennifer Bailey
Barbara Areces
David Young* (former Judge)
William Thomas
Milt Hirsch
Samantha Ruiz Cohen
Nushin Sayfie
Monica Gordo
COUNTY
Michaelle Gonzalez-Paulson
Carroll Kelly
Diana Vizcaino
Laura Anne Stuzin
FERNANDEZ RUNDLE & MARTINEZ BOTH REELECTED
Also elected without opposition were State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle and Public Defender Carlos Martinez. For Carlos, who was first elected in 2008, this is his third term. For Kathy, who is 66 years young, this is her seventh term. She took over for Janet Reno in 1993 when President Clinton names Reno as Attorney General. She was then elected in 1994 and reelected six more times. Is this her final term? What do you think?
NORTH OF THE BORDER
One note about the happenings in Broweird. Our longtime colleague, ASA Abbe Rifkin, has qualified to run in Group 15 against three other candidates, including Incumbent Judge Matthew Destry.
We hope everyone enjoyed their Cinco de Mayo yesterday. Have a great weekend and we leave you with one of our favourite songs of our youth; (well more like Stan Blake's youth):
CAPTAIN OUT .....
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
Rumpole gets the last word here on the putative candidacy of Daniel Espinosa, Esq.
Putting aside the sob story about how this is his "dream" and Mr. Espinosa begs the clerk to "allow me to go through with it", lets have a brief discussion about the writing skills of a man who wants to be called Judge, and have the power and ability to write orders that will cause millions of dollars to be won or lost, or cause a person to live or die.
"Knowingly, I enclosed a check for ... please advise at once so that I may appropriate issue a check from my campaign account once it is opened."
Hmm... so that I may appropriate issue a check. Can one "inappropriate" issue a check? Well, yes. If the check is twenty cents less than the amount due.
The verb is "issue" and the adverb, modifying the verb is "appropriately" not "appropriate". Adverbs describe the action. They may modify it as well. "I ate slowly". "The judge incorrectly decided the motion."
What Mr. Judge Is My Dream wanted to write was "so I can issue the check from the appropriate account for the correct amount" or "so I can have the check appropriately issued", although this sentence is still on shaky ground.
And what's the deal with "Knowingly?" Can one "unknowingly" enclose a check? Probably not, but one can improperly issue a check, and for the wrong amount to boot. The inclusion of "knowingly" is nothing more than an example of someone who has poor writing skills trying to write like he thinks a lawyer writes.
"...I am pleading with you to please accept my check, or in the alternative to allow the twenty cents (or a new check) to be issued."
Query: How does one issue twenty cents?
Answer: You are the United States Treasury and you are authorized by Congress to issue a new coin for twenty cents (the ol' "double dime").
So what was Mr. Beg, borrow and plead asking for? Well, he wanted the clerk to accept a check for a filing fee for an incorrect amount. FAIL. Or allow him to issue a new check, outside the deadline for the correct amount. FAIL. Or, somehow, allow a twenty cent piece of some sort to be issued by some individual or duly authorized agency that would cover the shortfall.
Why are we being picayune?
BECAUSE HE WANTS TO BE A JUDGE. He isn't applying for a license to sell ice cream. He isn't applying for a license to run the El Chapo Cafe, (where being several months late is no problemo). His wants to be a judge. It is his dream. It is his family's dream. He is saying, by running, that he is amongst the best and brightest of the entire legal profession of our county.
And yet he cannot even write a coherent letter convincing the clerk to accept his incorrect filing fee.
If he was a judge and had to run on a statute of limitations issue, how would he rule?
By virtue of his letter writing skills that would earn a D minus in our legal writing class, good riddance. The citizens of Miami-Dade County are saved from dealing with yet another completely unqualified lawyer who wants to be a judge.
(Any news on Judge Jackie Schwartz? )
THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:
UPDATED:
Thank you to the alert commenter for pointing out that challenger Daniel Espinosa has not been officially qualified to run against Judge Rosa Rodriguez. Mr. Espinosa turned over his check to the Dept. of State on Thursday, in the amount of $5,843.00. Only problem is that the filing fee is $5,843.20. By virtue of the check being 20 cents short, he may be out of luck.
FURTHER UPDATE:
There are actually two checks on file with the Department. The first one dated April 28, 2016 is for the correct amount but issued from the account of Espinosa Law Group. The second one dated May 5th, is twenty cents short and issued from the account of Daniel "Danny" Espinosa Campaign Account.
