The Texas Supreme Court refused on May 11 to review the constitutionality of a Dallas trial judge's decision to deny a television station permission to videotape a court case allegedly because the television station had previously broadcast stories critical of the judge.
The nine-member court denied the petition for review without comment. Justice Nathan Hecht, joined by Justice Priscilla Owen, dissented from the denial of review, noting that the trial court's "order may be a significant intrusion on KTVT's constitutional rights. . . . This court's summary denial of KTVT's petition, given the significance of the press's interest here, is to me inexplicable."
The case concerns trial judge Jim Pruitt's July 1999 refusal to allow Dallas-Fort Worth CBS affiliate KTVT-TV to film court proceedings through the courtroom's back door window. According to the television station, Pruitt's court coordinator explained to the station that its request had been denied because of prior negative stories that had been broadcast about Pruitt. Pruitt's bailiff later allegedly told another station that it could film through the window so long as they were not KTVT.
Pruitt then denied the station's motion for reconsideration from the bench. "I don't think KTVT is a reputable news organization, and as such, I'm not going to allow you to film," he said, according to court records quoted by the Associated Press.
The AP reported that Pruitt's reaction may have been prompted by an Emmy-award winning November 1998 story about lazy judges that accused Pruitt of spending part of a work day in a bar. Another judge mentioned in the 1998 broadcast has sued the television station for libel, according to the AP.
The station had argued to the court that its First Amendment right to cover a criminal trial had been violated by Pruitt's decision. The station's attorney, Roger Diseker, told the AP that Pruitt's action was a "clear violation of the First Amendment" and that it "does not bode well for the press when a judge can retaliate against the media for a negative story."
http://www.dwicriminaldefenselawyer.com/
http://www.sloanelaw.com
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Supreme Court Turns Down Appeals of 2 Ft.Worth Killers
WASHINGTON (AP) ― A convicted rapist paroled from Ohio and then condemned for the robbery and strangulation of his 64-year-old stepmother in Texas lost an appeal Tuesday before the U.S. Supreme Court, moving him closer to execution.The high court refused to review the case of Reginald Perkins, 53, sent to death row for the slaying of Gertie Mae Perkins in Fort Worth 7 1/2 years ago. The woman's body was found in the trunk of her car in a parking garage.A Tarrant County jury took just 30 minutes in 2002 to decide Reginald Perkins should be put to death. Shortly after the jury's verdict was read in court, Perkins proclaimed his innocence in a written letter read by his lawyer.In November, a federal appeals court rejected claims he was mentally retarded and ineligible for the death penalty, that his legal help earlier had been ineffective, that the Texas sentencing statute was unconstitutional and that he was innocent of the murder. It's that appeal the Supreme Court refused to review Tuesday.Evidence at his trial showed he pawned his stepmother's wedding ring and wrote fraudulent checks from the account of the family trucking business in Fort Worth. When Gertie Perkins showed up missing, police summoned to her home found a carpet removed, a phone cord disconnected and sheets missing from a bed.He became a suspect after detectives learned of his previous convictions in Ohio for rape and attempted rape and that he had been a suspect in two killings in Cleveland in the 1980s. When arrested, he directed his father and police to the body.Perkins also acknowledged the slaying to a fellow inmate while awaiting trial and said his motive was robbery.At the punishment phase of his trial, jurors heard testimony that he pleaded guilty to rape and attempted rape of two 12-year-old girls in 1982 and that he had been implicated in the strangulation of two women. One of them was the mother of the girl he raped. The other was the sister of his ex-wife.In 1986, he had been paroled from Ohio after receiving a life prison term for the rape conviction. He was returned from parole eight years later but released again in February 2000. His stepmother's murder occurred 10 months later.Perkins does not have an execution date.In a second Texas death row case Tuesday, Elkie Taylor, convicted in another Fort Worth case, lost his bid for a rehearing before the justices.In March, the court refused to review Taylor's conviction and sentence for strangling a 65-year-old Fort Worth man with two wire coat hangers and then leading police on a four-hour chase in a stolen 18-wheeler.Like Perkins, Taylor also had been contending in appeals he shouldn't have been condemned because he is mentally retarded. He was sentenced to die for the 1993 robbery and murder of Otis Flake at Flake's Fort Worth home. Authorities said it was the second killing linked to Taylor over an 11-day period. The Milwaukee native had been on parole for about three months at the time of the slayings, freed after serving less than nine months of an eight-year sentence for burglary.In 2003, two days before he was set to be executed, he won a reprieve from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals because state prison records showed he may be mentally retarded and ineligible for execution under Supreme Court guidelines.The Texas appeals court later lifted its reprieve. Lower federal courts also have denied his subsequent appeals.Taylor, who does not yet have an execution date, climbed in the cab of the stolen truck and led police on a chase from Fort Worth to Waco that ended when a state trooper shot out the truck's tires. In the chase, he tried to ram police cars and run over two troopers standing on the side of a road.Authorities contended Taylor and an accomplice took cash and items from Flake's house so they could be sold to buy crack cocaine. His accomplice, Darryl Birdow, was sentenced in 1994 to life in prison. Authorities said Taylor admitted involvement in a similar slaying of an 87-year-old Fort Worth man 11 days earlier but blamed the killing on a partner.
