Source: https://sdfla.blogspot.com/2013/
Timestamp: 2018-10-21 05:27:59
Document Index: 347046781

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2241', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2241', '§ 922', '§ 924', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2241', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2241', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 790', '§ 924', '§ 924', '§ 2255', '§ 924', '§ 924', '§ 924', '§ 924', '§ 2255', '§ 2241', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2241', '§ 2255']

Southern District of Florida Blog: 2013
Posted by David Markus at 12:02 PM 5 comments: Links to this post
By far the post with the most hits this year was "Local AUSA Mike Garofola to be on The Bachelorette," (with over 20,000 hits) followed by "Go, Dore, Go" (which was about his novel motion to compel NSA records, with almost 15,000). Make your own conclusions about the readership...
But before you do, know that other top hit posts were mostly the scoops regarding JNC lists, judges, and magistrates -- including Robin Rosenbaum being vetted for the 11th Circuit seat and the Rubio/Thomas blue slip controversy. With these posts in particular (of the almost 2,500 in total), the blog was able to fulfill its mission of getting District news out quickly and accurately to the local federal court family.
Posted by David Markus at 2:07 PM 7 comments: Links to this post
2. The 11th Circuit came out with a big Christmas present for Dudley Bryant -- a habeas win on a Begay/savings clause issue:
Petitioner Dudley Bryant appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition, brought pursuant to the “savings clause” in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). Bryant’s appeal presents the issue to which this Court alluded in Wofford v. Scott, 177 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. 1999), and subsequently left undecided in Gilbert v. United States (Gilbert II), 640 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2011) (en banc), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 1001 (2012), and Williams v. Warden, 713 F.3d 1332 (11th Cir. 2013). The issue is whether the savings clause in § 2255(e) permits a federal prisoner to bring a § 2241 petition when he has established that his current 235-month sentence for an 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) conviction exceeds the 10-year statutory maximum penalty authorized by Congress under 18 U.S.C. § 924(a).
When a conviction has become final, a federal prisoner usually may challenge the legality of his detention only through a § 2255 motion. However, the savings clause in § 2255(e) permits the prisoner to file a § 2241 habeas petition when a § 2255 motion was “inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). After review of the record, the briefs of the parties and the amicus, and having the benefit of oral argument, we conclude Bryant has satisfied the savings clause’s requirements in § 2255(e).
Bryant has proven that his prior § 2255 motion was “inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention” and that his § 2241 petition can now proceed under § 2255(e) because: (1) from the time of his initial sentencing in 2002 throughout his first § 2255 proceeding in 2005, our Circuit’s binding precedent in United States v. Hall, 77 F.3d 398, 401-02 (11th Cir. 1996), held that a concealed-firearm offense under Fla. Stat. § 790.01 was a “violent felony” under § 924(e) and squarely foreclosed Bryant’s claim that he was erroneously sentenced above the 10-year statutory maximum penalty in § 924(a); (2) subsequent to Bryant’s first § 2255 proceeding, the Supreme Court’s decision in Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137, 128 S. Ct. 1581 (2008), set forth a new standard to evaluate which crimes constitute violent felonies under § 924(e), and Begay, as interpreted by United States v. Archer, 531 F.3d 1347, 1352 (11th Cir. 2008), and United States v. Canty, 570 F.3d 1251, 1255 (11th Cir. 2009), overturned our Circuit precedent in Hall; (3) Begay’s new rule is substantive and applies retroactively to Bryant’s § 924(e) claim on collateral review; (4) as a result of pure § 924(e)-Begay error and retroactive application of Begay, Bryant’s 235-month sentence exceeds the 10-year statutory maximum authorized by Congress in § 924(a); and (5) the savings clause in § 2255(e) reaches his claim of illegal detention above the statutory maximum penalty. Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s dismissal of Bryant’s § 2241 petition and remand with instructions set forth herein.
We first review the procedural history of Bryant’s case, the savings clause in § 2255(e), and our Circuit’s prior rulings about § 2255(e). We then summarize the five specific requirements a § 2241 petitioner must satisfy to proceed under § 2255(e) and explain why Bryant has satisfied them.
President Barack Obama's six federal judicial nominees in Georgia appear poised for Senate consideration after years of delay in filling seats on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
The White House announced late Thursday that Obama had selected Northern District Chief Judge Julie Carnes for the Eleventh Circuit. The president also tapped four lawyers and judges to fill spaces on the Northern District, including one to replace Carnes, a 1992 appointee of President George H.W. Bush.
Those five nominees join Jill Pryor, a partner at Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore who was nominated by Obama for the Eleventh Circuit nearly two years ago. She was blocked by Georgia Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, but they appear to back all six nominees now.