FINAL UPDATE:
The Florida Dept. of State has removed Espinosa's name from Group 30. Congrats to Judge Rosa Rodriguez who dodged two bullets this week. First when Jorge Lopez filed against her; only to withdraw. Then when Espinosa filed against her, only to pay with a law office check at first, and then replace that check with a campaign account check that was 20 cents short of the filing fee.
That decision was worth at least $876,480 to Rodriguez; the salary she will earn over the next six years.
SIGNS, SIGNS, EVERYWHERE A SIGN,
BLOCKIN' OUT THE SCENERY, BREAKIN' MY MIND .....
And there's going to be lots of them, scattered all over Miami-Dade County this summer as, at deadline, there are no less then ten contested judicial races.
While ten contested races sounds like a high number, it's not. In 2006, there were 16 contested races; in 2012 there were 12 contests; and in 2008 there were also 10. Anyone remember the likes of Shirlyon McWhorter, Stephen Millan, Michael Samuels, Migna Sanchez Llorens, Bonnie Rippingile, Josie Velis, Gina Mendez, and Jose Sanchez-Gronlier. Those were just some of the losers in 2006.
Here are your contested judicial races:
CIRCUIT COURT
Circuit Group 9 - Incumbent Jason Bloch v. Marcia Del Rey
Circuit Group 30 - Incumbent Rosa Rodriguez v. Daniel Espinosa
Circuit Group 34 - Mark Blumstein v. Renee Gordon v. Denise Martinez-Scanziani v. Luis Perez-Medina. (Judge Gill Freeman retiring).
Circuit Group 52 - Rosy Aponte v. Carol "Jodie" Breece v. Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts. (Judge Michael Genden retiring).
Circuit Group 66 - Incumbent Robert Luck v. Yolly Roberson
Circuit Group 74 - Incumbent George "Jorge" Sarduy v. Elena Ortega-Tauler
COUNTY COURT
County Group 5 - Incumbent Fred Seraphin v. Milena Abreu
County Group 7 - Incumbent Ed Newman v. Lizzett Martinez
County Group 15 - Ruben Yury Alcoba v. Linda Luce (Judge Judith Rubenstein retiring).
County Group 35 - Incumbent Wendell Graham v. Antonio "Tony" Jimenez
ELECTED WITHOUT OPPOSITION .....
Congratulations to the following 17 Judges/former Judge who have been elected to a six year term with an annual salary of $146,080 (Circuit Court) and $138,020 (County Court):
CIRCUIT
John Schlesinger
Rodolfo "Rudy" Ruiz
Scott Bernstein
Bertila Soto
John Thornton
Jennifer Bailey
Barbara Areces
David Young* (former Judge)
William Thomas
Milt Hirsch
Samantha Ruiz Cohen
Nushin Sayfie
Monica Gordo
COUNTY
Michaelle Gonzalez-Paulson
Carroll Kelly
Diana Vizcaino
Laura Anne Stuzin
FERNANDEZ RUNDLE & MARTINEZ BOTH REELECTED
Also elected without opposition were State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle and Public Defender Carlos Martinez. For Carlos, who was first elected in 2008, this is his third term. For Kathy, who is 66 years young, this is her seventh term. She took over for Janet Reno in 1993 when President Clinton names Reno as Attorney General. She was then elected in 1994 and reelected six more times. Is this her final term? What do you think?
NORTH OF THE BORDER
One note about the happenings in Broweird. Our longtime colleague, ASA Abbe Rifkin, has qualified to run in Group 15 against three other candidates, including Incumbent Judge Matthew Destry.
We hope everyone enjoyed their Cinco de Mayo yesterday. Have a great weekend and we leave you with one of our favourite songs of our youth; (well more like Stan Blake's youth):
CAPTAIN OUT .....
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
Wednesday, May 04, 2016
JUDICIAL ELECTIONS 2016 - THE DAY BEFORE "THE DAY"
THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:
THE CLOCK IS TICKING ......
With just over 24 hours to go before the deadline to Qualify for the 2016 Miami-Dade Judicial Elections, there are many creatures a-stirring throughout all parts of our great County.
