Popehat’s Ken and Ron Littlepage of the Florida Times-Union on Angela Corey, the evidently thin-skinned Florida special prosecutor in the Martin-Zimmerman case. A letter Corey sent to the Florida Times-Union, in Ken’s view, “betrays anger management issues, entitlement problems, a weak grasp of pertinent First Amendment law governing statements of opinion, and a rather frightening attitude from a government official with such power.” Earlier here and here.
Posts tagged as:
prosecution
- John Edwards mistrial is umpteenth setback for DoJ white-collarers; FEC’s failure to charge might have been tipoff [BLT] One lawyer on the campaign finance implications of the Edwards prosecution [David Frum]
- Jeralyn Merritt analysis of Martin/Zimmerman evidence dump indicates once again that Stand Your Ground issue is likely to prove a red herring [TalkLeft, earlier]
- Letter writer doesn’t care for my recent structuring-forfeiture op-ed [Baltimore Sun] More on civil forfeiture: when cops become robbers [Nita Ghei, Washington Times]
- Deferred prosecution and NPAs: “The Justice Department may be in the next cubicle” [Jim Copland]
- Converting tickets into “court costs”: ploy raises funds for courts in Atlanta and elsewhere [Consumerist via Alkon]
- When lawyers advise innocent clients to plead guilty [John Steele, LEF on Brian Banks case]
- “Jailtime for twittering on your office PC? The federal courts are split” [Appellate Daily via @andrewmgrossman] “12 steps for overcoming overcriminalization” [TPPF via Vikrant Reddy, Right on Crime]
{ 1 comment }
- Some reps push to cut off federal funds for states with Stand Your Ground laws [Maguire, Just One Minute] Podcast and video of Cato’s panel discussion on SYG laws [and related from Tim Lynch] Muddle-prone media mischaracterizes other cases besides Martin/Zimmerman as SYG [Sullum] “Shame of mandatory minimums shows in Marissa Alexander case” [Roland Martin, CNN, via Alkon] More: Florida voter poll shows strong support for SYG [Sun-Sentinel] New medical reports could prove helpful to defense in Martin/Zimmerman case [WFTV, more]
- Feds prosecute building firm for paying NYC labor graft, but as for those who receive it… [Holman Jenkins, WSJ, with Wal-Mart Mexico FCPA angle]
- Why is the Center for American Progress helping the Obama administration pretend that it’s ended the Drug War? [Mike Riggs] “Jailed for trying to fill a prescription” [Amy Alkon] “She stole his heroin, so she was the victim” [Jacob Sullum]
- Conduct on which defendant was acquitted can still count as prior bad act evidence [Scott Greenfield]
- New UK justice law abolishes indefinite sentences for public protection (IPPs) [Barder]
- “Debtor’s Prison for Failure to Pay for Your Own Trial” [Tabarrok]
- ACLU on unsettling possibilities of surveillance drones, law enforcement and otherwise [Lucy Steigerwald]
{ 4 comments }
Van Smith with the City Paper in Baltimore (where South Mountain Creamery is a farmer’s-market fixture) reported on Wednesday and again on Friday on the “structuring” charges and forfeiture action against dairy farmers Randy and Karen Sowers (see yesterday’s post). A few highlights:
- On Wednesday, Smith reported that Sowers said in an interview that “he deposited the cash he’d made in the increments in which it had been earned. If the deposited amounts often ended up being a little under $10,001, he explained, that’s just the way it worked out and he [had] no intention of breaking the law.”
On the other hand, according to Smith’s summary of the federal complaint yesterday, Sowers is said to have told federal investigators during a February 29 interview “that ‘during the farmers’ market “season,” his weekly cash receipts were on the order of $12,000 to $14,000,’ yet ‘he kept his cash deposits under $10,000 intentionally so as not to “throw up red flags.”‘ He also told the agents that ‘he was advised by a teller at the bank that the deposit of more than $10,000 in cash would lead to the filing of a form, and that he decided from that point forward not to make deposits in excess of $10,000,’ according to the complaint.”
