Morning gang!!
The judge dressed the DT down pretty good about the order of protection thing - the minutes made me laugh. Here's a snip:
LATER:
The Court has considered the public records requests filed by the Maricopa County
Office of Public Defense Services (OPDS), defendant’s Motion for Protective Order, counsel’s
arguments, and the Court’s minute entry in this case dated September 25, 2012.
In the previous ruling on September 25, 2012, the Court denied a motion by defendant to
have all billing records sealed. The Court noted that OPDS “routinely redacts privileged
information from billing documents prior to releasing documents sought through a public record
request,” and found the OPDS practice sufficient to prevent the harm defendant sought to avoid
in the motion to seal. Defendant’s current Motion for Protective Order is nearly identical, both in
terms of reasons for the request and relief sought.
The “law of the case” doctrine generally prevents the court from reopening questions that
have already been decided by the court. However, the doctrine is procedural and “does not
deprive a judge of the power to change his or her own nonfinal rulings or the nonfinal rulings of
another judge of that same court sitting on the same case simply because the question was ruled
on at an earlier stage.” Davis v. Davis, 195 Ariz. 158, 162, ¶¶ 13-14, 985 P.2d 643, 647
(App.1999). Defendant’s current motion is nearly identical to the previous motion and does not
provide a new legal justification or a change in circumstances sufficient to warrant a deviation
from the previous ruling in this case.
Counsel for the ABC News and CNN-HLN Network/Turner stated the public record
requests for records from OPDS do not seek any detailed billings. Rather, these public records
requests to OPDS seek only total hours billed, total dollars paid, and the rates paid. As a result,
the current public records requests can be satisfied under the Court’s minute entry in this case
dated September 25, 2012.
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS ORDERED denying defendant’s Motion for Protective Order.
She basically said, "You already tried that - quit bothering me." lol
SO, I am hoping if Nurmi had made a mountain out of a molehill on the juror debacle, the judge will again, dress him down properly.
But truthfully, even if he is getting paid what he would make in private practice - why not do it - he is guaranteed income if he stays on instead of searching out sex offenders to play with, and then he can have Jodi edit his nice little book. Sarcasm intended.