The following Incumbent Circuit and County Judges are holding their breath, all currently unopposed, waiting to see who among them will join the summer breakfast circuit traveling between Florida City to the South and Aventura to the North; from Miami Beach to the East to the likes of Doral, Sweetwater, and Kendall to the West:
CIRCUIT
John Schlesinger
Rodolfo "Rudy" Ruiz
Scott Bernstein
Bertila Soto
John Thornton
Jennifer Bailey
Barbara Areces
William Thomas
Milt Hirsch
Samantha Ruiz Cohen
Nushin Sayfie
Monica Gordo
COUNTY
Michaelle Gonzalez-Paulson
Diana Vizcaino
Laura Anne Stuzin
The following "CONTESTED" races are lining up as follows:
Circuit Group 9 - Incumbent Jason Bloch* v. Marcia Del Rey
Circuit Group 30 - Incumbent Rosa Rodriguez v. Jorge Lopez*
Circuit Group 34 - Mark Blumstein v. Renee Gordon v. Denise Martinez-Scanziani v. Luis Perez-Medina. (Judge Gill Freeman retiring).
Circuit Group 39 - David Young v. NOBODY YET. (Judge Jorge Rodriguez-Chomat retiring).
Circuit Group 52 - Carol "Jodie" Breece v. Raul Perez-Ceballos v. Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts. (Judge Michael Genden retiring).
Circuit Group 66 - Incumbent Robert Luck v. Yolly Roberson*
Circuit Group 74 - Incumbent George "Jorge" Sarduy v. Elena Ortega-Tauler
County Group 5 - Incumbent Fred Seraphin v. Milena Abreu
County Group 7 - Incumbent Ed Newman v. Lizzett Martinez*
County Group 15 - Ruben Yury Alcoba v. Linda Luce v. Eleane Sosa-Bruzon*. (Judge Judith Rubenstein retiring).
County Group 23 - Incumbent Carroll Kelly v. Rosy Anette Aponte*
County Group 35 - Incumbent Wendell Graham v. Antonio "Tony" Jimenez
*Indicates that the candidate has filed their initial Statement of Candidate for Judicial Office but they have not yet paid their Qualifying Fee.
CAPTAIN OUT ......
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
Tuesday, May 03, 2016
JUDGES SARDUY & KELLY HAVE OPPONENTS, JUDGE SAYFIE DOES NOT .....
AND NOW A WORD FROM JUDGE BLAKE:
Stan Blake said...
This is Rumpole. We want to thank the Captain for doing a great job staying on top of this ever-changing judicial election landscape. The thought that comes to us is....where is Albert Zemlock when you need him?
THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:
BREAKING NEWS ROUND THREE .....
INCUMBENT JUDGE SARDUY HAS AN OPPONENT
AND
INCUMBENT JUDGE SAYFIE LOSES HER OPPONENT
AND
INCUMBENT JUDGE KELLY HAS AN OPPONENT .....
Incumbent Judges beware. No seat in safe in Miami-Dade County. Today, very quietly, Circuit Court Judge George Sarduy, currently assigned to the Family Division, drew an opponent. That opponent is none other than attorney Elena C. Tauler AKA Elena "Ortega"-Tauler; which is the name she used to file for Judge.
Judge Sarduy was in private practice until April of 2006 when he was appointed to the County Court bench by Governor Jeb Bush. Less than two years later, Sarduy was elevated to the Circuit Court bench by Governor Charlie Crist. He ran unopposed in 2010 to retain his seat and he is currently running for reelection.
Elena C. Tauler is an attorney licensed by The Florida Bar since 1988. On the other hand, Elena Ortega-Tauler is not an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Florida. Despite that, Elena Ortega-Tauler is running for Circuit Court Judge.
Tauler filed to run in Group 52 more than one year ago, and until today, was running against Carol "Jodi" Breece, Raul Perez-Ceballos, and Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts. This afternoon, Tauler jumped into Group 74 filing against Incumbent Judge Sarduy.
We have written several posts about Elena Tauler, including on April 24, 2008 and March 8, 2015, that can be found here and here.
We were recently sent a brochure from Florida Mediation Group where Tauler is a Mediator. The brochure touts "Elena C. Tauler", Esq as a Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Court mediator. It does not mention anybody by the name of Elena Ortega-Tauler in the brochure.
INCUMBENT JUDGE SAYFIE .....
Also happening this afternoon, Judge Sayfie lost her opponent, Rosy A. Aponte. Aponte has now decided to run against Incumbent County Court Judge Carroll Kelly in Group 23.
