FORMAL CHARGES FILED AGAINST JUDGE ALEMAN
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION
STATE OF FLORIDA
INQUIRY CONCERNING A JUDGE, :
NO. 06-52, CHERYL ALEMAN : CASE NO. _____________
________________________________ :
NOTICE OF FORMAL CHARGES
TO: Honorable Cheryl Aleman
Broward County Courthouse
201 S.E. 6th St., Suite 7910
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-3325
You are hereby notified that the Investigative Panel of the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, by a vote of those members present at its meeting held in Tampa, Florida on July 25, 2006, has determined pursuant to Rule 6(f) of the Rules of the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, as revised, and Article V, ' 12(b) of the Constitution of the State of Florida, that probable cause exists for formal proceedings to be, and the same are hereby, instituted against you based upon allegations that you have engaged in a pattern of arrogant, discourteous, and impatient conduct toward lawyers and others appearing before you and have otherwise acted in a manner that erodes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary,
to wit:1. In violation of Canon 1, Canon 2A, and Canon 3B(4), you denied motions to disqualify that were filed by public defenders Sandra Perlman and Bruce Raticoff in the case of
State v. Braynen. 2A. Specifically, during morning proceedings in the Braynen matter on January 24, 2006, you denied an oral motion to disqualify made by Ms. Perlman without affording her a reasonable opportunity to prepare the appropriate documents and file said motion in writing, as required by applicable law.
B. Thereafter, during afternoon proceedings, Ms. Perlman made another oral motion for disqualification based, in part, upon the fact that: i) you had engaged in preferential treatment in favor of the State by refusing to grant Ms. Perlman=s request that the lunch recess be delayed by 15 minutes in order to allow her to attend a previously scheduled plea hearing before another judge; yet, you readily granted a request from the assistant state attorney for a 15-minute delay in the start of the afternoon proceedings; and ii) you had impugned Ms. Perlman=s integrity by calling, or directing other courthouse personnel to call, the other judge=s courtroom at the time Ms. Perlman was scheduled to appear in front of the other judge in a perceived attempt to Acheck up@ on her.
C. When Ms. Perlman asked for 1 hour to reduce her oral motion to writing, you proceeded to give her a pen and pad of paper and advised her she had 15 minutes to prepare the motion, despite the fact the courtroom was on the 7th floor and the public defender=s office was on the 4th floor, which under normal circumstances would require 3-5 minutes in travel time each way. You then stated court would be in recess from 2:20 p.m. to 2:35 p.m. At approximately 2:42 p.m., court resumed and neither Ms. Perlman nor Mr. Raticoff were in the courtroom. You 3
then announced a brief recess in the proceedings. At approximately 2:49 p.m., when only Mr. Raticoff had returned to the courtroom, you abruptly issued a rule to show cause against both Ms. Perlman and Mr. Raticoff, despite Mr. Raticoff informing you that Ms. Perlman was printing the motion to disqualify and that he would make a phone call to determine her exact whereabouts.
D. When Ms. Perlman returned to the courtroom and explained she was unable to complete the motion for disqualification and accompanying affidavit in the 15 minutes you authorized, you refused to dismiss the rule to show cause and instead advised counsel the matter would be held Ain abeyance until the conclusion of th[e] proceeding.@
E. At approximately 3:05 p.m. after Mr. Raticoff expressed concern that the rule to show cause had placed counsel in the untenable position of having to defend themselves and their client during the same proceeding, Ms. Perlman made another oral motion for disqualification based, in part, upon the issuance of the rule to show cause. Ms. Perlman again requested a reasonable amount of time to prepare the written motion. Notwithstanding your knowledge that 15 minutes was insufficient time to prepare a written motion based upon your issuance of the rule to show cause just minutes earlier, you nonetheless indicated you would only give Ms. Perlman 15 minutes. When Ms. Perlman objected and expressed concern she would again be subjecting herself to contempt inasmuch as 15 minutes was insufficient, you responded by indicating court would be in recess for only 12 minutes. After Ms. 4
Perlman objected to 12 minutes, you then stated she would be given 22 minutes (from 3:08 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.) to prepare the motion.
