ADDITIONAL JQC COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST JUDGE ALEMAN
MESSAGE FROM SEAN CONWAY:
"I realize that what me and my clients experienced pales in comparison to the real harms suffered by those people involved in Judge Aleman's current JQC complaint. But, since Judge Aleman has, for a second time on Apr. 30th, responded to the JQC in a way that suggests that the 4 original counts have only to do with "disagreement with her rulings", I sent the following off to the JQC last week to shed more light on her "arrogant, discourteous and impatient" behavior (wording in the JQC's original case against her)."
JQC COMPLAINT MAILED MAY 2, 2007:
Esteemed members of the Commission:
Only because 17th Circuit Court Judge Cheryl Aleman’s April 30th, 2007 response to this Commission maintains that she "should not be punished for adhering to the law … or for making a ruling … with which some may disagree", I felt it was important to inform the Commission of two events that occurred while Judge Aleman was on the criminal bench here in Broward County.
These two events do not concern unfavorable rulings. The First Incident demonstrates behavior which, in the opinion of myself, my client, and many people present in her courtroom, was "arrogant, discourteous and impatient". The Second Incident, contrary to any defense that Judge Aleman was "just following established law" discusses Judge Aleman’s deliberate refusal to follow established law in what appeared to be a brief attempt to make defendants waive their rights to a speedy trial.
"FIRST INCIDENT"
FEBRUARY 9, 2006 - (TRANSCRIPT ATTACHED)
At the Final Violation of Probation hearing in the case of State v. Ian Adams, (case number 02-21362-CF10
, even though counsel for the State and I had discussed the case and the plea offer beforehand, a new offer was made to me by Assistant State Attorney Lawrence Marin on the morning of the hearing. I was about to tell Mr. Adams the new offer just as the case was called. Both myself and counsel for the State asked Judge Cheryl Aleman if the matter could be recalled in a few minutes. (A 3-4). There were many other cases waiting to be heard that morning. Rather than grant what would have been approximately a five-minute recall to address other cases and to allow me to discuss a new offer with Mr. Adams, Judge Aleman used much more than that amount of time to chastise me in a loud tone, to interrupt me when I would try to answer some of her questions, and even tried to assess costs of the State’s witnesses against me without any request by the State to do so.
After being told to call its first witness, counsel for the State, Lawrence Marin, advised Judge Aleman that, "there may be one other thing to discuss before the case actually goes. Also Judge, I know you’ve got other things on your docket, if this goes to a hearing it is going to be a pretty lengthy hearing." (A 3-4). Judge Aleman then incorrectly assumed that we, the attorneys, had not tried to discuss the case earlier when it was noted that "all the negotiations need to be done not this morning but days ago, weeks ago." (A 4). Judge Aleman would not allow me a moment to relay the new offer, which, in Mr. Adams’ other, 05-8921-CF10A case, was two years less prison than the previous offer.
Faced with no other options, I answered in the affirmative when Judge Aleman asked me "Are you asking for a continuance of the hearing?" (A 6). Judge Aleman then questioned me about what the grounds were and why no written motion to continue had been filed. (A 6-7). Never really wanting a continuance in the first place (just five minutes on recall), and seeing the continuance as the only opportunity to communicate a new plea offer to Mr. Adams, I had no satisfactory answers to Judge Aleman’s questions.
At that point, the State’s witnesses were asked by Judge Aleman if they were "getting paid overtime to be here?" (A 12). After two of the law enforcement officers said that they were being paid overtime, Judge Aleman asked "what’s defense counsel’s position as to who should bare (sic) the cost for the - - for defense failing to file a motion to continue in a timely fashion so that the cost could be avoided here?" (A 13). After my initial attempts to respond to the question were interrupted by Judge Aleman, I eventually managed to suggest that it was unfortunate, but that these things happen. (A 14). I never wanted a continuance; I only needed approximately the same amount of time that had already been used up to relay the new offer to Mr. Adams.
Nonetheless, Judge Aleman continued on the cost assessment issue stating "someone’s got to pay for that" and "… do you think that the people who are responsible for incurring those costs are the ones who ought to pay for them?" (A 15). Frustrated at not being able to convey a new plea offer to Mr. Adams, and believing that Judge Aleman was the person responsible for a continuance request having to be made in the first place, I responded truthfully, "well, Judge, I can answer that, I think Your Honor should pay for it, here is why, because I only asked for simply five minutes of time … nobody would have to come back." (A 15). Judge Aleman then attempted to recede from what she had just done saying "and if anybody has any motions along the lines of what should happen with respect to cost, I’m happy - - I’ll be happy to entertain any motions anybody wants to file with - - " (A 17). No plea offer was taken that day; the Final VOP hearing was then continued to April 13, 2006. Mr. Adams returned on April 13, 2006, and was sentenced to the new prison offer that had been conveyed at the February hearing. Unfortunately, Mr. Adams began this prison sentence two months later than would have otherwise occurred if he had been able to begin the sentence in February when the offer was conveyed. Inmates receive better gain time on their sentences at prison than they do in county jail.
