
Broward County Bar Association President Carlos Llorente won't call us back ...*CONFIRMED* - Judge Joel Lazarus has resigned as County Criminal Administrative Head. In an email, he cites his impending retirement, which is only a few months away (he'll be back as a senior judge almost immediately, and his seat will still be filled by the voters, not Governor Crist). Judge Sharon Zeller is currently looking for a replacement. Is there more to the story? Stay tuned ...
Still a few judges without challengers in 2010 - from the list:
County: Joel Lazarus, Peter Skolnik, Gisele Pollack, Gary Cowart, John Hurley, Linda Pratt, Mary Robinson, Steven Shutter, Eric Beller, Kathleen Ireland, Martin Dishowitz, Lisa Trachman, Lee Seidman, Edward Merrigan.
Circuit - Barbara McCarthy, Elijah Williams, Robert Carney, Susan Greenhawt, Susan Lebow, Hope Tieman-Bristol, William Haury, Matthew Destry, Carlos Rebollo, John T. Luzzo, Cynthia Imperato, Carlos Rodriguez, Linda Vitale, Lisa Porter, Kenneth Gillespie, Michael Gates, Cheryl Aleman, Eileen O'Connor.
Pick a winner (or loser), but act quickly. The county races are filling up fast ...
(and don't forget to plan ahead for 2012)
More JQC complaints? - say it ain't so. At least two more Gardineresque allegations plaguing the circuit? Peyton Place has nothing on the Broward Courthouse ...
Adria Quintela Live! - the Florida Bar's Chief Branch Discipline Counsel presents "Overview of the Lawyer Disciplinary Process" Thursday at 11:45 AM, the Tower Club. The luncheon is sponsored by The Broward County Hispanic Bar Association, and costs twenty-five bucks. No word on whether or not any of the fact patterns involve a lawyer's duty to report judges and fellow attorneys who break the canons of ethics with impunity, or whether lawyers who work for the Florida Bar are exempt from the same ethical obligations that bind the rest of us. Who knows, maybe the Q&A session will turn out to be a lot more fun than anyone could have anticipated?
What do you call an old pal who used to party like a Rock Star? - in Broward, sometimes "Your Honor". Sure, everyone's heard the stories, and they can be easily proven. But what if a former user never went to Rehab? Isn't that person still technically a drug addict, who, according to Mike Satz, is probably still committing other crimes? And how can the community be assured their officials are drug free, especially with so many of our elected officials currently grabbing the headlines in a race to the dysfunctional bottom? Can we really afford to continue believing that our top dogs possess the necessary self-control to stay out of their spouses pill bottles, their kids' illicit stashes, or to follow dosage directions given them by their own doctors? No, we think not, particularly in light of the rabid mood swings, outbursts, and suspect decisions landing so many Broward politicos in hot water these days. It's time to drug test all elected Broward officials on a regular basis, as a first step toward reform.
Scheinberg & Gardiner - the SAO responded to our request regarding the number of cases former ASA Howard Scheinberg worked on in front of Judge Ana Gardiner, after their friendship blossomed during Loureiro. They found only two cases, neither involving trials. From the SAO response:
State of Florida v. Bernard Joseph, Case # 06-22947CFA, was presented to the Grand Jury by Mr. Scheinberg. Judge Susan Lebow signed the indictment. Computer records indicate that Mr. Scheinberg handled the arraignment and early stages of discovery when the case was in Judge Gardiner’s division. The case was transferred to Judge Paul Backman’s division. The motions to suppress and the trial were handled by another prosecutor in front of Judge Martin Bidwill. The case was tried in front of Judge Bidwill in July of 2009.
State of Florida v. Keith Lines, Case # 08-2646CF10A, was initially assigned to Mr. Scheinberg. Computer records indicate that he covered calendar calls and status conferences when the case was in Judge Gardiner’s division. The case was nolle prossed on July 21, 2008, after Mr. Scheinberg left the office and re-filed as Case# 08-11699CF10A & B, adding a co-defendant. The case is currently pending and is set for trial in May of 2010 in front of Judge Bidwill.
Lastly - what will happen to Omar Loureiro up in Palm Beach, now that reality might have eclipsed even Judge Chernow Brown's "assume the worst" scenario? Is dismissal back on the menu?
$120 Million In Cash For A New Courthouse? - and Broward Schools are making deeper cuts, including more layoffs. Way to go.
Ballroom Blitz - tomorrow at least one Miami circuit courtroom will be conducting a third degree felony blitz. They're just like the ones tried in Broward a while back, with a twist - they actually resolve a ton of cases.