- “Historically, the anti-structuring statute has been used by prosecutors as an ancillary charge with other accusations of nefarious behavior, such as drug dealing or terrorism. And it still is. But over the last few years, prosecutors have started to use it more regularly as a standalone charge — an observation noted by defense attorneys that Maryland U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein confirms. Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a data center about federal court cases, reports that in fiscal year 2011 Maryland brought 14 of the nation’s 99 structuring cases, making it the top state for such prosecutions. Nationally, the numbers have been rising; the 2011 figures are up 8.8 percent from the year before and up 57.1 percent from five years ago.”
- Targets in Bank Secrecy Act forfeiture cases — which, to repeat, need not be premised on any suspicion of tax evasion or other criminality unrelated to the Act — have included Maryland “gas stations, liquor stores, and used-car dealerships.” “South Mountain is not the first seasonal-produce market to find itself targeted for structuring recently. Taylor’s Produce Stand, on the Eastern Shore, was stung last year after the feds seized about $90,000 from its bank accounts. In December, pursuant to a civil-forfeiture settlement agreement after no criminal charges were filed, the stand’s owners got back about half of the seized money.”
- And this clue as to why the U.S. Attorney’s office in Maryland might be outperforming its colleagues nationwide in pushing BSA forfeitures: the forfeiture complaint against the Sowerses was “signed by assistant U.S. attorney Stefan Cassella – who literally wrote the book on federal forfeiture law.”
{ 8 comments }
“Justice Department officials have known for years that flawed forensic work might have led to the convictions of potentially innocent people nationwide, but prosecutors failed to notify defendants or their attorneys even in many cases they knew were troubled.” Among the cases: that of Santae Tribble, who spent 28 years in prison following a murder-robbery conviction based on claimed hair identification now known to be erroneous. [Washington Post, more]
Follow-up from the Post on the Justice Department’s lack of transparency; and see my colleague Tim Lynch’s post at Cato.
Monroe Freedman lines up Angela Corey’s press conference — in which she spoke of “our precious victims,” talked of having prayed with the Martin family, and suggested that her investigators had established “the facts” and “the truth” regarding the guilt of George Zimmerman — against the code of ethics. Earlier on the prosecution affidavit here [expanded and retitled 8:30 a.m. Apr. 16].
Dan Markel at Prawfsblawg is wondering whether second-degree murder amounts to overcharging the case given the state of the evidence and the prosecutor’s affidavit: “I have no special insight into [prosecutor Angela] Corey’s evidence files but I sure hope she knows more than we do. Otherwise, a murder charge seems like a terrific injustice.”
Relatedly, Tom Maguire at Just One Minute explains his reasons for doubting that Corey has developed breakthrough evidence in the investigation so far. David French and Andrew McCarthy at NRO take sharply different views of how well the prosecution affidavit supports its charge.
And Ken at Popehat isn’t impressed at all by the prosecution’s handiwork so far: “The affidavit is argumentative, it’s conclusory, and it lacks attribution. … This is not the worst affidavit I’ve ever seen — but it’s damn close, and the decision to proceed based on it in such a high-profile case is stunning. … There’s no way that a judge reading this affidavit can make an intelligent or informed decision about the sufficiency of the evidence — even for the low hurdle of probable cause.”
More: Jeralyn Merritt on the affidavit’s unsupported assertions [via Balko] And via Steele, Legal Ethics Forum: George Conk “sensed trouble when Florida Special Prosecutor Angela Corey announced she would not convene a grand jury, skipping the first means of testing one’s evidence and demonstrating recognition of the citizenry’s right to [gauge] the conduct of prosecutors.” “Zimmerman should not be charged, nor sitting in a county detention, based on this document; yet there he is.” [Empty Wheel] Yet more: Radley Balko on the unchecked charging power of prosecutor [HuffPo]
{ 10 comments }
I’ve got a new post up at Cato at Liberty drawing a few conclusions from the ignominious collapse of the Department of Justice’s Africa Sting prosecution under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA)(& Gun News Daily, KeepAndBearArms.com).