"SECOND INCIDENT"
OCTOBER 18TH – OCTOBER 30TH,
2006For an unknown period of time in October, 2006, Judge Aleman decided to drastically shorten the amount of time a person accused of a crime had to prepare for trial after Arraignment.
I only had one case set for Arraignment in Judge Aleman’s division that month, State v. Mel Brooks, 06-12904-CF10A. Because I had filed a written plea of not guilty, I was not present at the October 18th, 2006 Arraignment. I learned of the October 30th Calendar Call date by mail a few days before the hearing, thinking it was an error. I realized it was not an error but, rather, an intentional decision by Judge Aleman to give the defense seven working days in which to prepare their felony cases for trial, or to move for a continuance (thereby waiving their clients’ rights to a speedy trial).
One by one, attorneys tried different ways to get around Judge Aleman repeatedly pressuring them to make a decision between "ready for trial?" or "continuance?" After Mr. Brooks was asked to make the same decision, I asked to put the case on recall. This request was granted. When Judge Aleman recalled Mr. Brooks’ case two hours later, I advised the Court that there appeared to be a mistake. When asked by Judge Aleman what that mistake was, I informed Judge Aleman that "I like to refer to what I call the Good Book in times like these, and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.160 states that a person shall have a reasonable amount of time in which to prepare for trial after arraignment." (The transcript has the actual language). Judge Aleman then read the Rule, but mentioned how I had been appointed by the Court several weeks earlier, thus creating a new "date of appointment provision" to Rule 3.160, rather than following the rule’s clear, unambiguous language. I, too, had to move for a continuance and Mr. Brooks was then asked if he was waiving his right to a speedy trial to which he replied in the affirmative. Judge Aleman’s decision to depart from an established rule of law, coupled with her visible zeal to question those defendants whose attorneys were not ready for trial in seven working days whether they were "waiving their right to a speedy trial" led me to believe that this waiver was the primary motivation behind Judge Aleman’s short-lived, "seven working day" trial policy.
I appreciate the Commission’s time in considering these additional concerns regarding Broward County 17th Judicial Circuit Judge Cheryl Aleman.
Sincerely,
Sean Conway
Good job Sprinkles - or is this exactly what you wanted? What did Cheryl ever do to you?
We're mad as hell and we're not gonna take it anymore!
Good job Sean. You should run for judge.
Let me guess . . next comes directions on how to file a JQC complaint from court on a Blacberry. This place is starting to resemble the WWF ... where's Brannon?
Everyone here seems to go on about how you can't run against a sitting judge. Well, someone stepped up and ran against this "arrogant, discourteous and impatient" judge and SHE WAS FRIGGIN REELECTED. The bar, and specifically the defense bar, has no one to blame but themselves.
I know some who have flirted with the idea of running, but they have told me, if you can't run against the most unpopular judge and win, who can you run against?
It's not the fear of retaliation by the rest of the sitting judiciary alone that keeps some from running, it's the fear that they won't get the support they need to win.
I mean, really, if we couldn't get rid of aleman, who can we run against and have a chance to win???
good point, but she's a little different. cavalry chapel is a force to be reckoned with. they are everything the defense bar is not - organized, unified, and committed. as i understand it, they have something like 60,000 built in votes, plus she was/is very active in anti-abortion movement, etc. plus, Malove, as brave as he was, wasn't the most charismatic candidate. if broward organizes, puts out a unified message, with charismatic candidates, watch what happens. this is how Miami does it, and we can use their model. it works.
Great job Sean.
Malove lost, but the defense bar was not united in his support. Many believed that Aleman would be the lesser of two evils.
I predict there will be one or more running against her in 2010, if the JQC does not crucify her first.
I got a call from someone registering concern that Sean could get in trouble for letting the substance of his complaint out into the public domain.
IT'S NOT TRUE. I checked with the Bar - no rules apply except for the standard "don't say anything you know is not true" rule.
I then called the JQC - I spoke to Associate General Counsel Mike Schneider. He said a 1990 Federal Miami case (Doe) basically trumps all provisions in Florida Law, making any confidentiality provisions unenforceable regarding complainants to the JQC.
So here's the deal: if you complain, you CAN talk about it. This is why the NAACP and Bar Associations, when they complain, dutifully provide a copy of the complaint letter to the Press or their Mom, or whomever.
Here's what you should not do: if an investigation ensues, you should not disclose the sum and substance of any conversations you may have had with JQC investigators (like a Grand Jury).
