Court Opinion

ID: 9486540
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 11:51:38.887203+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:51:46.916653
License: Public Domain

BLACK, Circuit Judge,
specially concurring:
I write to identify what I believe to be the major factor causing this appeal, namely, the frustration the district court undoubtedly felt as a result of Ms. Ward’s conduct in this case. During a lengthy and complex multi-defendant drug importation conspiracy trial, the district court courteously attempted to accommodate Ms. Ward’s desire to admit Quiala’s post-arrest statements by continuing his trial until' after the jury returned its verdicts in the trial of his co-defendants. *573When Quiala’s separate trial could not be completed on July 23, the district court scheduled closing arguments to begin at 9:30 a.m. on July 24, fully expecting all parties to be present.
I do not know what caused Ms. Ward to travel from Key West to Miami on the evening of July 23. I do know, however, that her poor judgment in doing so was inconsiderate of the district court, the jury and other counsel. As I understand the record, Ms. Ward planned to leave Miami on an 8:20 a.m. flight, knowing that she was expected in court in Key West one hour and ten minutes later. I question whether such a plan would work in the best of circumstances. Certainly, Ms. Ward’s plan failed to allow for the uncertainties of air travel, including not only the possibility of mechanical failure, but also early morning fog, inclement weather, pilot or crew illness, flight overbooking and the like.
Although I concur in the opinion of the court and agree that penalties for defense counsel’s conduct should not fall on her client, I believe Ms. Ward might well have deserved sanctions.