Jose Baez

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm thinking Baez didn't ask for a speedy trial because he knows he is not going to be lead chair in this and has to wait for another lawyer to make that call. I don't think he'll be doing anything much longer. :rolleyes:
 
Looking for a pic of his wife.

I'd like to see one too. I did hear Geraldo Rivera refer to her as lovely last month when Geraldo had Mr & Mrs Baez as his guests on his Yacht in NY.
 
I'd like to see one too. I did hear Geraldo Rivera refer to her as lovely last month when Geraldo had Mr & Mrs Baez as his guests on his Yacht in NY.

Yet, he seems fascinated with KC.
 
Yesterday a poster on the Garcia thread stated that there are no Florida statutes to keep Baez from representing Casey based on his level of experience ... that those standards only apply to appointed counsel ... not privately retained counsel.

I thought that I would post what I found on that subject here since it deals as much with Baez as Garcia. I also included some case law that I find very interesting, as it shows precedence. And what might happen if Casey seeks a waiver from this Rule of Criminal Procedure (3.112)

After digging through Fl statutes the only things I can find that refer to the 5 years experience rule are all directly related to court appointed attorneys which Baez is not. There are rules in place in most states to make sure people facing the death penalty are not inadequately defended by a state appointed attorney (which use to happen all the time).

Can't find a thing about a privately paid for attorney needing to meet this standard. Everyone has to have their first capital case somewhere along the line, the state isn't willing to foot the bill though or risk the appeal.

Well you need to read Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure

Specifically, In re Amend. to Fla. Rules of Crim. P. – Rule 3.112 Minimum Standards for Attorneys in Capital Cases, 820 So. 2d 185, 194 (Fla. 2002) (amending rule 3.112 to apply to privately retained attorneys).

The same standard applies to both appointed and retained attorneys.

As evidenced by the following case ... Casey may be able to seek a waiver from the court to allow representation by an unqualified attorney ~ one that does not meet the standards of Rule 3.112 ... but in doing so she will likely lose her grounds for appeal based on ineffective counsel or ineffective assistance of counsel.

See (Nukarri k) Williams v. State of Florida

(snipped)

ANALYSIS
Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.112(f) establishes minimum standards for attorneys in capital cases. Under the rule, attorneys acting as lead counsel in such cases must meet the following criteria:
(1) are members of the bar admitted to practice in the jurisdiction or
admitted to practice pro hac vice; and
(2) are experienced and active trial practitioners with at least five
years of litigation experience in the field of criminal law; and
(3) have prior experience as lead counsel in no fewer than nine state
or federal jury trials of serious and complex cases which were tried
to completion, as well as prior experience as lead defense counsel or
cocounsel in at least two state or federal cases tried to completion in
which the death penalty was sought. In addition, of the nine jury trials
which were tried to completion, the attorney should have been lead
counsel in at least three cases in which the charge was murder; or
alternatively, of the nine jury trials, at least one was a murder trial and
an additional five were felony jury trials; and
(4) are familiar with the practice and procedure of the criminal courts
of the jurisdiction; and
(5) are familiar with and experienced in the utilization of expert
witnesses and evidence, including but not limited to psychiatric and
forensic evidence; and
(6) have demonstrated the necessary proficiency and commitment
which exemplify the quality of representation appropriate to capital
cases, including but not limited to the investigation and presentation
of evidence in mitigation of the death penalty; and
(7) have attended within the last two years a continuing legal 5
education program of at least twelve hours' duration devoted
specifically to the defense of capital cases. Attorneys who do not
meet the continuing legal education requirement on July 1, 2002,
shall have until March 1, 2003, in which to satisfy the continuing
legal education requirement.
 
Looking for a pic of his wife.

Hi ... I don't have a picture ... but on the ABA website it lists his wife's name as Luz Cruz-Ortiz Baez ... don't know if that helps. I would include the link but it requires access to ABA members area.
 
one_hoohah_wife, you're right - Casey can waive the statutory protections and have anyone who is admitted to the bar represent her. It comes from the right to represent yourself - but they won't allow someone who isn't a defendant and isn't admitted to the bar ever argue in court.