F. At approximately 3:35 p.m., proceedings resumed. At that time, you handed counsel an order denying the
first written motion to disqualify. Ms. Perlman then explained she had not been able to complete the second written motion in the 22 minutes allotted but had returned to the courtroom at 3:30 p.m. as directed out of fear she would be held in contempt a second time. She then requested an additional 5 minutes for Diane Cuddihy, an appellate attorney in the public defender=s office, to complete the motion and bring it to your courtroom. You permitted the additional 5 minutes and upon receipt of the second written motion, promptly denied it as well.2. In violation of Canon 1, Canon 2A, and Canon 3B(4), on or about February 7, 2006, in the case of
State of Florida v . Hollis, you issued an Order [To] Show Cause against attorney Adam Katz and ordered him to appear before you on February 8, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., although you were aware Mr. Katz was out of town at that time and, furthermore, there were no exigent circumstances that compelled you to schedule a hearing on such abbreviated notice. Because Mr. Katz was unable to adjust his travel schedule so as to permit his return to Broward County in time for the February 8th hearing (not having learned of the February 7th Show Cause Order until late in the evening of February 7th), you found him in criminal contempt and sentenced him to 60 days in the Broward County jail by Order entered February 13, 52006 [
nunc pro tunc to February 10, 2006]. Mr. Katz was then incarcerated from Friday, February 10, 2006, through Tuesday, February 14, 2006.3. In violation of Canon 1, Canon 2A, and Canon 3B(8), during a hearing in the case of
State of Florida v. Felix on or about July 1, 2003, you denied the defendant, Jean Felix=s request for medical furlough, notwithstanding the fact that:a. The assistant public defender and assistant state attorney appearing before you stipulated that: i) Mr. Felix was Asuffering from an incurable fatal disease@ and; ii) Ahis life expectancy was approximately two months@ according to medical personnel at the jail;
b. Neil McKay, who worked at the Broward County Jail as the systems manager for Westford Health Services, testified Mr. Felix was at the Aend stage of AIDS@ and that his condition would be aggravated if he stayed in jail because of the increased risk of infection; and
c. The assistant state attorney stated on the record during the July 1st hearing, AI have no objection to the furlough.@
4. In violation of Canon 1, Canon 2A, and Canon 3B(2), you subsequently entered an Order in the
Felix case on July 29, 2003 (AOrder@), which appeared to be in direct or indirect response to an article that appeared in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel entitled, ALawyers Stunned After Broward Circuit Judge Refuses To Release Dying Inmate@ dated July 4, 2003. In defending your July 1st ruling in the Order, you misleadingly stated, inter alia, that:At the hearing on the morning of Tuesday, July 1, 2003, on Defendant=s Motion for Furlough, defense counsel 6
[Steven] Michaelson presented no testimony of any medical doctor [concerning Mr. Felix=s medical condition].
Your Order conspicuously omits
, however, that the State Attorney=s Office and Public Defender=s Office had stipulated during the July 1st hearing that Mr. Felix was dying from an Aincurable fatal disease@ and had a short life expectancy, thereby obviating the need for any medical testimony concerning his medical condition.5. In violation of Canon 1, Canon 2A, and Canon 3E(1), you refused to disqualify yourself in cases in which attorney Michael Gottlieb was counsel of record; namely,
State of Florida v. Walls and State of Florida v. Suppa, despite the fact you had previously disqualified yourself in another case in which Mr. Gottlieb filed a motion for disqualification wherein he detailed his acrimonious relationship with you during the time you served as an assistant statewide prosecutor.CONCLUSION
6. The acts described above, if they occurred as alleged, would also impair the confidence of the citizens of this state in the integrity of the judicial system and in you as a judge; would constitute a violation of the cited Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct; would constitute conduct unbecoming a member of the judiciary; would demonstrate your unfitness to hold the office of judge; and would warrant discipline including, but not limited to, your removal from office and/or any lawyer discipline recommended by the Commission. 7
You are hereby notified of your right to file a written answer to the above charges made against you within twenty (20) days of service of this notice upon you.
DATED this _____ day of February, 2007.
___________________________________
Lansing C. Scriven, Esq.
Lansing C. Scriven, P.A.
Special Counsel
Fla. Judicial Qualifications Commission
Fla. Bar No. 729353
442 W. Kennedy Blvd., Suite 280
Tampa, FL 33606
813/254-8700
--andB
Marvin C. Barkin, Esq.
Interim General Counsel
Fla. Judicial Qualifications Commission
P.O. Box 1102
Tampa, FL 33601
813/223-7474
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
NOTICE OF FORMAL CHARGES has been furnished by Certified Mail to the HONORABLE CHERYL ALEMAN, Broward County Courthouse, 201 S.E. 6th St., Suite 7910, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-3325 on this _____ day of February, 2007.___________________________________
Attorney
the rumoors that she was moved because of jqc stuff were obviously correct
Did anyone else get a headache from reading this post? Is it too difficult to ask someone from JAAB to proofread a posting in order to get a standard font type and size for this article? The format of this article is atrocious.
JAAB welcomes any help we can get. Just lend a hand (maybe we can even work it out so your cover isn't blown too).