Here's a shorthand sketch of how we're told it works:
Cases are identified as qualifying for the Blitz Docket. The SAO and Defense try to reach an agreement, and the judge has the final say. Oftentimes the judge will undercut the State, resulting in sentences way below SAO offers. Here's the twist - judges will often give credit for time served, probation, or county sentences, even when the defendant scores mandatory Florida State Prison. How, you ask? Because the SAO, recognizing non-violent garbage cases when they see them, agrees not to appeal the sentence. Everyone goes home happy, with the SAO freeing up precious resources to bring to bear against truly violent offenders. It's smart and effective, and it'll never happen here, so long as Mike "Biggest Loser" Satz is running the show. Sigh ...
(As nasty as you wanna be, Vic ... )








Stopped by the Florida Highway Patrol, an inflamed Circuit Judge John Kastrenakes lashed out at a trooper and said "he would always have doubts when a trooper appears in his courtroom," according to an FHP report made five months after the incident ...
Into the mud, scum queen! (at 6:00 minute mark)
The JQC all but accused the judge of lying, noting that during Loureiro's trial and beyond, she and the prosecutor made 3,388 calls and text messages to each other ...
The onetime prosecutor was cleared of any wrongdoing by the Florida Bar last May.
"There was no relationship between those two," Scheinberg's attorney, Bruce Lyons, said Wednesday. "If you or anyone else's spin is that's a lot of calls and they must have been doing something, you would be incorrect. Did they communicate, yes. Did they communicate about this case, the answer is no." ...
*SS: Scheinberg's Florida Bar Closed Complaint File*
(Attorney Steve Hammer, Gardiner's one time close friend and confidante, signed the letter clearing Scheinberg)
Gardiner & Scheinberg Depo Transcripts
NBC 6: Judge Accused of Hanky Panky With Prosecutor
During the murder trial in 2007, the two legal love birds (made) 949 phone calls and 474 text messages, according to the JQC complaint. Can you say, conflict of interest?
(Congrats to Mike Satz on his bogus UM Award reception - why didn't they invite Caravella?)
During the period between March 23, 2007, when you began your close personal relationship with Mr. Scheinberg, and August 24, 2007, the date you imposed the death penalty on Mr. Loureiro, your phone records reveal, and you do not dispute, that you had 949 telephone calls with Mr. Scheinberg and 471 text messages, for a total of 1,450 separate communications over a period of 155 calendar days. That averages 9.35 communications per day between you and Mr. Scheinberg, 7 days a week ...
... On April 30 and May 1, 2007, during the penalty phase of the trial, you had a total of 12 communications with Mr. Scheinberg, including 10 telephone and 2 text messages ...
... On August 23-25, 2007, which included the date before, the date of and the date after the sentencing, you had 19 telephone conversations and 25 text messages with Mr. Scheinberg, for a total of 44 communications on those three days ...
... Your relationship with Mr. Scheinberg continued beyond the sentencing date of Mr. Loureiro. For example, during the period March 31, 2008, through the end of August, 2008, you had 1,166 telephone calls with Mr. Scheinberg and 2,222 text messages, for a total number of communications of 3,388. During that 154 day period, you averaged 22 communications per day with Mr. Scheinberg, which is almost one communication per hour for each 24 hour day ...
... a (JQC) Panel member asked you: "Could you explain the relationship with Howard Scheinberg since 1987?" This question called for an explanation of your relationship with Mr. Scheinberg from 1987 to the date the question was asked, November 13, 2008. Your answer to the question made no mention of your close personal relationship and the high volume of telephone communications and text messages between you and Mr. Scheinberg after March 23, 2007. Your answer was therefore misleading and demonstrates a lack of candor toward the Commission ...
... The same Panel member asked this follow-up question: "Again, just to clarify, my understanding is that you - - during the time your were a judge and he was a prosecutor, you did not have any kind of social relationship with Howard Scheinberg?" And your answer was: "If I saw him maybe at one retirement - - they gave they give plaquings [sic] to the younger prosecutors when they leave after three years. He could have been at a plaquing [sic] where the attorneys and the judges go. But I don't ever remember even sitting with him and socializing." This was a misleading answer because it failed to reveal the personal relationship and the thousands of calls and text messages between you and Mr. Scheinberg between March 23, 2007, and the date of the November 13, 2008, hearing before the Investigative Panel. Your answer demonstrates a lack of candor toward the Commission ...