But, there are ethical rules that JB would be tiptoeing - I doubt he would sit first chair at trial. One assumes if there is a statutory law about representation, its probably there for a good reason and the lawyer should defer.

The waivers usually are only used if the client and lawyer have some type of exceptional relationship (not the JB/KC kind), or if the history of the case is ridiculous - like say an old woman who had the same lawyer for 50 years who has defended her for years, but only recently took the bar in that state - because he'd be admitted to the bar in FL for less than 5 years, he'd technically be unqualified...but the court would probably let her waive it
 
one_hoohah_wife, you're right - Casey can waive the statutory protections and have anyone who is admitted to the bar represent her. It comes from the right to represent yourself - but they won't allow someone who isn't a defendant and isn't admitted to the bar ever argue in court.

But, there are ethical rules that JB would be tiptoeing - I doubt he would sit first chair at trial. One assumes if there is a statutory law about representation, its probably there for a good reason and the lawyer should defer.

The waivers usually are only used if the client and lawyer have some type of exceptional relationship (not the JB/KC kind), or if the history of the case is ridiculous - like say an old woman who had the same lawyer for 50 years who has defended her for years, but only recently took the bar in that state - because he'd be admitted to the bar in FL for less than 5 years, he'd technically be unqualified...but the court would probably let her waive it

Yes or he (the lawyer in your scenario) could motion to appear pro hac vice ...

I wouldn't be surprised if the (eventual) lead attorney is someone from out of state ... As I've stated before ... I think some big shot will swoop in and rescue Casey from herself!
 
Florida also has rules of professional conduct that govern the conduct of attorneys which are relevant to this issue.
 
Just reported on wesh 2 news that Casey has been with Baez at his office all day and that they are still there.
I'm not an attorney so I have no idea was reasonable, but considering there is no new charges and no new evidence, what could they possible be talking about for hours on end???? Does he not have other cases? :rolleyes::waitasec::waitasec:

Wondering if he will be so impressed with the Princess after he gets ALLL the forensics?
 
Looking for a pic of his wife.

Hi...I dont have a link but if you dig around for the first interview that Geraldo did with JB on his boat you can see her in the background I think. I know that she was there and that Geraldo did refer to her as being lovely. Hope this helps
 
JB's inexperience as a trial lawyer and the power KC seems to have over him is interfering with his ability to do the best he can for his client.
 
Oh dear oh dear.

Did anyone see todays presser?

JB was... well lets just say he didnt disappoint.

So funny at the end when HE said to the journalists "Thank you. I have no further questions."

Ummm JB, YOU called the press conference. The journo's were there to ask YOU questions.

Sheeeesh.
 
Oh dear oh dear.

Did anyone see todays presser?

JB was... well lets just say he didnt disappoint.

So funny at the end when HE said to the journalists "Thank you. I have no further questions."

Ummm JB, YOU called the press conference. The journo's were there to ask YOU questions.

Sheeeesh.

Link?
 
I agree about wishing for her the "most experienced" representation. I think the State of Florida only wants to try these charges one time (if that) and the best way to ensure this is to have an even playing field.

I don't know if you noticed but I was saying that I heard the second Jose was good (not JB). But I note the second Jose is also a greenie for death penalty cases (I think).

T

You're right....

The State has a pretty good track record for prosecuting child killers.
 
Yes or he (the lawyer in your scenario) could motion to appear pro hac vice ...

I wouldn't be surprised if the (eventual) lead attorney is someone from out of state ... As I've stated before ... I think some big shot will swoop in and rescue Casey from herself!

I would agree that one of the talking heads like Geragos would do it like he did with Scott P. I can't see, for example, Scheck doing it like he did with the nanny case.

But here's where I reach a sticking point even with a Geragos - whoever does it gets Cindy as part of it, and I would bet *anything* that nobody but nobody can shut Cindy up. And shutting her up is crucial.

I think George would zip it and keep it zipped except for any very specific things the lead would rehearse him on for media contacts. Lee too. But Cindy? No way in he[[.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
80
Guests online
853
Total visitors
933

Forum statistics

Threads
589,923
Messages
17,927,722
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top