http://www.dwicriminaldefenselawyer.com/
http://www.sloanelaw.com
http://www.dwicriminaldefenselawyer.com/
http://www.sloanelaw.com
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Counterfeiter Detained in Custody Pending Trial by Federal Magistrate
FORT WORTH – A brother and sister accused of making fake money appeared in federal court Wednesday on charges that they tried to pass the counterfeit currency at a Fort Worth store.
But Amy Catherine Taylor, 29, and her brother, Jack Arvil Taylor, 25, could also face federal weapons charges after six explosive devices and six rifles were found inside their southwest Fort Worth home Tuesday.
The siblings made their first appearance before U.S. Magistrate Charles Bleil. The judge released Ms. Taylor on bail but ordered her brother held pending a detention hearing Monday morning.
The two were arrested Tuesday when federal agents and Fort Worth officers descended on their home in the 3000 block of Meadowmoor Street.
According to a criminal complaint filed in U.S. district court, the pair tried to defraud a Wal-Mart store in southwest Fort Worth this summer. On July 3, the two entered the store in the 7400 block of McCart Street and presented $600 in counterfeit money to a cashier. They used fake $100 and $50 bills to purchase a money order, the complaint said.
The cashier looked at the money, suspected it was not authentic and called Fort Worth police. The Taylors fled the store before officers arrived.
Investigators reviewed the store's surveillance video, determined which car the two fled in and traced them to the Meadowmoor Street home. Secret Service agents confiscated counterfeiting equipment, including two computers and a printer, during Tuesday's raid of the home.
The raid also revealed six crudely made – but deadly – explosive devices. Officials also found six rifles including an AR-15 mounted on a tripod, an AK-47 and ammunition.
"It is very telling that a counterfeiting bust ends in finding explosives and assault type weapons in a seemingly quiet neighborhood," Fort Worth police Lt. Paul Henderson said in a press release. "Thankfully, the Taylor siblings were discovered before their intentions became known through the use of those deadly devices."
In the state court system (County Criminal and District Courts) bail in lieu of appearance in virtually assured except in the most serious offenses. where the accused is considered a flight risk or the release of an individual would pose a clear danger to society. Even then a bail bond would be set, but it would typically be too high for the individual to make. However, for those facing Federal charges in the United States District Court, it is very common for the United States Attorney's Office to requests that those that pose any conceivable risk to the public be detained. And they often come up with very creative ways for doing so. For example, a defendant recently charged with receiving child pornography via the Internet was ordered detained pending trial after a US Customs Agent testified at his detention hearing that those who posess Child Pornography have a sexual interest in children, and she had located several elementary schools within miles of the defendant's home. Furthermore, the threat to society need not be physical. Someone accused of embezzelment or fraud is just as likely to be held if the government can establish they pose an economic threat to others if allowed to remain free pending trial.
http://www.sloanelaw.com/
http://www.dwicriminaldefenselawyer.com/index.php
But Amy Catherine Taylor, 29, and her brother, Jack Arvil Taylor, 25, could also face federal weapons charges after six explosive devices and six rifles were found inside their southwest Fort Worth home Tuesday.
The siblings made their first appearance before U.S. Magistrate Charles Bleil. The judge released Ms. Taylor on bail but ordered her brother held pending a detention hearing Monday morning.
