Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

[AZlawyer]

Can the defense (down the road) use the fact that Judge Perry is up for re-election as Chief Judge as a reason to attempt to prove bias and/or argue the case schedule if it does get moved up for a date sooner than May?
I'm remembering some posturing around the Grand Jury indictment about SA Jeff Ashton's election and bias to please the public ...

Not unless JP actually does or says something to show bias. BTW, if the defense argues bias as to a second judge, this time they will be required to actually prove the facts alleged. In Florida, you only get one "free pass" to make unproved allegations of bias against a judge.

 

[EclecticArtist]

First, I do not reside in Florida...

Is a Florida Tax paying resident entitled to know where their tax dollars are spent, or when a person pays taxes to their state, does the state have a open checkbook to pay for things without accountability? I just don't understand with state funding for the defense, how JB and Team can request this..

This question is in reference to JB wanting the funding documents sealed.

 

[Muzikman]

I doubt it. Too far afield from the question of "does KC have any assets we can collect on?" But let's not jump ahead to Morgan getting a judgment just yet.

ETA: Incidentally, where a lawyer spends his client's money is not attorney-client privileged information.

BBM-
Putting myself in Zenaida's shoes, I would want to know where every penny of that $275,000 went, to make sure 50G-100G wasn't squirreled away somewhere for when she "got out", as the JAC suggests.


Your ETA: The JAC has a paragraph in their Post-Hearing Memo that makes me wonder now. Paragraph 31, starting on page 8::

"The Court should establish reasonable amounts for deposition-related costs, investigators, and experts based upon the factual and legal issues in this case. The defense has the \burden to establish the amounts necessary for the defense of this matter. If appropriate, this Court could handle the proceeding ex parte in order to protect attorney work product privilege."

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/36596270/03192010-JAC-Post-Hearing-Memorandum

 

[AZlawyer]

First, I do not reside in Florida...

Is a Florida Tax paying resident entitled to know where their tax dollars are spent, or when a person pays taxes to their state, does the state have a open checkbook to pay for things without accountability? I just don't understand with state funding for the defense, how JB and Team can request this..

This question is in reference to JB wanting the funding documents sealed.

BBM-
Putting myself in Zenaida's shoes, I would want to know where every penny of that $275,000 went, to make sure 50G-100G wasn't squirreled away somewhere for when she "got out", as the JAC suggests.


Your ETA: The JAC has a paragraph in their Post-Hearing Memo that makes me wonder now. Paragraph 31, starting on page 8::

"The Court should establish reasonable amounts for deposition-related costs, investigators, and experts based upon the factual and legal issues in this case. The defense has the \burden to establish the amounts necessary for the defense of this matter. If appropriate, this Court could handle the proceeding ex parte in order to protect attorney work product privilege."

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/36596270/03192010-JAC-Post-Hearing-Memorandum

Well, attorney-client privilege and attorney work-product privilege are not exactly the same thing. One has to do with communications between an attorney and his client, and the other has to do with the attorney's thought processes and strategies.

I think the concern is that, if we (the public) or even the SA get to see what costs the defense is incurring, we will be able to figure out from that information what the defense strategy is. This is probably true. The question is, to what extent is the defense permitted to hide that information when they've "opted in" to the disclosure rules in any event?

I would say that, if JP grants the defense motion to delay disclosure of penalty phase witnesses (you know, like an expert witness on the effect of childhood sexual abuse) until after the guilt phase, then he will also have to agree to handle some or all of the budget proceedings ex parte and in camera. Otherwise, we and the SA will have it all figured out with or without "disclosure."

 

[qipx1]

I would say that, if JP grants the defense motion to delay disclosure of penalty phase witnesses ... until after the guilt phase, then he will also have to agree to handle some or all of the budget proceedings ex parte and in camera. Otherwise, we and the SA will have it all figured out with or without "disclosure."

Is there anything to prevent him from viewing the budget while delaying it for discovery purposes, without doing an ex parte hearing? Basically the defense submits the witness list/ expenses to Judge Perry, and he reviews it without either party present. Strickland did this with the Jail House informants.

 

[AZlawyer]

Is there anything to prevent him from viewing the budget while delaying it for discovery purposes, without doing an ex parte hearing? Basically the defense submits the witness list/ expenses to Judge Perry, and he reviews it without either party present. Strickland did this with the Jail House informants.

Ex parte means without the other party (the State) being involved, so if the judge delays disclosure of invoices, etc., to the State, that would mean he would be reviewing those items ex parte.

 

[Patty G]

During the Casey Anthony Budget Hearing 5/6/10, Jose Baez presented to the court the cost of Dr. Henry Lee's expertise, and the court granted costs. However, back on December 15, 2008 during a live show and a phone call conversation with Nancy Grace, Nancy asked Dr. Lee the following:

GRACE: Dr. Lee, are you telling me that you are working on the case pro bono, for free?

LEE: Yes.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0812/15/ng.01.html

Should the court and/or the JAC be notified of what Dr. Henry Lee stated back on Dec 15, 2008 or not?

 

[sunsetbeach]

During the Casey Anthony Budget Hearing 5/6/10, Jose Baez presented to the court the cost of Dr. Henry Lee's expertise, and the court granted costs. However, back on December 15, 2008 during a live show and a phone call conversation with Nancy Grace, Nancy asked Dr. Lee the following:

GRACE: Dr. Lee, are you telling me that you are working on the case pro bono, for free?