And thank you to the alert reader who pointed out that Sayfie's campaign account has grown since last Friday. On Monday she reported that for the month of April, 2016, she raised an additional $41,990, bringing her total raised to $96,000. It is also remarkable how the legal community rallied around her candidacy in opposing the filing by Aponte. I say that because, of the $41,990 raised in the month of April, $41,465 was donated on Friday, April 29th, the day Aponte filed. Sayfie also loaned her campaign an extra $25k on the same day).
INCUMBENT JUDGE CARROLL KELLY .....
Judge Kelly has been on the bench since 1998. Since getting elected that year, she was reelected in 2004 and 2010, and she is running for reelection this year. Her web page can be found here.
Judge Kelly is currently the Administrative Judge of the Domestic Violence Division. She previously served as President of the Florida Conference of County Court Judges, teaches as an Adjunct Professor at the UM law school, and serves on the faculty of the Florida Judicial College and the Florida College for Advanced Judicial Studies.
Her opponent is Rosy A. Aponte, who we wrote about on Friday, April 29, 2016.
Three days left until filing closes and by all accounts there will be a lot more action in the final 72 hours.
CAPTAIN OUT .....
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
Stan Blake said...
As a prior administrative judge in the Criminal Division for 9 years, the average person has no idea about all the extra work with no additional pay. Almost daily meetings and putting out fires are just a small part of the job. Because of the experience, administrative judges often teach others and sit on commitees. I know personally how hard Judge Kelly and Judge Sayfie work.
This is Rumpole. We want to thank the Captain for doing a great job staying on top of this ever-changing judicial election landscape. The thought that comes to us is....where is Albert Zemlock when you need him?
THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:
BREAKING NEWS ROUND THREE .....
INCUMBENT JUDGE SARDUY HAS AN OPPONENT
AND
INCUMBENT JUDGE SAYFIE LOSES HER OPPONENT
AND
INCUMBENT JUDGE KELLY HAS AN OPPONENT .....
Incumbent Judges beware. No seat in safe in Miami-Dade County. Today, very quietly, Circuit Court Judge George Sarduy, currently assigned to the Family Division, drew an opponent. That opponent is none other than attorney Elena C. Tauler AKA Elena "Ortega"-Tauler; which is the name she used to file for Judge.
Judge Sarduy was in private practice until April of 2006 when he was appointed to the County Court bench by Governor Jeb Bush. Less than two years later, Sarduy was elevated to the Circuit Court bench by Governor Charlie Crist. He ran unopposed in 2010 to retain his seat and he is currently running for reelection.
Elena C. Tauler is an attorney licensed by The Florida Bar since 1988. On the other hand, Elena Ortega-Tauler is not an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Florida. Despite that, Elena Ortega-Tauler is running for Circuit Court Judge.
Tauler filed to run in Group 52 more than one year ago, and until today, was running against Carol "Jodi" Breece, Raul Perez-Ceballos, and Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts. This afternoon, Tauler jumped into Group 74 filing against Incumbent Judge Sarduy.
We have written several posts about Elena Tauler, including on April 24, 2008 and March 8, 2015, that can be found here and here.
We were recently sent a brochure from Florida Mediation Group where Tauler is a Mediator. The brochure touts "Elena C. Tauler", Esq as a Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Court mediator. It does not mention anybody by the name of Elena Ortega-Tauler in the brochure.
INCUMBENT JUDGE SAYFIE .....
Also happening this afternoon, Judge Sayfie lost her opponent, Rosy A. Aponte. Aponte has now decided to run against Incumbent County Court Judge Carroll Kelly in Group 23.
And thank you to the alert reader who pointed out that Sayfie's campaign account has grown since last Friday. On Monday she reported that for the month of April, 2016, she raised an additional $41,990, bringing her total raised to $96,000. It is also remarkable how the legal community rallied around her candidacy in opposing the filing by Aponte. I say that because, of the $41,990 raised in the month of April, $41,465 was donated on Friday, April 29th, the day Aponte filed. Sayfie also loaned her campaign an extra $25k on the same day).
INCUMBENT JUDGE CARROLL KELLY .....
Judge Kelly has been on the bench since 1998. Since getting elected that year, she was reelected in 2004 and 2010, and she is running for reelection this year. Her web page can be found here.
Judge Kelly is currently the Administrative Judge of the Domestic Violence Division. She previously served as President of the Florida Conference of County Court Judges, teaches as an Adjunct Professor at the UM law school, and serves on the faculty of the Florida Judicial College and the Florida College for Advanced Judicial Studies.