The district court nominees are Judge Michael Boggs of the Georgia Court of Appeals, Mark Cohen of Troutman Sanders, Leigh Martin May of Butler, Wooten & Fryhofer, and Judge Eleanor Ross, a DeKalb County State Court judge.
Posted by David Markus at 10:05 AM 1 comment: Links to this post
The criminal conviction is a surprising chapter in the career of Handfield, 57, one of South Florida’s most prominent African-American lawyers and civic leaders.
He is now facing an inquiry from the Florida Bar, which regulates the state’s lawyers.
“This was a seven-year-old matter, and when it was brought to my attention, I fully cooperated with the government and the matter was resolved with a misdemeanor,” Handfield said Monday.
Handfield, a Miami native, is well known in South Florida legal circles. Over the years, governors have appointed Handfield to several statewide commissions — including Florida’s Commission on Ethics.
Posted by David Markus at 9:32 AM 3 comments: Links to this post
Posted by David Markus at 8:39 AM 7 comments: Links to this post
Posted by David Markus at 3:40 PM 4 comments: Links to this post
Some additional facts: She was an AUSA before becoming a judge. She was nominated by President Bush to the district court. She clerked on the 5th Circuit (Lewis Morgan) and also served on the Sentencing Commission.
Posted by David Markus at 8:59 AM 8 comments: Links to this post
The situation the officers confronted in the instant case bears none of these indicia of an urgent, ongoing emergency. The officers here did not receive an emergency report regarding an ongoing disturbance, but rather a service call regarding what appeared to be a bullet hole, which circumstances known to the officers indicated had been made at least 39 hours prior to when the officers made entry.5
When Officer Martin first arrived at the apartment building, she did not encounter a tumultuous scene, nor were the officers met with chaos when they returned to the building the next day. The officers observed no violent behavior, nor did they see or hear evidence that a fight had taken place or that anyone had been injured, other than finding a single bullet hole.
Nor did the officers have any information that would lead them to suspect that Timmann might be suicidal, or that he might be home (in fact, the absence of his work vehicle indicated that he was likely not at home). Considering the totality of the circumstances, it was not reasonable for the officers to believe that someone inside Timmann’s apartment was in danger and in need of immediate aid. Therefore, we find that the District Court erred in holding that the emergency aid exception justified the officers’ warrantless entry into Timmann’s apartment.
Congratulations to AFPD Brenda Bryn for the appellate victory and AFPD Chantel Doakes for preserving the issue in the trial court.
Posted by David Markus at 12:53 PM 23 comments: Links to this post
I really feel strange posting about my personal life on the blog, but I just wanted to take a second and thank everyone for their emails, calls and notes about my dad, Stuart Markus. He was such a good man. I really can't think of a person that didn't love the guy.
I also want to thank Dave Ovalle for writing this obituary, which captures a lot of great stories about him.
Posted by David Markus at 4:00 AM 11 comments: Links to this post
The openings were created when U.S. District Judge Patricia Seitz took senior status last November and plans by U.S. District Judge Donald Graham to take senior status this month.
Posted by David Markus at 7:00 AM 7 comments: Links to this post
Both are current state judges on the Circuit bench. Judge Bloom received her JD from the University of Miami in 1988, and Judge Gayles received his JD from George Washington in 1993. Gayles has ties to the federal system as a former Assistant U.S. Attorney in the late 90s. Both will make excellent federal judges.
Posted by David Markus at 9:44 PM 9 comments: Links to this post
The assistant U.S. attorneys who have opted to take the buyouts are Grisel Alonso, Kerry Baron, Carole Fernandez, Aloyma Sanchez and William White, according to sources.
The USAO, however, is in much better shape than the Federal Public Defender's Office, which has had its budget slashed, which has forced defenders to take lengthy unpaid furloughs, and which has had buyouts for an office one quarter the size of the USAO.
Posted by David Markus at 10:09 AM 4 comments: Links to this post
"The [U.S.] Marshals Service requires a minimum of ten days' notice in order to produce the witness, and that the defendant must bear the cost, in advance, of the transportation, housing and security attendant to the witness' production," Assistant U.S. Attorney Lawrence LaVecchio wrote in court records.
Yours truly was also quoted along with some other lawyers:
Posted by David Markus at 9:38 AM 7 comments: Links to this post
Earl Sampson, an employee of a Quickstop in Miami Gardens, was just taking out the garbage. But then he is arrested for trespassing for no reason. Check out the video:
The Herald's Julie Brown has all of the details:
But Miami Gardens isn't backing down. They are somehow defending the cops:
This is some great investigative reporting by the Herald and not just regurgitation of government press releases. Kudos.
This opinion about what counts as an aggravated felony got a little heated between Judges Fay and Martin.