There Go Da Judge - Driving Blind
Pulp: Judge Ana Gardiner Hit With Formal Charges
DBR: Broward judge charged with ethics violations






JAABLOG has been bringing you the best in fake journalism over the last few years. Tonight we are departing from the proven formula, by featuring some real journalism for a change. The following piece is an updated and greatly expanded original article by Joe Kollin, twenty-eight year veteran of the Sun-Sentinel, originally excerpted by the Daily Pulp back in April of last year. Recent headlines regarding Mike Satz and corruption, together with Chief Judge Tobin's statewide corruption grand jury, have led Joe to elaborate on the age old grand jury pitfalls that have been plaguing Florida for as long as anyone cares to remember. So, without further ado, please enjoy "Ethics Czars Not Needed ... If Florida State Attorneys Did Their Jobs", by the award winning REAL journalist Joe Kollin.
Politicians who want ethics czars, inspector generals and task forces to placate us Broward residents about corruption in our local governments should check the law.
Broward, as well as every county in Florida, already has ethics czars, inspector generals and anti-corruption task forces with all the power and might of the state behind them. These watchdogs can subpoena witnesses and have them jailed for lying. They can indict any public official they believe violates the law, or they can just criticize them for violating the public trust.
We don’t need more politically appointed bureaucrats, especially if it means having to give them subpoena power.
Grand juries are our watchdogs and they have all the power needed to root out corruption. Czars, inspector generals and ask forces would be superfluous.
Yet county grand juries for years, especially in Broward, have been acting more like lapdogs than watchdogs. That has allowed public officials to do as they please, knowing that no one is looking over their shoulders. As a result, the feds had to move in to make arrests in Broward corruption cases. And it is forcing the state to step in, ironically, by empanelling a statewide grand jury to look at corruption.
County grand juries are made up of 15 to 21 residents picked at random from jury lists. Members serve roughly six months and set their own meeting schedules. In addition to their anti-corruption role, they also look at death-sentence cases because no person can be put to death in Florida unless indicted by a grand jury. Grand juries deliberate in secret. Members aren’t lawyers or politicians—they are lay people who represent all of us.
To be fair, grand juries are told of their anti-corruption role by a judge who reads them a set of instructions on the day they are selected. The instructions, approved by the Florida Supreme Court (431 So.2d 594), tell new grand jurors that they are “a deterrent to evil and corruption” and that “no officer or agency of government is above or beyond the reach of the grand jury.”
The instructions also let them know of the “power to investigate the conduct of public affairs by public officials and employees, including the power to inquire whether those officials are incompetent or lax in the performance of their duties,” and lets them know that they are "a sword and a shield; a sword because the power of the grand jury has a chilling and deterrent effect on those who violate the law; it is a shield because of its power and duty to protect the innocent against persecution.”
Tell me that isn’t a mandate to probe corruption!
But the instructions are eight pages long, single-spaced. Would you remember for six months the boring instructions that a judge reads immediately after you are selected for something that might take you away from your family and work?
That’s why you can’t blame grand jurors for not recognizing their independent watchdog role. Blame, instead, the elected state attorney, the chief prosecutor in each county, for grand jurors not knowing their watchdog role, said a long-time state attorney, now retired.
“It may not be a grand jury problem, it may be a prosecutorial problem,” said Joseph P. D’Alessandro, state attorney for the five-county circuit that includes Fort Myers and Naples from 1969 to 2002—eight consecutive terms. He is now a partner in a Fort Myers law firm, Goldberg, Racila, D'Alessandro & Noone.
The chairwoman of the grand jury that served Broward most of last year, interviewed after her term ended, said the state attorney never reminded her panel of its anti-corruption watchdog function and its independence.
Lancea V. LeBlanc, 58, a federal government employee who lives in Sunrise, said she didn’t understood that she had the duty to investigate corruption in local government. Had she realized it, would she have done so?
“I would have,” she said.
Why didn’t Broward’s state attorney impress on grand jurors their duty to probe corruption? We don’t know. Michael J. Satz, who is in his eighth term as Broward’s elected state attorney, won’t discuss the issue, according to his spokesman, Ron Ishoy. Satz was first elected state attorney in 1976 and is now serving his eighth term.
The reasons Satz and other state attorneys like to keep grand juries in the dark are obvious, however. For one thing, state attorneys aren’t immune from the watchful eye of the grand jury; the grand jury can investigate and indict them as well as any other elected or appointed official. It hasn’t been unusual in the past for Florida grand juries wanting to investigate the state attorney, or not satisfied with his legal advice, to demand the courts appoint and independent lawyer as their legal advisor.
Another reason some state attorneys want to keep grand juries in the dark: the grand jury might force them to prosecute someone they might prefer not prosecuting, such as a political ally.
