987 users online (208 members and 779 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 41 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 610
  1. #1

    JBaez requests Ex Parte Hearing with Judge Strickland

    SNIPPED: "...Jose Baez, doesn't want the public to know about any defense theories that are being developed.

    He filed a request for an ex-parte hearing before Orange Circuit Court Judge Stan Strickland. That means he wants to meet with the judge without prosecutors or the public present so "sensitive matters which are critical to the defense can be addressed," according to the document filed late Monday.

    In the process of investigating the case, the defense claims they will need to obtain certain records, which could be used at trial. Baez doesn't want to prevent others from know ing about any theories.

    And the items Baez is seeking cannot be obtained through normal discovery process, the legal process of prosecutors turning over investigative information about the case...."


    See here: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,7397632.story

    I'm going to have to go look at whether or not FL allows such a thing, but it's not allowed here in LA, and with good reason!

    Talk about prime setting for a defense attorney to "lobby" their theories and evidentiary issues with the judge!
    Also appears he's seeking a potential primer on discovery from the judge...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    North
    Posts
    5,964
    And here we go again!

    I am curious to hear how Judge S responds. Does anyone think he'll grant JB's request?
    JMO

  3. #3
    What is he up to? More whining about obtaining items from FBI? Or does he want pictures from the judge's server? Everyone wants to have private meetings suddenly...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    175
    [And the items Baez is seeking cannot be obtained through normal discovery process, the legal process of prosecutors turning over investigative information about the case...."


    What does that mean? What could he possibly need to obtain that he couldn't get through discovery? What would be some examples of this?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    On the edge...
    Posts
    547
    Is this normal operating procedure? I never heard of this...then again, I haven't followed a case as closely as this one. Can someone please advise.
    Last edited by lovelabs; 03-31-2009 at 01:30 PM. Reason: wrong word
    God is Great Beer is Good And People are Crazy

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    North
    Posts
    5,964
    Quote Originally Posted by LancelotLink View Post
    What is he up to? More whining about obtaining items from FBI? Or does he want pictures from the judge's server? Everyone wants to have private meetings suddenly...
    Seems that way, doesn't it?

    If the Judge refuses to grant this request, can JB claim that the refusal interfered with his ability to defend his client? Would that claim have merit?
    JMO

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southeast
    Posts
    271
    Sounds like some discovery they absolutely do not want made public.

  8. #8
    Well, here's what I've found so far in Westlaw:

    2008 FL Supreme Court Case discussing whether or not an ex parte communication with a judge and prosecutor was violative of due process rights. Court's comments are contained in a footnote, meaning it's important, but not necessarily the holding of the case, and though not on point factually, helps me evaluate this.

    SNIPPED: f.8 - "...We also reject Tompkins's claim that his due process rights were violated by an ex parte communication between the trial judge and the prosecutor concerning the need for an evidentiary hearing on Tompkins's lethal injection claim. The ex parte communication was not improper because it did not constitute a substantive discussion on the merits of Tompkins's case. See Jimenez v. State, 33 Fla. L. Weekly S805, S809, --- So.2d ----, ----, 2008 WL 2445461 (Fla. June 19, 2008) (finding ex parte communication between judge and prosecutor not improper where the record established that the judge engaged in the conversation for strictly administrative reasons and the communication did not constitute a substantive discussion concerning the merits of the case); see also Fla.Code of Jud. Conduct, Canon 3 B(7)."

    Tompkins v. State, 994 So.2d 1072, Fla.,2008.

    For those with Westlaw access, see here:
    http://web2.westlaw.com/result/defau...d=1&rs=WLW9.03

    I expect to see an Opposition Memorandum by the SA will discussing whether or not these "things" JBaez wishes to discuss in private with Judge Strickland could constitute a substantive discussion regarding the merits of the case, which is NOT allowable, or are for a "strictly administrative reason," which may be allowable.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    North
    Posts
    5,964
    Quote Originally Posted by LC446 View Post
    [And the items Baez is seeking cannot be obtained through normal discovery process, the legal process of prosecutors turning over investigative information about the case...."


    What does that mean? What could he possibly need to obtain that he couldn't get through discovery? What would be some examples of this?
    I also thought that discovery worked both ways. Doesn't JB have to disclose all evidence he finds to the SA?
    JMO

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by lovelabs View Post
    Is this normal operating procedure? I never heard of this...then again, I haven't followed a case as closely as this one. Can someone please advise.
    No, it's certainly not here in LA - but I'm still looking at case law in FL. I can't imagine it's going to be granted with what I'm seeing in Westlaw.


  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Paintr View Post
    I also thought that discovery worked both ways. Doesn't JB have to disclose all evidence he finds to the SA?
    Yes. However, I read this motion as JB wanting to talk to the judge about his efforts to obtain certain items from other entities, not LE/OSCO/SA, without the SA present.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Northeastern US
    Posts
    1,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Chezhire View Post
    Yes. However, I read this motion as JB wanting to talk to the judge about his efforts to obtain certain items from other entities, not LE/OSCO/SA, without the SA present.
    Can't he subpoena the information he seeks that LE/OSCO/SA does not have, or is he essentially trying to secretly subpoena information?

  13. #13
    ecs5298's Avatar
    ecs5298 is offline Founding Member of AFKBPOFPOPL & Hardwood Mulch King & Bacon Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    United States of Bacon
    Posts
    9,296
    Quote Originally Posted by JWG View Post
    Can't he subpoena the information he seeks that LE/OSCO/SA does not have, or is he essentially trying to secretly subpoena information?

    He probably wants the judge to do it for him since he never wants to do his own work.

    Do you ever get the feeling that JB was one of those people in high school that never did their homework and always tried to copy someone else's?
    "When it all goes down the crapper, don't come crying to me. You were warned" - ecs5298, November 6, 2012

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Chezhire View Post
    Yes. However, I read this motion as JB wanting to talk to the judge about his efforts to obtain certain items from other entities, not LE/OSCO/SA, without the SA present.
    Chezhire,

    Knowing what you know about the case do you have any clue where Baez might be going with this?

    What certain items might he be trying to get?

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by JWG View Post
    Can't he subpoena the information he seeks that LE/OSCO/SA does not have, or is he essentially trying to secretly subpoena information?
    Yes, that's what he's supposed to be doing if he can't get it voluntarily (knowing him, he's annoyed everyone from the FBI to kingdom come with his attitude, so no one's likely to volunteer anything to him.)
    It's a fairly easy thing to do, too. I've never had trouble getting subpoenas for out-of-state entities - but you do have to know HOW to go about it procedurally.

Page 1 of 41 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Support Thread: Judge Strickland
    By Tricia in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 158
    Last Post: 05-09-2010, 09:47 PM
  2. 2010.04.19 Judge Strickland IS stepping down
    By manatee in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 506
    Last Post: 05-02-2010, 10:06 PM
  3. 2010.01.15 Letter to Judge Strickland WFTV
    By sleutherontheside in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 366
    Last Post: 01-23-2010, 11:46 AM