LEE: Yes.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0812/15/ng.01.html

Should the court and/or the JAC be notified of what Dr. Henry Lee stated back on Dec 15, 2008 or not?

I think both the State and JAC should hear/watch that video. Maybe someone can send it to the local news etc etc

 

[PrintGal]

Hi AZ-

Once witness lists have been exchanged can one side revise theirs if they think they will need to rebut something they suspect one of the other side's witnesses to testify to?

Thanks for all you do!

 

[AZlawyer]

During the Casey Anthony Budget Hearing 5/6/10, Jose Baez presented to the court the cost of Dr. Henry Lee's expertise, and the court granted costs. However, back on December 15, 2008 during a live show and a phone call conversation with Nancy Grace, Nancy asked Dr. Lee the following:

GRACE: Dr. Lee, are you telling me that you are working on the case pro bono, for free?

LEE: Yes.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0812/15/ng.01.html

Should the court and/or the JAC be notified of what Dr. Henry Lee stated back on Dec 15, 2008 or not?

I think they know. JS even made the "crate of oranges" comment in his order. But a pro bono expert can change his mind and decide he needs to get paid if he's going to continue.

Hi AZ-

Once witness lists have been exchanged can one side revise theirs if they think they will need to rebut something they suspect one of the other side's witnesses to testify to?

Thanks for all you do!

Yes, until the final deadlines for disclosing witnesses have passed--and even then, there will be some leeway given if there is good cause for a late disclosure.

 

[logicalgirl]

I think they know. JS even made the "crate of oranges" comment in his order. But a pro bono expert can change his mind and decide he needs to get paid if he's going to continue.



Yes, until the final deadlines for disclosing witnesses have passed--and even then, there will be some leeway given if there is good cause for a late disclosure.

AZLawyer, are there exceptions to those leeways? JBP seemed to give Baez several warnings that he was going to bring the witness to a halt after a specified time - period.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZLawyer, are there exceptions to those leeways? JBP seemed to give Baez several warnings that he was going to bring the witness to a halt after a specified time - period.

There is always some leeway if there is good cause and no prejudice to the other side, but obviously it is a bad idea for a judge to mention that up front.

 

[zoey]

again I'm sure this has been gone over and over...BUT---on the lawyers and experts---aren't they normally required to keep track of hours put in???? No one seems accountable for time they put in this case? It's all guess --- (watched the 3-18 repeat trial and none of the lawyers could say how many hours exactly they put in)---

Also--will the defence be help accountable for showing the 40% left of discovery that the State is going to pay? Seems like all the experts have put in so much work and still nothing seems to be done.....

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Is it actually a sign of disrespect to call a Judge "Judge" instead of "Your Honor"? I have heard many attorneys use "Judge" with no problems...What is the difference if any?

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

Hey there legal eagles, my legal question is

When the state of Florida enlisted Dr. Vass as one of their experts, how much will Dr. Vass be paid? Will the amount be something similar to that which the JAC will allow for the defense?

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Baez stated yesterday, he will write a motion in reference to JAC Chapter 119 rules are unconstitutional as they pertain to Inmate Anthony.

(I feel he's has a snowballs chance in heck to rewrite JAC's rules/regulations) How can he do this? This seems like a frivolous motion to me. He can motion to keep things sealed as they come up but will have no chance to change the rules/procedures just for Inmate Anthony..can sanctions be placed on him for wasteing the courts time?

TIA

 

[notthatsmart]

I have an opinion question.
Ja said something like this.

The body farm information was more important to us before we found the remains. It is not as important as it was before.

What do you think that means? I would think that the body farm information would be very important to their case if they are going to lay out exactly what happened. This would include the 2.6 days in the trunk, which would cause the smell.

Or, they found something at the remains site that says the body was never in the trunk?

 

[MissJames]

Caylee was last seen getting into that car. No one saw her alive after that. Before the body was found the decomp in the trunk was the only evidence that Caylee was dead.The defense was claiming Caylee was alive ,therefore KC could not have killed her. Once the body was found the trunk decomp became less important .
What I would like to ask the lawyers is if it makes strategic sense to dispute everything? The body wasn't thereThere is no proven cause of death..The duct tape doesn't match.That's not decomp in the trunk. RK is suspicious.JG is suspicious.
If thje defense is going for SODDI,why dispute the duct tape as a cause of death?If going with accident why dispute the decomp in the car?Wouldn't it be better for the defense to pick one and try to prove it? Otherwise it's the spaghetti defense.

 

[Riley1833]

When JP took the defense attorneys to the side to discuss the expert JB didn't want to reveal, could this be considered, in fact, an ex parte, in camera meeting? Why did the State not object? And is there any way to find out if the expert was accepted or not? TIA

 

[AZlawyer]

again I'm sure this has been gone over and over...BUT---on the lawyers and experts---aren't they normally required to keep track of hours put in???? No one seems accountable for time they put in this case? It's all guess --- (watched the 3-18 repeat trial and none of the lawyers could say how many hours exactly they put in)---

Also--will the defence be help accountable for showing the 40% left of discovery that the State is going to pay? Seems like all the experts have put in so much work and still nothing seems to be done.....

If they want someone else to pay their fees (like the State of Florida), they will have to keep track of hours. In this case, the lawyers are all supposed to be working pro bono at this point, so I suppose they don't have to keep track. The experts will need to keep track, and their billing statements will be scrutinized before they are approved (at rates much lower than any of them are used to).

I'm not sure what your second question is asking, exactly. But we shouldn't assume the defense experts have not accomplished anything for the time they put in. How would we know?