Or the state attorney may fear a “runaway” grand jury, one that thinks for itself and could go off half-cocked.
D’Alessandro and his assistants—he ran five grand juries in five counties—kept each informed of their duties and independence. So did the local media in those cities. As a result, it wasn’t unusual for grand juries to do what they wanted.
“They’ll tell us, ‘Please leave the room,’” D’Alessandro said. “I’ve had them do it.”
Vigilant grand juries, based on what I saw in Florida over the years in counties where grand juries weren’t kept in the dark, could have helped prevent what’s happening in Broward, Dade and Palm Beach counties. Public officials would have known that a body of powerful, independent citizens is watching them.
If politicians sincerely believe that a new law is needed, maybe it should be one that requires a judge to meet monthly with every grand jury to answer questions and review their duties and obligations. Or maybe voters should elect state attorneys who won’t try to control the grand jury.
LeBlanc’s 21-member grand jury was selected and sworn in by Broward Circuit Judge Andrew L. Siegel last March 10. Siegel orally read it the instructions, as he said is required. LeBlanc said that because grand jurors couldn’t recall those instructions, her grand jury did only what the state attorney wanted, .
“It wasn’t our decision what was brought to the grand jury, we didn’t decide,” she said.
She would have liked to know.
“It would have given the people a chance to vote on what to look at instead of the state attorney telling us what to do,” she said. “The grand jury would have made the decision.”
So, doing what the state attorney wanted, the grand jury investigated pain clinics, issuing a 70-page report on the problem previously revealed extensively by the local media.
The state Supreme Court realized in 1981 that grand jurors can’t be expected to remember everything judges read and offered a solution, or so it thought. It took action after the Grand Jury Association of Florida, a now-defunct Miami-based non-profit organization made up of former jurors, recommended giving jurors printed instructions.
On April 16, 1981, the high court accepted the association’s recommendation and approved (431 So.2d 594) a handbook written in plain English for grand jurors so that they could take it home to review during their terms. [See the Supreme Court-approved handbook for grand jurors]
The court approved the handbook in the same order as it approved the oral instructions (431 So.2s 594).
LeBlanc said she and her fellow grand jurors weren’t given the handbook. Whether current grand jurors received it in November when Broward Circuit Judge Lisa Porter selected them couldn’t be determined. Porter didn’t respond to a request for an interview.
The handbook tells grand jurors that their duties include investigations of “how public officials are conducting their offices and their public trusts” and that the “importance of the grand jury's power is emphasized by the fact that it is one of the most independent bodies known to the law."
D’Alessandro, the retired state attorney, said that even before the handbook was written he made sure grand jurors were aware of their responsibilities. Most would have known, anyway, because the media in those Florida cities regularly reported the investigations grand juries conducted.
Other members of LeBlanc’s grand jury, and those selected for the current panel, couldn’t be reached to discuss their watchdog roles. Names of grand jurors have been considered secret since a Sept. 8, 1995 opinion by then-Florida Attorney General Robert A. Butterworth. The opinion said that because grand jury deliberations are secret, the names of grand jurors also are secret. The only exception is the foreperson or acting foreperson who signs indictments and presentments.
Until Butterworth’s opinion, the names of grand jurors were considered public and newspapers often published them so anyone afraid to report corruption to police or law enforcement would have someone they could provide a tip, maybe even a neighbor. Every six months for 15 years I put the names of new grand jurors in newspapers where I worked and members have told me it resulted in tips about public officials.
Would LeBlanc have taken a tip from a neighbor with knowledge of corruption to her grand jury for discussion?
“I don’t see why not,” she said.
D’Alessando said he wonders how state attorneys can control grand juries if the court gives them the proper instructions, gives them the handbook and state attorneys remind them of their independence.
“The court picks 18 people and reads them the [instructions] that tell them they are the most powerful people in America, so they know they’ve got the power,” he said. “You can’t then go in five minutes later and tell them what to do.”
Some obviously do.
“Grand juries are the backbone of our democracy,” he added “They have a tremendous function, such as investigating government, suggesting how it should work and making recommendations to make it more efficient. They don’t just indict people, they investigate even when a crime hasn’t been committed.”
Victor Tobin, as Broward’s chief judge, is responsible for the Broward grand jury and has been appointed to supervise the new statewide grand jury probing corruption. He didn’t respond to a request for an interview.
Tobin has assigned Circuit Judge Robert A. Rosenberg to preside over Broward’s next grand jury. Its term begins soon—on March 19.
[See the state grand jury law]
(Thanks to Joe Kollin. Let's hope he continues to class up the place with his thought provoking articles)