The two were arrested Tuesday when federal agents and Fort Worth officers descended on their home in the 3000 block of Meadowmoor Street.
According to a criminal complaint filed in U.S. district court, the pair tried to defraud a Wal-Mart store in southwest Fort Worth this summer. On July 3, the two entered the store in the 7400 block of McCart Street and presented $600 in counterfeit money to a cashier. They used fake $100 and $50 bills to purchase a money order, the complaint said.
The cashier looked at the money, suspected it was not authentic and called Fort Worth police. The Taylors fled the store before officers arrived.
Investigators reviewed the store's surveillance video, determined which car the two fled in and traced them to the Meadowmoor Street home. Secret Service agents confiscated counterfeiting equipment, including two computers and a printer, during Tuesday's raid of the home.
The raid also revealed six crudely made – but deadly – explosive devices. Officials also found six rifles including an AR-15 mounted on a tripod, an AK-47 and ammunition.
"It is very telling that a counterfeiting bust ends in finding explosives and assault type weapons in a seemingly quiet neighborhood," Fort Worth police Lt. Paul Henderson said in a press release. "Thankfully, the Taylor siblings were discovered before their intentions became known through the use of those deadly devices."
In the state court system (County Criminal and District Courts) bail in lieu of appearance in virtually assured except in the most serious offenses. where the accused is considered a flight risk or the release of an individual would pose a clear danger to society. Even then a bail bond would be set, but it would typically be too high for the individual to make. However, for those facing Federal charges in the United States District Court, it is very common for the United States Attorney's Office to requests that those that pose any conceivable risk to the public be detained. And they often come up with very creative ways for doing so. For example, a defendant recently charged with receiving child pornography via the Internet was ordered detained pending trial after a US Customs Agent testified at his detention hearing that those who posess Child Pornography have a sexual interest in children, and she had located several elementary schools within miles of the defendant's home. Furthermore, the threat to society need not be physical. Someone accused of embezzelment or fraud is just as likely to be held if the government can establish they pose an economic threat to others if allowed to remain free pending trial.
http://www.sloanelaw.com/
http://www.dwicriminaldefenselawyer.com/index.php
Monday, December 15, 2008
Tarrant County Attorney Convicted of Forgery
Fort Worth attorney Kimberly Ashley-Stevens was convicted today of three felony charges related to forged documents in an adoption case.
A Tarrant County jury deliberated about three hours before convicting Ashley-Stevens of fabricating physical evidence, tampering with a government document and passing forged documents in the case of a couple who were attempting to adopt an infant.
Ashley-Stevens, 40, showed no physical emotion when the verdict was returned. However afterward, she cried quietly outside the courtroom while waiting for her punishment hearing to begin.
Prosecutors are expected to start presenting evidence of other adoption and annulment cases in which Ashley-Stevens is accused of presenting forged documents.
Ashley-Stevens faces up to 10 years in prison on the charge of fabricating physical evidence, and up to two years in prison on the charge of tampering with government records and forgery in connection with those documents.
Ashley-Stevens is being tried in state District Judge Elizabeth Berry's Criminal District Court No. 3.
http://www.sloanelaw.com
A Tarrant County jury deliberated about three hours before convicting Ashley-Stevens of fabricating physical evidence, tampering with a government document and passing forged documents in the case of a couple who were attempting to adopt an infant.
Ashley-Stevens, 40, showed no physical emotion when the verdict was returned. However afterward, she cried quietly outside the courtroom while waiting for her punishment hearing to begin.
Prosecutors are expected to start presenting evidence of other adoption and annulment cases in which Ashley-Stevens is accused of presenting forged documents.
Ashley-Stevens faces up to 10 years in prison on the charge of fabricating physical evidence, and up to two years in prison on the charge of tampering with government records and forgery in connection with those documents.
Ashley-Stevens is being tried in state District Judge Elizabeth Berry's Criminal District Court No. 3.
http://www.sloanelaw.com
Fort Worth closes DWI Loophole
FORT WORTH - Fort Worth police have taken action to halt a loophole that allowed obvious drunk drivers of the hook.
While shocking, there have been reports of drivers in Fort Worth that got so drunk they actually passed out behind the wheel, yet were never charged with a DWI.
Police say policy has now been changed to close the loophole that was big enough to drive through; but prior to the change, there was report after report of people doing just that.