That's it. I scribbled my notes pretty quick, so my apologies to Mr. Schneider if I misstated him in any way.
The only way to really get a judge's attention! It seems that this judge has more problems than a puppy has fleas. Why do you suppose she has to be so nasty all the time? What happened to just being just a fair arbiter? Why does it seem that you have to hold their feet to the fire to get a fair trial? Broward County needs some change in its judiciary. Rotation would be a nice start. Maybe the bad ones will be humbled by the experience.
Great idea Judge Gardiner, or should I say Chief Judge Gardiner. I have faith that your skills will serve the community well. She's highly organized and likes things orderly and neat. I've never heard her be rude to anyone, she just insists on preparedness.
Way to go Sean! She needs to be made an example of. If she practiced what she preached, she'd be allot happier judge. Can you imagine walking into her courtroom and catching her smiling?
Yeah, right.
Or maybe she just didn't like Sean's tie with the foxes on it.
or the tie with balloons, we all know how much you like balloons.
Are the civil attorneys fed up yet with her?
apparently, in civil, I hear she makes the parties still hold hrgs. where there is an agreed-upon order, which, (and I don't know civil), is supposedly unheard of & a waste of time?
Ha, Ha!
that stuff was certainly arrogant, rude, and discourteous ... but does it rise to level of advising the JQC about it?
Sean should pay the costs of those witnesses, he's a cheap bastard anyway. Hope the Bar fries him for telling on Judge Aleman.
oh what a bunch of cry babies. when you guys have a operation court broom call us lads down in in Miami.
Stay tuned, the end of the week should be interesting.
Sean, your the man! Only when people start to take a stand against these abuses can you make headway in changing the outrageous behavior of some of these judges. Keep up the good work, Sean. You stand as an example of the courage all of us should have in bringing to a stop the nonsense.
Great work, Sean! I don't know how long its going to take for these public servants to get it. Do the right thing, or open yourself to criticism. These are not your courtrooms, they belong to the public. Get over yourselves.
Sean - didn't Aleman STOP her garbage 7 day policy just a few days after you outed her on the blog? Reading your complaint, it seems pretty obvious that she was ignoring established law and practices, at the very least trying to take advantage of a loophole to the obvious detriment of defendants and defense lawyers. What gives? Why would she behave in this way? Is this a reflection of a bias in her borne from a career as a prosecutor?
Broward county
Additional misconduct
complaints filed against judge
An embattled Broward circuit judge is facing additional allegations of misconduct.
Defense attorney Sean Conway last week filed a complaint with the Judicial Qualifications Commission, citing what he said was Judge Cheryl Alemán's "deliberate refusal" to follow the law and insolent behavior.
The commission filed charges against Alemán in February, alleging that she behaved with bias or violated judicial codes of conduct in four cases.
Conway's complaint stems from two cases, in which he says the judge forced him to ask for continuances. In one, Conway alleges the judge set an unreasonable trial date, preventing a speedy trial. In the other case, Conway says the judge delayed his client's plea hearing because she insisted on rescheduling the hearing rather than allow him time to discuss the plea deal with his client.
This Aleman needs to go! Judges that refuse to follow the law have no place of the bench. Sean, I applaud your for doing what is right under the circumstances. All this type of behavior shall from here on be the subject of scrutiny.
Don't forget too that Aleman got reelected under the old SPD system. Prominent attorneys worked hard on her campaign. They were well connected politico types. And they were richly rewarded with gobs of SPD appointments on an almost daily basis. It was sickening to watch, I wonder if it was illegal. If it was ok, just another perk for the incumbent, then thank goodness the SPD system has changed. It was unseemly. Come to think of it, has the JQC been apprised of how Aleman rewarded her campaign workers? Too bad Sean is the only attorney who doesn't bend over and take it, otherwise the JQC could get the whole story on Aleman and the other judges under investigation (How many now? I think I need 2 hands to count them all).
Mr. Conway:
I have nothing but respect for you. They will call you rat and other terms but they are the ones who lift their leg and pee on the public trust. They are the rats.
This Aleman needs to get the boot! This gal needs some real soul searching to straighten out the problems that are written all over her face. What a sad commentary of a obviously very say lady. To bad really.
She doesn't express any sadness when she viciously attacks everyone that comes within her range. It's more like some degree of sickness that she exhibits in her self appointed role of savior of the world. Its like she fancies herself to be a rider of one of the four horses of the apocalypse or something. I wonder which one.
Better Question: What happens when they show up at her door?
We all stand with you Sean. These people will get it after a while, but it takes people like you to stand up to them. Bravo Sean.
I'm impressed that Mel Brooks, Hollywood mogul, hired you Sean. Did you guys have baked beans for lunch?
still posting on the blog bri?