P.S.: WSJ editorial on the subject; responsive letter from former prosecutor Richard Beckler.
Deposed press lord Conrad Black is taking a public stand against the law enforcement and corporate-governance authorities that put him behind bars. [Andrew McCarthy/The New Criterion, earlier]
- NLRB rules employment contracts that specify arbitration for group grievances violate federal labor law even in nonunion workplaces [D. R. Horton, Inc. and Michael Cuda; Ross Runkel, Corporate Counsel]
- Richard Epstein on “living wage” legislation [Defining Ideas]
- In Greece, law providing early retirement for “hazardous” jobs was extended to some that are not so hazardous, like hairdressing, pastry making and radio announcing [Mark Steyn via Instapundit, IBTimes, Reuters]
- “Prosecutor’s double-dippers draw millions from New Jersey pension funds” [Mark Lagerkvist, DC Examiner] Even if convicted on felony charges of misappropriation of public funds, Beverly Hills school superintendent unlikely to forfeit pension [LA Times]
- “Against Forced Unionization of Independent Workers” [Ilya Shapiro on Cato amicus brief in Harris v. Quinn]
- Whoops: UAW officials appeal extortion sentence, 6th Circuit sends it back as too lenient [AutoBlog via Kaus]
- New York appeals court makes it harder to get weak NYC job-bias cases dismissed on summary judgment [Judy Greenwald, Business Insurance] Connecticut’s job-bias commission doesn’t seem to consider any cases frivolous any more [Daniel Schwartz]
{ 2 comments }
Kim Strassel has a must-read piece at the Wall Street Journal exposing the politics of the Lacey Act’s extension to importation of plant products, by no means fueled just by inflexible environmentalist sentiment: crucially, wood-products industry and union forces recognized that the law could serve as a way to eliminate competition from imports.
Trees are ubiquitous, are transformed into thousands of byproducts, and pass through dozens of countries. Whereas even a small U.S. importer would know not to import a tiger skin, tracking a sliver of wood (now transformed into a toy, or an umbrella) through this maze of countries and manufacturing laws back to the tree it came from, would be impossible.
Furniture maker Ikea noted that even if it could comply with the change, the “administrative costs and record-keeping requirements” would cause furniture prices to “skyrocket.” The wood chips that go into its particleboard alone could require tracking back and reporting on more than 100 different tree species.
Which is exactly what the Lacey expanders wanted.
The WSJ also recently interviewed Gibson Guitar CEO Henry Juszkiewicz [related, Reuters; earlier] while Pat Nolan points out how the feds’ raid on the facility points up many evils of unbridled prosecution power [NRO] Musicians and others held a “We stand with Gibson” rally and concert [Mark Perry, rally pics] As for press coverage, Andrew Revkin at the NYT notes that outrage over the raid is energizing those horrid “anti-regulatory campaigners” ["DotEarth"] while an op-ed contributor at the paper explains that (not to sound like those same awful campaigners!) the operation of the Lacey Act does indeed menace innocent artisans who make musical instruments [Kathryn Marie Dudley] Tim Cavanaugh finds the L.A.Times strumming a derivative ideological tune, while Radley Balko notes, in a police-restraint-for-me-but-not-for-thee vein, that a reporter arrested at Occupy Nashville had mocked concern over the gun-toting Gibson raid. More: ABA Journal.