First, a portion of the dissent by Judge Martin:
This case, of course, presents one of the rare instances in which showing deference and comity to the State Court would benefit a federal defendant. But here, in contrast to our usual practice, the Majority shows no comity and no deference to an order of the State Court clarifying the terms of the sentence that it imposed on Mr. Garza-Mendez. The Majority’s refusal to credit the State Court’s clarification of its own sentence is perplexing, especially given that, in my experience, we do not scrutinize State Court judgments in the same way when they result in a harsher sentence for criminal defendants.
Here's Judge Fay's response:
The dissent’s assertion that we use comity only when it increases a defendant’s sentence is off the mark. When comity aids defendants in reducing federal sentences, the overwhelming probabilities are there would be no appeals. The dissent does not cite one case in the posture of this case, where defense counsel obtained a clarification order of a state-court sentence well after the state procedural period for challenging the sentence had expired to attempt to alter a later federal sentence in federal court. Under the circumstances of this case, the district judge determined the subsequent state-court clarification order was not entitled to deference, because of the unambiguous language of the sentencing order as well as federal statutory and circuit law. The dissent’s charges impugning the integrity of our court are both outrageous and totally unfounded.
Woah. It didn't seem to me at all that Judge Martin was impugning the integrity of the court of which she is also a member. It seemed to me that she was pointing out what all criminal practitioners know about appellate courts. Good for Judge Martin. (As an aside, the majority only had one 11th Circuit judge, who was joined by a judge from the court of international trade.)
Posted by David Markus at 6:08 PM 15 comments: Links to this post
Posted by David Markus at 7:29 PM 3 comments: Links to this post
...but a three interesting opinions attached to cert denials. How Appealing has all of the links, as usual:
Tom Goldstein explains what all of this means at SCOTUSblog: "What you can learn from opinions regarding the denial of certiorari."
The more interesting opinion to me as a matter of Supreme Court practice is Justice Alito’s opinion respecting the denial of certiorari in Martin v. Blessing. In an opinion of this kind, a Justice agrees that certiorari should be denied but emphasizes that the denial of review does not endorse the lower court’s ruling. Sometimes the opinion notes a procedural flaw in the case that prevents Supreme Court review. But sometimes there is a further subtext: the opinion is a warning shot that some anomalous practices should be stopped without the Court ever having to get involved. ...
Meantime, trial started for Frank Excel Marley III, a lawyer accused of stealing more than $1 million from the Seminole Tribe. Paula McMahon has the details:
Marley's former legal assistant, Maria Hassun, 66, of Coral Gables, pleaded guilty to her role earlier this year and agreed to testify against her boss.
She is scheduled to begin serving a year and a day in federal prison on Dec. 13 but prosecutors said they will recommend a sentence reduction for her if she testifies truthfully against Marley. She must also repay $148,658 to the tribe.
Marley's attorney, Bruce Zimet, told jurors Monday that his client is part African-American and part Native American and is still owed a lot of money for unpaid work he did for the tribe. Marley "made millions and millions of dollars" for the tribe and protected them from losing millions.
Marley "became a pawn in a war of power" between factions in the tribe, Zimet said.
And Hassun is a liar who gained Marley's trust, then defrauded him, Zimet said. Hassun told prosecutors that she acted on Marley's instructions when she inflated invoices that were submitted to the tribe.
The prosecution says Marley committed fraud by padding his legal bills and charged for services, travel, phone calls and meetings "that did not occur."
Posted by David Markus at 11:15 AM 1 comment: Links to this post
Posted by David Markus at 9:20 AM 1 comment: Links to this post
The Atlantic has an in depth piece about how President Obama is doing with his goal of diversity on the federal bench. Here's the section on the 11th Circuit and Florida:
There have been six vacancies on the 11th Circuit since President Obama took office in January 2009. He has not nominated a single black man or woman to fill them. He has nominated instead one Latino man and four white women. The Senate has confirmed two of these nominees—Adalberto Jordan and Beverly Martin, both of whom were Clinton district court appointees. As set forth below, there is currently a vacancy, for an "Alabama" spot on the 11th Circuit, that is so new the White House has not yet named a nominee for it.
By contrast, four of the 15 judges currently on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals are black (two of whom were appointed to their post by President Obama, the other two by President George W. Bush). The territory of the 4th Circuit comprises a slightly smaller percentage of blacks—23 percent—than does the 11th Circuit. Even the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, still by far the most conservative in the nation, has two black federal appeals judges—one appointed by President Obama, the other by Bill Clinton.
Posted by David Markus at 8:00 PM 26 comments: Links to this post
UPDATE -- Judge Rosenbaum sentenced Kim Rothstein to 18 months in prison.
Posted by David Markus at 8:23 AM 13 comments: Links to this post
Is 10 days in jail sufficient for someone who sent an innocent man to jail for 25 years?
Here is the NY Times story covering the issue:
Posted by David Markus at 8:30 AM 7 comments: Links to this post