In 2005, a jury convicted Robles and Garrido [and sentenced to them to 10 years and 51 month prison terms, respectively] based on an
indictment that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal said [in their review of the convictions] was "ambiguous at best."
,
The 9th Circuit stated: "After reviewing the trial record as a whole, we
conclude that there is a reasonable probability that the jury convicted
Robles and Garrido of honest services fraud based on their failure to
disclose a conflict of interest," the panel wrote. "Because of the
emphasis on the conflict of interest theory in the jury instructions and
in the closing arguments, we find that the error affected the
Appellants' substantial rights."
.
While "there is
evidence in the record that could support a bribery or kickback
conviction," the panel wrote, " nevertheless, it is impossible to
conclude that the jury convicted Robles and Garrido based on their
participation in either a bribery or a kickback scheme instead of based
on Skilling's unconstitutional failure to disclose a conflict of interest."
.
The
9th Circuit panel reversed honest-services mail & wire fraud convictions on 21
counts against Robles and five counts against Garrido, while
acquitting Robles of two counts and Garrido of one count because
prosecutors, post-Skilling, admitted they had insufficient evidence.
.
In
addition, 9th Circuit panel reversed four money-laundering counts against
Robles because they "are predicated on the flawed honest services fraud
convictions," while upholding five of Robles' bribery counts.
.
In any county where vague and ambiguous indictments are seen all to often, this case should send a warning.
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Barstow, Big Bear, Needles & Joshua Tree Courts Likely to Still Suffer after Trial Court Funding Act's Latest Workgroup Report
Trial Court Funding Act,'s workgroup's 250-page report pointed out that
equality in trial court funding is still "in need of improvement," opening the door for a new plan to be considered directing how
money is divvied up by the courts. "The workgroup finds that
funding has not been allocated based on workload fluctuations or in a
manner designed to promote equal access to the courts statewide,
implementation of statewide policies, or implementation of efficiencies
and cost-saving measures to support access to justice," the report said. The
Judicial Council should "adopt a new methodology for allocating funding
appropriated for support of trial court operations, to be implemented"
in July, the group said.
.
A committee, led by Sacramento County Superior Court Presiding Judge Laurie Earl, has a deadline to submit a proposal to the Judicial Council [at its meeting in San Francisco on April 25 to 26]. It is hoped that the Inland Empire courts in San Bernardino and Riverside are expected to be the biggest winner in any funding shift, but with that said. workload, not historical factors will be a major driver, so smaller county areas like Barstow, Joshua Tree, the Mountain areas & Needles and are likely to still suffer.
.
.
A committee, led by Sacramento County Superior Court Presiding Judge Laurie Earl, has a deadline to submit a proposal to the Judicial Council [at its meeting in San Francisco on April 25 to 26]. It is hoped that the Inland Empire courts in San Bernardino and Riverside are expected to be the biggest winner in any funding shift, but with that said. workload, not historical factors will be a major driver, so smaller county areas like Barstow, Joshua Tree, the Mountain areas & Needles and are likely to still suffer.
.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Police Can Track Cell Phone Says Fed'l Appeal Court
New 6th Circuit Court of Appeal case says police can track cell phone -[UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MELVIN SKINNER, No. 09-6497, UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 12a0262p.06; 2012 U.S. App.
LEXIS 16920; 2012 FED App. 0262P (6th Cir.) August 14, 2012, Filed] - what says you all?
Thursday, August 2, 2012
THE REALIGNMENT PROBLEM...and policy changes that will have to be made at all levels of government
"Public Safety Realignment: California at a Crossroads" was a briefing and conference held in San Francisco last week [a report by ACLU of California can be found on line at www.acluc.org/realignment]. Not a single prosecutorial office (nor legislator's office) was listed amongst the participants. Hopefully a few snuck in and got the information, if not, too bad. Why?
.
Realignment burdens [created by the 2011 US Supreme Court decision in Brown v Plata (131 S. Ct. 1910) which found that overcrowding in California's prisons to be so severe as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment] are real in that the capacity of the state prison system, while temporarily (and only in part) relieved by the early release/transfer of 17,000, the State is looking at having to release or transfer to local holding facilities another 16,000 state prisoners, and the realignment burdens are going to be a recurring problem. Why?
.
1. There is a troubling lack of state monitoring, data collection, outcome measurements and funding incentives to help counties successfully implement realignment (code for the State saying, here's your AB 109 hush bucks and leave us alone);
.
2. A dramatic increase in spending on county jails--facilitated by billions of dollars in state funding--particularly in those counties that have historically sent more people to state prison for low-level, non-violent offenses.
.