Her opponent is Rosy A. Aponte, who we wrote about on Friday, April 29, 2016.
Three days left until filing closes and by all accounts there will be a lot more action in the final 72 hours.
CAPTAIN OUT .....
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
Monday, May 02, 2016
JUDGE ROSA RODRIGUEZ DRAWS AN OPPONENT .....
THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:
BREAKING NEWS CONTINUES ... JUDGE ROSA RODRIGUEZ HAS OPPOSITION .....
In what's now becoming a regular occurrence over the past few days, another long time Incumbent Judge has drawn an opponent.
Early on it was the likes of County Court Judges Ed Newman and Fred Seraphin, and Circuit Court Judges Jason Bloch and Robert Luck.
In the past couple of days, add Incumbent Judges Wendell Graham, Nushin Sayfie, and now Rosa Rodriguez to that list. WHO'S NEXT ?!
Today, attorney Jorge A. Lopez has filed to run against the three time incumbent Judge Rodriguez.
Judge Rosa Rodriguez was first elected to the Circuit Court bench in 1998. She was reelected in 2004 and 2010. She is running to retain her seat. In 1998, Rodriguez defeated attorney Ann Mason-Parker by 54% to 46% to win her race. She ran unopposed in '04 and '10.
Attorney Jorge A. Lopez has been a member of The Florida Bar for 29 years. He has an office in Coral Gables. According to his web site, this is what it says about him:
Jorge A. Lopez, Senior Partner
Jorge A. Lopez earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration from Georgetown University in 1983 and a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Miami School of Law in 1986. Mr. Lopez was admitted to the Florida Bar in October of 1986. Mr. Lopez has extensive experience handling complex commercial matters and litigation involving investor fraud and corporate disputes. Mr. Lopez also handles litigation of catastrophic injury claims, aviation disasters and consumer fraud cases. In addition, Mr. Lopez has represented clients against some of the largest financial institutions including Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, UBS Paine Webber, Salomon-Smith Barney, CitiGroup, Credit Suisse First Boston and Prudential Securities. Mr. Lopez speaks Spanish and Portuguese
COINCIDENCE
As was pointed out by an alert reader of the BLOG, Attorney Rosy Aponte (who filed against Judge Sayfie) and Attorney Jorge A. Lopez, both have the exact same Campaign Treasurer. That person is C.P.A. Carlos Trueba who has an office in Doral.
MONEY
We all know that you can't run a campaign without it. And, like Judge Graham, who has raised no money and filed with one week to go before the qualifying deadline, and like Judge Sayfie, who has raised only $54,000, the least among all incumbent Circuit Court Judges, so does Judge Rosa Rodriguez fall into that same category. Of the 14 Incumbent Circuit Court Judges running for reelection, only Judges Schlesinger, Bernstein, and Areces have raised less than the $89,000 that Judge Rosa Rodriguez has raised. And when you add in the amounts lent to candidates' own campaigns, Rodriguez fall down to third to last with Areces and Sayfie bringing up the rear in total funds available for their campaigns. Rodriguez has contributed a grand total of ZERO loaned to her own campaign. (See our BLOG post dated April 29, 2016).
Alert readers, please email us with any other tips and breaking news.
CAPTAIN OUT .....
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
NEW STUFF
El Chapo cafe at the REGJB is now open for business. There was a soft-no-announce opening last week. Probably because the coffee was horrible and the food worse, and there wasn't- according to reports- a lot available.
Judge Sayfie still has opposition.
Can this really be the lawyer who thinks she is qualified to challenge Judge Sayfie?
Anonymous said...
And Judge Jacqueline Schwartz is still a judge.
And in case you didn't see our edit of Sunday's post*, Assistant Federal Public Defender Abby Becker won the Gregg Wenzel Young Lawyer's award for her work in spearheading the Federal Public Defender's Office's clemency project and her obtaining the release of a woman sentenced as a first offender to life in prison for one of those drug conspiracy cases in the 1990's that the Clinton Administration wrought by their desire to pander to the right.
See you in court.
* Many federal practitioners are a mild lot. They don't get trained to throw the elbows in close quarters that those who rose through the ranks of the REGJB did. But apparently our slight in not mentioning Ms. Becker by name in our original post brought out the worst in her supporters, not to mention their thesauruses.