According to police reports, a man was found sitting in traffic on an Interstate 35 service road with a strong "odor of alcohol." The report also said the man couldn't "keep his balance" and "didn't know where he was."
Another driver was found stopped on Interstate 35 and appeared "intoxicated and asleep behind the wheel."
Motorists on Interstate 30 reported a man sitting in his truck that was half on the shoulder and half in the fast lane. Police said he had "a strong odor of alcohol," "slurred speech" and "swayed as he attempted to stand."
Then there is the case of the driver discovered slumped behind the wheel on Meadowbrook Drive, "unresponsive" and with a "strong odor of an alcoholic beverage." An officer reported the man "could barely walk and nearly fell down several times."
All the above incidents appear in Fort Worth police reports from this year. Some reports involve drivers apparently so drunk they passed out after stopping on the roadway.
But there is one more thing the drivers have in common, not one of them got charged with DWI.
"It doesn't matter if they're awake, asleep or passed out; it doesn't matter," said Richard Alpert, the assistant district attorney for Tarrant County
Alpert said he didn't realize that sleeping or unconscious drunk drivers weren't getting DWIs until News 8 brought it to his attention.
"It's a recipe for fatality," he said. "It's a recipe for death."
But as in all recipes, little things can make a big difference.
Fort Worth police said their general orders for a DWI arrest require some proof the suspect is actually operating the vehicle. Fort Worth police traffic supervisor Sgt. Rodney Bangs said the decision on arresting for DWI is not black and white.
"It hinges on the definition of operating," he said. "In the past it was construed to mean if the vehicle was running in gear and the person had a foot on the brake, therefore they were controlling the vehicle, keeping it from moving."
So, instead of a DWI arrest, some of the drunkest drivers in Fort Worth have simply been ticketed for public intoxication and hauled to jail to sleep it off.
Alpert said a DWI is a much more serious charge.
"It's the difference between a fine only offense and an offense that has a mandatory two-year, no-release probation with programs, fines and tools that can prevent them from driving while intoxicated," he said.
With a DWI charge, a judge can order treatment and require an interlock device on the car. With a public intoxication charge, the defendant pays a fine and it's over. The case also can't be used to increase penalties for future drunk driving arrests.
To close the loophole, the DA's office issued a memo stating that DWIs cover a driver "seated in a stationary, yet running vehicle positioned in a traffic lane."
However, there is still the question of what about those cars found running or drivers that manages to pull off into a parking lot or restaurant drive thru?
Alpert said those cases are more difficult, but can be prosecuted.
Sgt. Bangs said the change should lead to more DWI arrests.
"This enhances our ability to make DWI arrests," he said.
Officers will still have to make tough judgment calls in the field. If they choose to charge a DWI, they know it will take them off the streets for hours to process the case. For that reason, Alpert said he will not blame an officer who gives a ticket for public intoxication because he thinks a DWI won't stick.
http://www.sloanelaw.com
While shocking, there have been reports of drivers in Fort Worth that got so drunk they actually passed out behind the wheel, yet were never charged with a DWI.
Police say policy has now been changed to close the loophole that was big enough to drive through; but prior to the change, there was report after report of people doing just that.
According to police reports, a man was found sitting in traffic on an Interstate 35 service road with a strong "odor of alcohol." The report also said the man couldn't "keep his balance" and "didn't know where he was."
Another driver was found stopped on Interstate 35 and appeared "intoxicated and asleep behind the wheel."
Motorists on Interstate 30 reported a man sitting in his truck that was half on the shoulder and half in the fast lane. Police said he had "a strong odor of alcohol," "slurred speech" and "swayed as he attempted to stand."
Then there is the case of the driver discovered slumped behind the wheel on Meadowbrook Drive, "unresponsive" and with a "strong odor of an alcoholic beverage." An officer reported the man "could barely walk and nearly fell down several times."
All the above incidents appear in Fort Worth police reports from this year. Some reports involve drivers apparently so drunk they passed out after stopping on the roadway.
But there is one more thing the drivers have in common, not one of them got charged with DWI.
"It doesn't matter if they're awake, asleep or passed out; it doesn't matter," said Richard Alpert, the assistant district attorney for Tarrant County
Alpert said he didn't realize that sleeping or unconscious drunk drivers weren't getting DWIs until News 8 brought it to his attention.