3. A shockingly high number of people who represent no real threat to public safety being held in county jails before having their day in court, incarcerated without trial simply they cannot afford bail.
.
Some of the suggestions:
.
1. Data Collection. Mandate standardized data collection and analysis across the 58 counties in order to monitor which policies and programs are working to reduce recidivism and reliance upon incarceration, and base policy and budget decisions on those findings;
.
2. Funding Formula. Revise the state allocation formula to incentivize counties to reduce recidivism and incarceration;
.
3.Sentencing Reforms. Enact statewide front-end sentencing reforms to help counties implement realignment;
.
4.Pretrial Detention reform. Amend statewide pretrial detention laws and implement new local pretrial release policies to keep behind bars only those that truly pose a risk to public safety;
.
5. Alternatives to incarceration. Create and fund concrete plans to develop community-based alternatives to detention for both pretrial and sentenced population;
.
6.Utilize New Sentencing Options. Encourage local courts to utilize realignment's new sentencing options that authorize judges to replace all or a part of a jail sentence with community sanctions or treatment programs;
.
7. Stop Jail Expansion. Halt or significantly reduce jail expansion and construction plans, including AB 900 funding and projects;
.
8. Limit Use of Immigration Detainers. Review the impact of immigration status and immigration detainers on inmates' detention to prioritize public safety needs.
.
Blogger Bob's comments:
.
1. Realignment is a legal reality and brings with it the very real need to make policy and budgetary priority changes; we spend two and half times MORE putting and keeping people in jail than educating our youth and that does not even include funding entitlement programs like Medi-Cal--the questions have to be asked, what schools do we close, what educational services do we cut, what people do we deny medical services to and cause their death so we can continue the flow of convictions and resulting incarcerations? When the public can see the choices being forced on us by the "leave-the-system-alone folks", maybe the change pressure will be real, but for now, significant change will not happen without more formula-based legislation (the newer and better AB 109 likely to be fought over?)
.
2. Electing people in support of ANY of the suggestions, is going to be tough--WHY? Many prosecuting agencies and prison industry advocates could care less. In fact in the last election cycle, anyone in a state race that suggested we look for ways to reduce the need for jail expansion by looking into alternative sentencing approaches and re-examine prosecution policies, were met with vicious (and pricey) hit piece campaigns--so while the suggestions are noted, who would carry the message against such a massive industry armada (the prison guard unions and their PACs/Non-Affiliated Committees, the Building Industry Association, certain construction trade unions that are involved in prison building projects--formidable opponents to say the least)
.
3. Judges, who stand for re-election in California, even though they have the power to consider other
sentencing options might be reluctant to do so for fear of offending the brethren (90% plus of the appointees are former DDAs,some of which maintain close ties with those groups from whence they came), for fear of being labelled "soft-on-crime" and have to face a DDA put up to run (by the current DA) against the sitting judge and absent that, the pro-institutional bias (and that's its easier and politically safer to order straight state prison time) is a tough nut to crack.
.
.
Realignment burdens [created by the 2011 US Supreme Court decision in Brown v Plata (131 S. Ct. 1910) which found that overcrowding in California's prisons to be so severe as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment] are real in that the capacity of the state prison system, while temporarily (and only in part) relieved by the early release/transfer of 17,000, the State is looking at having to release or transfer to local holding facilities another 16,000 state prisoners, and the realignment burdens are going to be a recurring problem. Why?
.
1. There is a troubling lack of state monitoring, data collection, outcome measurements and funding incentives to help counties successfully implement realignment (code for the State saying, here's your AB 109 hush bucks and leave us alone);
.
2. A dramatic increase in spending on county jails--facilitated by billions of dollars in state funding--particularly in those counties that have historically sent more people to state prison for low-level, non-violent offenses.
.
3. A shockingly high number of people who represent no real threat to public safety being held in county jails before having their day in court, incarcerated without trial simply they cannot afford bail.
.
Some of the suggestions:
.
1. Data Collection. Mandate standardized data collection and analysis across the 58 counties in order to monitor which policies and programs are working to reduce recidivism and reliance upon incarceration, and base policy and budget decisions on those findings;
.
2. Funding Formula. Revise the state allocation formula to incentivize counties to reduce recidivism and incarceration;
.
3.Sentencing Reforms. Enact statewide front-end sentencing reforms to help counties implement realignment;
.
4.Pretrial Detention reform. Amend statewide pretrial detention laws and implement new local pretrial release policies to keep behind bars only those that truly pose a risk to public safety;
.
5. Alternatives to incarceration. Create and fund concrete plans to develop community-based alternatives to detention for both pretrial and sentenced population;
.