There's only so many ways one can be called a rude, ignorant bore by otherwise mild mannered litigators before you've had enough. We've had enough. We surrender. Ms. Becker has received her well earned, much deserved, due.
Now stop sending us threatening emails with the words "a good thrashing" in them.
Judge Sayfie still has opposition.
Can this really be the lawyer who thinks she is qualified to challenge Judge Sayfie?
Anonymous said...
Rosy Aponte, who is currently the subject of investigation by The Florida Bar, is the long time cohort of the self proclaimed king of foreclosure defense, John Ruiz, who has himself spent the batter part of the last five years mired in a myriad of cases consisting of foreclosures, repossessions, and attempts to collect debts related to his la ley "empire". Ms. Aponte luckily managed to avoid payment of her debts through a discharge she obtained in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Interestedly, Ms. Aponte's complete ineptitude has been highlighted recently by the Hon. A J Cristol who barred her from practicing before the United States Bankruptcy Court as a result of her confession that she had no clue what she was doing in a contested chapter 7 case. Ms. Aponte's stellar representation resulted in the debtor and multiple family members of the debtor, including his elderly mother being held in contempt of court, faced with incarceration and substantially sanctioned. Unbowed, in yet another case pending before the Hon. Laurel Isicoff, Ms. Aponte was ordered to show cause and sanctioned as a result of filing an unsuspecting alleged debtor in bankruptcy without ever having met her client. Her excuse was simple, someone in her office used her credentials . It is a sad day when a distinguished, hardworking and well respected jurist is challenged by a puppet who sole qualification is a hispanic last name.
And Judge Jacqueline Schwartz is still a judge.
And in case you didn't see our edit of Sunday's post*, Assistant Federal Public Defender Abby Becker won the Gregg Wenzel Young Lawyer's award for her work in spearheading the Federal Public Defender's Office's clemency project and her obtaining the release of a woman sentenced as a first offender to life in prison for one of those drug conspiracy cases in the 1990's that the Clinton Administration wrought by their desire to pander to the right.
See you in court.
* Many federal practitioners are a mild lot. They don't get trained to throw the elbows in close quarters that those who rose through the ranks of the REGJB did. But apparently our slight in not mentioning Ms. Becker by name in our original post brought out the worst in her supporters, not to mention their thesauruses.
There's only so many ways one can be called a rude, ignorant bore by otherwise mild mannered litigators before you've had enough. We've had enough. We surrender. Ms. Becker has received her well earned, much deserved, due.
Now stop sending us threatening emails with the words "a good thrashing" in them.
Sunday, May 01, 2016
FACDL AWARDS DINNER
UPDATED Below with a full list of the award winners. As we said, we are an ocean away.
The FACDL had their 263rd awards dinner last night at the Last Stop Bar in Florida City. Yes, the tradition dates back to a bunch of Calusta Native Americans sitting on a mound of shells in Florida Bay and handing out fresh lobster and oysters as an award.
Actually, and because we are still in Europe involved in Brexit, we have pieced together events based on the numerous emails we have received in the last 8-10 hours.
Federal assistant Public defender Abby Becker received the Greg Wenzel young lawyers awardfor doing something really good. Nobody knows for sure, the acoustics were awful. But we're sure it's well deserved. for her work in spearheading the Federal Public Defenders Clemency petitions. This is great work that was and is really needed. Well done. (okay? Everyone needs to stop sending us mean and nasty emails now. We weren't there. We don;t know who did what to whom.)
Beji Waxman received the "Against All Odds Award" for writing a winning brief in the Florida Supreme Court and his prior decade of litigation for a client in the infamous Casey Nickelodeon murders in Broward. Eventually Waxman was able to convince the Supreme Court that the Broward rule that identity need not "really be proven" in a Broward murder case was, well, not entirely kosher to use some Latin.
Judge Mary Jo Francis deservedly received the Justice Kogan award for her work on the bench, especially in jail court misdemeanor cases, where 99.9% of the cases involve defendants suffering from mental illness.
Edith Georgi won the Sy Gaer founders award for her lifetime of wonderful, dedicated, and top notch advocacy at the Public Defenders office.
Alex Michaels won the Gino Negretti "Courtesy in Court" award, for obvious reasons.