"It's a recipe for fatality," he said. "It's a recipe for death."
But as in all recipes, little things can make a big difference.
Fort Worth police said their general orders for a DWI arrest require some proof the suspect is actually operating the vehicle. Fort Worth police traffic supervisor Sgt. Rodney Bangs said the decision on arresting for DWI is not black and white.
"It hinges on the definition of operating," he said. "In the past it was construed to mean if the vehicle was running in gear and the person had a foot on the brake, therefore they were controlling the vehicle, keeping it from moving."
So, instead of a DWI arrest, some of the drunkest drivers in Fort Worth have simply been ticketed for public intoxication and hauled to jail to sleep it off.
Alpert said a DWI is a much more serious charge.
"It's the difference between a fine only offense and an offense that has a mandatory two-year, no-release probation with programs, fines and tools that can prevent them from driving while intoxicated," he said.
With a DWI charge, a judge can order treatment and require an interlock device on the car. With a public intoxication charge, the defendant pays a fine and it's over. The case also can't be used to increase penalties for future drunk driving arrests.
To close the loophole, the DA's office issued a memo stating that DWIs cover a driver "seated in a stationary, yet running vehicle positioned in a traffic lane."
However, there is still the question of what about those cars found running or drivers that manages to pull off into a parking lot or restaurant drive thru?
Alpert said those cases are more difficult, but can be prosecuted.
Sgt. Bangs said the change should lead to more DWI arrests.
"This enhances our ability to make DWI arrests," he said.
Officers will still have to make tough judgment calls in the field. If they choose to charge a DWI, they know it will take them off the streets for hours to process the case. For that reason, Alpert said he will not blame an officer who gives a ticket for public intoxication because he thinks a DWI won't stick.
http://www.sloanelaw.com
Boy George goes on Trial for False Imprisonment & Assault
LONDON - A Norwegian escort told a court Monday that Boy George manacled him to a bedroom wall and beat him with a metal chain after accusing him of hacking into his computer.
The former Culture Club singer is on trial for the false imprisonment of 29-year-old Audun Carlsen.
The 47-year-old singer, who is standing trial under his real name, George O'Dowd, denies the charge. Carlsen told London's Snaresbrook Crown Court that he met the singer through a Web site and went to his London home for a naked photo shoot. After the encounter Boy George sent a series e-mails accusing Carlsen of hacking into his computer, but Carlsen nonetheless agreed to return for a second photo session several weeks later in April 2007.
Carlsen told the jury that when he arrived Boy George and another man held him down and beat him before the singer handcuffed him to a hook in the bedroom wall.
"George was slapping me and beating me and punching me and screaming things," Carlsen said. Carlsen said he was able to escape by unscrewing the hook and running for the door.
"I took a bit of time getting the door open and he had a metal chain that he was hitting me with," Carlsen said.
Carlsen said he ran into the street clad only in his underwear. The court was shown photographs of red welts on Carlsen's head and injuries to his arm which he said had been inflicted during the attack.
Boy George's androgynous image and powerful voice made him an `80s icon, and gave Culture Club hits including "Karma Chameleon" and "Do You Really Want to Hurt Me?"
But the singer struggled for years with drug problems.
In 2006 he was ordered to do community service with New York City's Department of Sanitation after pleading guilty to false reporting of an incident. He called police with a false report of a burglary at his lower Manhattan apartment, and the responding officers found cocaine inside.
In Texas, the charge "False Imprisonment" is called "Unlawful Restraint:"
§ 20.02. UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT.
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly restrains another person.
(b) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child younger than 14 years of age;
(2) the actor was a relative of the child; and
(3) the actor's sole intent was to assume lawful control of the child.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is:
(1) a state jail felony if the person restrained was a child younger than 17 years of age; or
(2) a felony of the third degree if:
(A) the actor recklessly exposes the victim to a substantial risk of serious bodily injury;
(B) the actor restrains an individual the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant; or
(C) the actor while in custody restrains any other person.
(d) It is no offense to detain or move another under this section when it is for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest or detaining an individual lawfully arrested.
(e) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child who is 14 years of age or older and younger than 17 years of age;
(2) the actor does not restrain the child by force, intimidation, or deception; and
(3) the actor is not more than three years older than the child.
http://www.sloanelaw.com/
The former Culture Club singer is on trial for the false imprisonment of 29-year-old Audun Carlsen.