6.Utilize New Sentencing Options. Encourage local courts to utilize realignment's new sentencing options that authorize judges to replace all or a part of a jail sentence with community sanctions or treatment programs;
.
7. Stop Jail Expansion. Halt or significantly reduce jail expansion and construction plans, including AB 900 funding and projects;
.
8. Limit Use of Immigration Detainers. Review the impact of immigration status and immigration detainers on inmates' detention to prioritize public safety needs.
.
Blogger Bob's comments:
.
1. Realignment is a legal reality and brings with it the very real need to make policy and budgetary priority changes; we spend two and half times MORE putting and keeping people in jail than educating our youth and that does not even include funding entitlement programs like Medi-Cal--the questions have to be asked, what schools do we close, what educational services do we cut, what people do we deny medical services to and cause their death so we can continue the flow of convictions and resulting incarcerations? When the public can see the choices being forced on us by the "leave-the-system-alone folks", maybe the change pressure will be real, but for now, significant change will not happen without more formula-based legislation (the newer and better AB 109 likely to be fought over?)
.
2. Electing people in support of ANY of the suggestions, is going to be tough--WHY? Many prosecuting agencies and prison industry advocates could care less. In fact in the last election cycle, anyone in a state race that suggested we look for ways to reduce the need for jail expansion by looking into alternative sentencing approaches and re-examine prosecution policies, were met with vicious (and pricey) hit piece campaigns--so while the suggestions are noted, who would carry the message against such a massive industry armada (the prison guard unions and their PACs/Non-Affiliated Committees, the Building Industry Association, certain construction trade unions that are involved in prison building projects--formidable opponents to say the least)
.
3. Judges, who stand for re-election in California, even though they have the power to consider other
sentencing options might be reluctant to do so for fear of offending the brethren (90% plus of the appointees are former DDAs,some of which maintain close ties with those groups from whence they came), for fear of being labelled "soft-on-crime" and have to face a DDA put up to run (by the current DA) against the sitting judge and absent that, the pro-institutional bias (and that's its easier and politically safer to order straight state prison time) is a tough nut to crack.
.
Indictment of former SEIU Union Leader's Timing Not the Type of Bad Publicity Prop 32 Opponents & Organized Labor (Tyrone Freeman) Wanted to See Before the Upcoming Election?
Indictment of former SEIU Union Leader's Timing Not the Type of Bad Publicity Prop 32 Opponents & Organized Labor Wanted to See Before the Upcoming Election?
This message is reprint essentially of an email sent to Blogger Bob by the National Union of HealthCare Workers [National Union of Healthcare Workers, 5801 Christie Ave.
Suite 525,Emeryville, CA 94608]--I think it bears note in light of the upcoming elections:
"-SEIU leader faces up to 200 years in jail
-Tyrone Freeman indicted on 15 felony counts including embezzlement and mail fraud
-SEIU-UHW's Leon Chow leaves Supervisor race
SEIU leader indicted
Tuesday, former SEIU leader Tyrone Freeman was indicted by a federal grand jury in Los Angeles on 15 counts, including embezzlement, mail fraud, and filing false tax returns.
The indictment, as reported in the Los Angeles Times, states that Freeman misused hundreds of thousands of SEIU members’ dues dollars while he was President of SEIU Local 6434, which represents 170,000 low-wage homecare workers across California. Freeman also served as a Vice President of SEIU’s International Executive Board.
The charges, which could result in a jail sentence of up to 200 years, allege that Freeman spent union members’ dues on lavish golf tournaments, Beverly Hills cigar bars, spa treatments, his own wedding in Hawai’i, and payments to family members’ businesses.
The criminal indictment offers an important perspective on SEIU’s disastrous trusteeship of SEIU-UHW. In 2009, SEIU removed SEIU-UHW’s democratically-elected officials for resisting SEIU’s order to transfer 65,000 members to Tyrone Freeman’s SEIU Local 6434. Freeman was a close ally of SEIU President Andy Stern, who appointed Freeman to his position and “nurtured Freeman’s rise in the union,” according to the Los Angeles Times. Criminal investigators now believe that Freeman used members’ dues to pursue a “lifestyle of $175 glasses of cognac, $250 bottles of wine and a $3,400 trip to the NFL Pro Bowl,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
Freeman joins a long list of SEIU officials who’ve participated in a culture of corruption at the union, including Annelle Grajeda, Alejandro Stephens, Wade Rathke, Bruce Raynor and Rickman Jackson.