{ 6 comments }
- Six-year-old charged with sexual assault [Channel3000.com, Wisconsin; Radley Balko]
- “Beware: Cities Hunting You Down For Reagan-Era Parking Tickets” [David Kiley, AOL]
- Waco, Texas: “McLennan DA fights DNA testing because exonerations override juries” [Grits for Breakfast] Robert Mosteller, “Failures of the Prosecutor’s Duty to ‘Do Justice’ in Extraordinary and Ordinary Miscarriages of Justice” [Legal Ethics Forum]
- Controlled substances: “Could a US lawyer lawfully counsel clients about this proposed new law?” [John Steele, LEF]
- Mens rea erosion a “deeply troublesome trend” [Kevin LaCroix on WSJ] “Trial penalty,” long sentence minimums give prosecutors muscle to extract plea deals [NYT, Sullum] “Settlements feed U.S. prosecutor overreach” [Reynolds Holding, Reuters BreakingViews] “Responsible corporate officer doctrine” worries pharma defense lawyers [WSJ Law Blog] “The continuing quest to criminalize business judgment” [Kirkendall]
- “More than three-quarters of turn-of-the-century Chicago homicides led to no criminal punishment — not because the perpetrator could not be identified, but because no jury would convict.” [William Stuntz's posthumous book via Cowen]
- “Scalia criticizes narcotics laws” [for over-federalization] [WSJ]
{ 2 comments }
My new Cato post has a suggestion for Time magazine: how about prosecuting only the executives who’ve actually committed crimes? (& Kenneth Silber, RealClearPolitics “Best of the Blogs”). Related: Politico.
{ 6 comments }
My new op-ed at the New York Post looks at the history of Spitzer-to-Cuomo-to-Eric Schneiderman prosecutorial overreach and asks: how exactly did the New York Attorney General come to have so much power with so little constraint? (& welcome Instapundit, Real Clear Markets, Timothy Carney/Examiner, CEI readers)
More: I and others have written about the act here and at Point of Law.
{ 1 comment }
Prosecutors bring in adorable “therapy dogs” to assist witnesses in rape and abuse trials. Aside from the jury sympathy issue, and the possible sending of “this is a victim” signals, defense lawyers argue that the dogs’ presence makes testimony easier whether accusations are true or not: “They argue that as a therapy dog, Rosie responds to people under stress by comforting them, whether the stress comes from confronting a guilty defendant or lying under oath.” [N.Y. Times] More: Greenfield.
{ 4 comments }
Great WSJ article on the unending proliferation of federal crimes, with appearances by a family that ran into a law making it a felony to dig for arrowheads on federal land, Bobby Unser and his snowmobile-astray ordeal, and a man effectively ruined by the $860,000+ cost of successfully defending himself against a federal charge of violating Russian hunting regulations.
“Most people think criminal law is for bad people,” says Timothy Lynch of Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. People don’t realize “they’re one misstep away from the nightmare of a federal indictment.”
More: from Tim Lynch, and (via PoL) Josh Blackman, William Anderson/Regulation mag.
{ 13 comments }
Jeff Rosen has a sharp review in the New York Times of a new book by veteran business writer James Stewart entitled “Tangled Webs: How False Statements Are Undermining America: From Martha Stewart to Bernie Madoff”:
Although Stewart, now a business columnist for The New York Times, claims that lying has been on the rise, a more plausible thesis is that prosecutions for false statements have been rising — not because of growing contempt for the truth but because defendants are increasingly prosecuted for doing nothing more than denying their guilt to investigators. (These are the kinds of lies that courts used to excuse under a doctrine called the exculpatory no.) It wasn’t until the post-Watergate era that prosecutors began routinely to indict people not merely for lying under oath but for lying to federal officials even when not under oath — using a novel law that is the basis for several of the prosecutions Stewart celebrates.
(& Bad Lawyer)
{ 6 comments }
A Frontline/NPR/Pro Publica joint investigation makes a powerful case that prosecutors have drawn on the work of errant labs and expert witnesses to generate unreliable charges, and sometimes convictions, following unexplained deaths of children. Among the targets: numerous parents falsely accused of murdering their own children.
{ 1 comment }