The 47-year-old singer, who is standing trial under his real name, George O'Dowd, denies the charge. Carlsen told London's Snaresbrook Crown Court that he met the singer through a Web site and went to his London home for a naked photo shoot. After the encounter Boy George sent a series e-mails accusing Carlsen of hacking into his computer, but Carlsen nonetheless agreed to return for a second photo session several weeks later in April 2007.
Carlsen told the jury that when he arrived Boy George and another man held him down and beat him before the singer handcuffed him to a hook in the bedroom wall.
"George was slapping me and beating me and punching me and screaming things," Carlsen said. Carlsen said he was able to escape by unscrewing the hook and running for the door.
"I took a bit of time getting the door open and he had a metal chain that he was hitting me with," Carlsen said.
Carlsen said he ran into the street clad only in his underwear. The court was shown photographs of red welts on Carlsen's head and injuries to his arm which he said had been inflicted during the attack.
Boy George's androgynous image and powerful voice made him an `80s icon, and gave Culture Club hits including "Karma Chameleon" and "Do You Really Want to Hurt Me?"
But the singer struggled for years with drug problems.
In 2006 he was ordered to do community service with New York City's Department of Sanitation after pleading guilty to false reporting of an incident. He called police with a false report of a burglary at his lower Manhattan apartment, and the responding officers found cocaine inside.
In Texas, the charge "False Imprisonment" is called "Unlawful Restraint:"
§ 20.02. UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT.
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly restrains another person.
(b) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child younger than 14 years of age;
(2) the actor was a relative of the child; and
(3) the actor's sole intent was to assume lawful control of the child.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is:
(1) a state jail felony if the person restrained was a child younger than 17 years of age; or
(2) a felony of the third degree if:
(A) the actor recklessly exposes the victim to a substantial risk of serious bodily injury;
(B) the actor restrains an individual the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant; or
(C) the actor while in custody restrains any other person.
(d) It is no offense to detain or move another under this section when it is for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest or detaining an individual lawfully arrested.
(e) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child who is 14 years of age or older and younger than 17 years of age;
(2) the actor does not restrain the child by force, intimidation, or deception; and
(3) the actor is not more than three years older than the child.
http://www.sloanelaw.com/
Florida Judge being Investigated for Inappropriate Conduct
A Florida judge is being investigated amid complaints that he has behaved inappropriately in the courtroom. Judge Ralph Eriksson is accused of punishing people for exercising their legal rights. According to testimony, Ericksson denied defendants their legal rights and was vindictive. Daniel Bradshaw appeared before the judge in the past took the stand on Monday to tell a special panel how the judge treated him. Bradshaw said Eriksson blew up on the stand during his case two years ago and then sent him to jail for five months. "I mean, he just went boom. I asked, 'Can you repeat yourself?' All of a sudden he said, 'Haven't you heard a word I said yet? How do you wish to plea?' I said, 'Not guilty.' 'Well, I'm going to send you to jail anyway,'" Bradshaw said. The state's Judicial Qualifications Commission is listening to testimony and reviewing video to see how has treated defendants. Video from Bradshaw's April 2006 court appearance shows his attorney asking Eriksson to repeat himself and Ericksson shouting back. Bradshaw asked Ericksson about a motion to suppress evidence in his case and Eriksson responded by giving Bradshaw a $5,000 bond and sending him to jail. An expert witness for the state said this review is about Eriksson's actions. "I thought the conduct was shocking, inappropriate, non judicial, very unprofessional, vindictive, punitive, and we could go on and on. There is simply no basis for what the judge did," expert witness Jeffrey Weiner said. The judge's defense attorney, Chandler Muller, said the expert witness did not look at the actual video until about an hour before his deposition was taken. He also said the judge did not abuse his power. "The record's going to show that we have a fine judge that's served this community for many years in a very fair way and he has a lot of support," Muller said. Eriksson has been a county judge for 13 years. After hearing all the testimony, the Judicial Qualifications Commission will make a recommendation to the Florida Supreme Court. In the meantime, Eriksson has not been suspended from his position.
http://www.sloanelaw.com
http://www.sloanelaw.com
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