I offer my help. And, JAAB now knows I'm not Jay! They also know I wasn't tutti frutti all doody. But as I wrote before, anonymity is a vehicle for success on the Blog. "The Blog Is Brilliant" to quote me. Great source huh?
To help out on the font issues, which I was struggling with myself last night, I suggest first writing the piece on a word processor. Then, a cut a paste job. Then, you have these weird things that can happen regardless of that b/c of HTML code. Try clicking on the bottom left corner button where you write on Go Daddy. It gets funky. All of a sudden last night when I wrote the piece on Adam, it underlined everything for no reason. I think there are some kinks in Go Daddy. Try to go back and edit it. But it may be impossible b/c of mismatching formatting. O/W you'd have to write it out longhand. Too much work. I don't know how to upload a .pdf file. You can link it to a URL perhaps. Maybe try select all and see if the fonts will get consistent.
Better, perhaps the sponsor for Go Daddy can help. Umm...can you please hire her? The window washing rocket scientist from the old Super Bowl Commercials.
As to the merits of the complaint, even though, it would seem clear that the issues raised in Mr. Katz', Ms. Perlman's, and Mr. Raticoff, and Ms. Cuddihy, and Mr. Gottlieb are all smack dab on point. The 4th ruled in Mr. Gotlieb's favor on his issues so that ought buttress the claims. I think I remember reading something with Sandy that was great too.
How exactly does the JQC process work? Bill went full tilt and tried his hardest before. Is there a specific remedy called for by the multiple complainants?
Candidly, she was always kind of nice to me. So this is sorta hard to write. But Adam has a family. Sandy's a helluva lawyer, as is Bruce, and Mike. Ms. Cuddihy is probably the most patient, kindest, knowledgeable, attorney's on any issue, appellate or otherwise, in the State of Florida I've ever encountered. I find it very difficult to think of any rational counterarguments. That's because, there aren't any.
Someone went to jail. A fellow attorney. I know he needs to put food on the table and his children missed him. Plus, Pt's were threatened with jail. Are you kidding me, Sandy? Bruce? Gimmee a break. Even Nancy Grace would say, "Objection" for Heaven's sake. Well, maybe not Nancy.
To be honest, I feel bad for Judge Aleman. We had 2 things in common. She debated in college as did I. She played college hoops. So did I (fantasy hoops).
Sadly, obviously, those points are irrelevant I know. The law is the law. Liberty is precious. Seeing Adam in that state was, sickening. I didn't know about everyone else. Geez.
Respectfully, I concur.
AnY onE WAnT tO wAGeR oN tHE PEnaLTies? i THinK itS GOInG tO Be a slAP oN thE WRiST liKE dIAz oR SHAppY. thESE JuDGes GET aWWAy wITh iTT alL. ALEmaN AlwaYS haD UNREasoNAble DEMAnds....PrOBABLY SomEThIng LaCKIng in HER PerSOnAL lIFe tO MAke heR so MiSERAbLE....IM diZZy.
Are you pleaing guilty because you are guilty?
is Aleman prejudiced?
They ordered that Shappy meet with a psychologist weekly. I think he was "normal" for one week after his slap on the wrist, oh I mean his ....reprimand... and then back to his old self. Maybe Aleman needs a few weeks at a spa... relax out her stress, a loofah mud wrap does wonders. Maybe she can even get the JQC to foot the bill.
Why didn't the prosecutors get involved... they were badgered by her too? She would threaten them with contempt as well. I guess that wouldn't have been prudent on their part.
i still cant figur out what she did wrong on the katz matter, disrespecting the court is a vast understatement to what he did.
I will be the first to say I dont know Mr. Katz. Unless I am wrong, it appears that this person was put on notice his case was going to trial on two occasions and there would be no further continuances. I light of this both times he sent a coverage guy in to say he was unavailable. It appears the Judge made it clear that on the second incident he had to be there and ready to try the case, even after he tried for a written motion for continuance. Yet he went to vegas on business and sent in a coverage guy. Agian, I will state I dont know if the above is all true that is what was portrayed in the press.
If this is true, who here would completely disregard a Judge telling you be ready for trial no more continuances? We have all been there, its sucks, but no one just blows it off. If the facts I said above is true, is there any worse disrespect an attorney can bring on the Court?
Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong on this, as I may be missing something.
Didn't Aleman terminate someone's parental rights for failing to show up in court on time? And then she was reversed by the 4th. If this is true then that should have been in the complaint as well.
Okay, this blog is way too difficult to follow in print, that is why Rumpole's gets so much more traffic. Why not make this easier to use for those of us who need a passport to enter your county? Otherwiese, this blog will forever remain a shitty second-rate rag.