But according to all emails, the highlight of the event was when moderator Milt Hirsch paused in his annual rendition of Federalist Paper #78 (on the judiciary)
But it is not with a view to infractions of the Constitution only, that the independence of the judges may be an essential safeguard against the effects of occasional ill humors in the society. These sometimes extend no farther than to the injury of the private rights of particular classes of citizens, by unjust and partial laws. Here also the firmness of the judicial magistracy is of vast importance in mitigating the severity and confining the operation of such laws. It not only serves to moderate the immediate mischiefs of those which may have been passed, but it operates as a check upon the legislative body in passing them; who, perceiving that obstacles to the success of iniquitous intention are to be expected from the scruples of the courts, are in a manner compelled, by the very motives of the injustice they meditate, to qualify their attempts. This is a circumstance calculated to have more influence upon the character of our governments, than but few may be aware of...
whereupon Judge Hirsch introduced Judge Sayfie, to a rousing standing ovation of attorneys who all then made patting movements on their jackets and rummaged through their purses to mostly discover that, darn, they forgot to bring their check books.
Judge Hirsch then returned to conclude with his rendition of "A Costly Ride" by Guy de Maupassant, reprising his long-ago defense of a case in which he successfully argued the old "wrong place, wrong time defense."
A good time was apparently had by all.
One of these years someone is going to invite us.
Until then.... see you in court.
CAPTAIN JUSTICE said...
The Captain Reports:
Rumpole - here is your Errata Sheet:
The last Award is called the Pearson-Prebish Founders Award named after the two FACDL-Miami founders. It is awarded for Lifetime Achievement.
There were two winners, both well deserved:
Edith Georgi and Rory Stein
Congrats to all of the winners last evening.
Cap Out .....
The FACDL had their 263rd awards dinner last night at the Last Stop Bar in Florida City. Yes, the tradition dates back to a bunch of Calusta Native Americans sitting on a mound of shells in Florida Bay and handing out fresh lobster and oysters as an award.
Actually, and because we are still in Europe involved in Brexit, we have pieced together events based on the numerous emails we have received in the last 8-10 hours.
Federal assistant Public defender Abby Becker received the Greg Wenzel young lawyers award
Beji Waxman received the "Against All Odds Award" for writing a winning brief in the Florida Supreme Court and his prior decade of litigation for a client in the infamous Casey Nickelodeon murders in Broward. Eventually Waxman was able to convince the Supreme Court that the Broward rule that identity need not "really be proven" in a Broward murder case was, well, not entirely kosher to use some Latin.
Judge Mary Jo Francis deservedly received the Justice Kogan award for her work on the bench, especially in jail court misdemeanor cases, where 99.9% of the cases involve defendants suffering from mental illness.
Edith Georgi won the Sy Gaer founders award for her lifetime of wonderful, dedicated, and top notch advocacy at the Public Defenders office.
Alex Michaels won the Gino Negretti "Courtesy in Court" award, for obvious reasons.
But according to all emails, the highlight of the event was when moderator Milt Hirsch paused in his annual rendition of Federalist Paper #78 (on the judiciary)
But it is not with a view to infractions of the Constitution only, that the independence of the judges may be an essential safeguard against the effects of occasional ill humors in the society. These sometimes extend no farther than to the injury of the private rights of particular classes of citizens, by unjust and partial laws. Here also the firmness of the judicial magistracy is of vast importance in mitigating the severity and confining the operation of such laws. It not only serves to moderate the immediate mischiefs of those which may have been passed, but it operates as a check upon the legislative body in passing them; who, perceiving that obstacles to the success of iniquitous intention are to be expected from the scruples of the courts, are in a manner compelled, by the very motives of the injustice they meditate, to qualify their attempts. This is a circumstance calculated to have more influence upon the character of our governments, than but few may be aware of...
whereupon Judge Hirsch introduced Judge Sayfie, to a rousing standing ovation of attorneys who all then made patting movements on their jackets and rummaged through their purses to mostly discover that, darn, they forgot to bring their check books.
Judge Hirsch then returned to conclude with his rendition of "A Costly Ride" by Guy de Maupassant, reprising his long-ago defense of a case in which he successfully argued the old "wrong place, wrong time defense."
A good time was apparently had by all.
One of these years someone is going to invite us.
Until then.... see you in court.
The Captain Reports:
Rumpole - here is your Errata Sheet:
The last Award is called the Pearson-Prebish Founders Award named after the two FACDL-Miami founders. It is awarded for Lifetime Achievement.
There were two winners, both well deserved:
Edith Georgi and Rory Stein
Congrats to all of the winners last evening.
Cap Out .....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)