SEIU-UHW's Leon Chow leaves Supervisor race
Also this week, SEIU-UHW Director of External Affairs and Executive Board member Leon Chow shuttered his campaign for San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors after newspapers reported on Chow’s apparent violations of California election laws. Chow reportedly violated state laws by registering to vote in San Francisco even though he lived in a different county. Chow’s campaign to unseat incumbent Sup. John Avalos -- one of the board’s most progressive members -- was backed by SEIU-UHW and the Chamber of Commerce.
This message is reprint essentially of an email sent to Blogger Bob by the National Union of HealthCare Workers [National Union of Healthcare Workers, 5801 Christie Ave.
Suite 525,Emeryville, CA 94608]--I think it bears note in light of the upcoming elections:
"-SEIU leader faces up to 200 years in jail
-Tyrone Freeman indicted on 15 felony counts including embezzlement and mail fraud
-SEIU-UHW's Leon Chow leaves Supervisor race
SEIU leader indicted
Tuesday, former SEIU leader Tyrone Freeman was indicted by a federal grand jury in Los Angeles on 15 counts, including embezzlement, mail fraud, and filing false tax returns.
The indictment, as reported in the Los Angeles Times, states that Freeman misused hundreds of thousands of SEIU members’ dues dollars while he was President of SEIU Local 6434, which represents 170,000 low-wage homecare workers across California. Freeman also served as a Vice President of SEIU’s International Executive Board.
The charges, which could result in a jail sentence of up to 200 years, allege that Freeman spent union members’ dues on lavish golf tournaments, Beverly Hills cigar bars, spa treatments, his own wedding in Hawai’i, and payments to family members’ businesses.
The criminal indictment offers an important perspective on SEIU’s disastrous trusteeship of SEIU-UHW. In 2009, SEIU removed SEIU-UHW’s democratically-elected officials for resisting SEIU’s order to transfer 65,000 members to Tyrone Freeman’s SEIU Local 6434. Freeman was a close ally of SEIU President Andy Stern, who appointed Freeman to his position and “nurtured Freeman’s rise in the union,” according to the Los Angeles Times. Criminal investigators now believe that Freeman used members’ dues to pursue a “lifestyle of $175 glasses of cognac, $250 bottles of wine and a $3,400 trip to the NFL Pro Bowl,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
Freeman joins a long list of SEIU officials who’ve participated in a culture of corruption at the union, including Annelle Grajeda, Alejandro Stephens, Wade Rathke, Bruce Raynor and Rickman Jackson.
SEIU-UHW's Leon Chow leaves Supervisor race
Also this week, SEIU-UHW Director of External Affairs and Executive Board member Leon Chow shuttered his campaign for San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors after newspapers reported on Chow’s apparent violations of California election laws. Chow reportedly violated state laws by registering to vote in San Francisco even though he lived in a different county. Chow’s campaign to unseat incumbent Sup. John Avalos -- one of the board’s most progressive members -- was backed by SEIU-UHW and the Chamber of Commerce.
Please visit our website at www.NUHW.org and feel free to contact us with any questions at info@nuhw.org!"
..
Blogger Bob's comments
.
.. While the general public kinda blurs things together on "SEIU", they clearly should not. SEIU has been active and bringing representation to many people that needed the help. How much of this indictment results from internal policing is not known. It was not that many years ago that Hoffa, Jr. had a fight with another contingent of the Teamsters. The result was federal intervention and indictments. It looks like SEIU Freeman got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. More union scrutiny maybe is in the horizon
... I for one, having watched "Non-Affiliated Committee's" (state political PACs) fund oppositions AGAINST pro-union candidates (John Coffey--33rd AD) in the last election cycle and actually support candidates that were staunch right-to-work (anti-union) candidates (Bill Jahn) instead, was a thing to behold, and maybe something membership SHOULD maybe have more control over the funds being used for same? [e.g. should they know their fees are being used to back people that want to fight union-backed candidates?]
...Are the San Bernardino County public employee unions next? There is a real fight coming up with the pension plan liabilities in San Bernardino County..Lovingood and Roelle are the 2 supervisorial candidates for the 1st Supervisorial District with differing views of what, when and how should legacy liabilities (like pensions) be given the sacred cow blessing. Potential swing votes on the Board? Stay tuned.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
DA Discovery Abuses....Brady Ignored?
Interesting article on the ongoing Brady fight. Specifically mentioned is the 2010 Working Group on Brady hosted by the
Jacob Burns Ethics Center at Cardozo Law School [cosponsored by,
among others, the National District Attorneys Association] and some criticisms.
http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202564932174&DA_Policies_Fail_to_Protect_Rights&slreturn=20120631223412
http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202564932174&DA_Policies_Fail_to_Protect_Rights&slreturn=20120631223412
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)