August 18, 1:46 PM EDT
Jean Casarez on InSesson just reported that the paper copy of the motion has been filed and the case will now move forward.
Okay, I took a week off to go on my first real vacation in seven years. Once we arrived at our destination, we had a wonderful time. However, due to lost airline connections in both directions, we ended up spending two days extra NOT having a good time! There was a sweltering day and night in a Houston hotel whose air conditioning wasn't quite up to snuff, without our luggage and a fresh change of clothing. To avoid the same situation on the way home, we spent a day shuttling to the airport and spending the night shuffling from plane to plane to plane making tight connections. We ended up "visiting" in three states which were not on our itinerary.
I heard about Judge Perry's order concerning her probation and caught a bit of news about it. Unfortunately, my husband banned my laptop from the trip for good cause. Thanks, Sprocket, for posting the news. Now that I've had a chance to rest up a bit, I can also report on the defense reply to the Appellate Court. As of now, the defense reply has only been filed electronically and we all know that it has to be filed on paper. Somebody will have to drive over to Daytona to file the hard copy.
Listening to Jean Casarez on InSession right now, she is pointing out that nobody has filed a stay on the order that Casey Anthony appear for probation on or before August 26.
During the original hearing, Lisbeth Fryer argued vehemently about Judge Strickland's bias and that he had recused himself and had no jurisdiction over the fraud case. She argued double jeopardy.
She also argued that putting Casey on probation in Orange County would put herself and others in danger. At the time, I can recall that she kept throwing the responsibility to the State to report the scrivener's error that caused Casey to be on probation while in protective custody.
In his order, Judge Perry replied to all her concerns:
1. He stated that the Court had jurisdiction. He stated (omitting specific legal citations) that
It is axiomatic that oral pronouncements control over clerical errors. The court has the authority to correct its judgment. An order is rendered, valid and binding, when orally given. It may be corrected at any time to reflect what the court had in fact done.
2. As to violation of double jeopardy, Perry stated that
This case does not involve additional punishment proscribed by the double jeopardy clause nor does it involve a punitive effect by requiring the Defendant to serve probation twice. The Defendant was in jail and unable to meet the goals and requirements of the probationary sentence. The Defendant could not comply with the standard thirteen conditions of probation while incarcerated on a pending charge.
3. As to the defense's responsibility to report the error to the Court, Perry was very clear.
In this case, the State, defense counsel, and the Defendant all knew what the announced intent of the Court was as to when the Defendant's probation was to begin... To permit this error to continue would in fact turn a clerical error into a game cautioned against in the Bozza case...
4. Due process was briefly mentioned.
The Court does not address the issue of the alleged violation of the Defendant's right to due process because the defense did not allege how it was violated.
5. To be sure that the defense understood the issue of Duty to the Court, Perry stated in part that
Finally, this Court would like to address the issue of what duty does an attorney, an officer of the court, owe to our system of justice to see that the lawful orders of the court are followed. The defense acknowledged in court that Mr. Baez knew about the error, but contended that he did not have any obligation to inform the court... While ignorance of the contents of a court order is one thing, the failure to abide by that order and the failure to notify the court of a known scrivener's error in the order may be a violation of an attorney's duty of candor. To additionally seek to use a scrivener's error to achieve an end that was against the court's intent, especially where both parties had argued the issue of when probation should commence, strikes a the very foundation of our justice system...
The duty of candor is simply not a rule of fine etiquette, but is the gold standard that all officers of the court - especially attorneys - must live by if we are to ensure the public's trust and faith in our justice system... While "(z)ealous advocacy is the cornerstone of good lawyering and the bedrock of a just legal system...zeal cannot give way to unprofessionalism" and noncompliance with court orders.
Perry then went on to recommend that the defense refer to The Florida Bar's Rules of Professional Conduct.
As I am writing this, the Orlando Sentinel is reporting that a Bar Complaint against Jose Baez on this very issue.
6. Judge Perry did address the issue of Casey's safety. He ordered her address not be disclosed and cited an article in the Orlando Sentinel which reported that Casey was the most hated person in America.
The Appellate Court in Daytona is still waiting for a paper copy of the defense reply to be provided. At this moment, WESH is reporting that the court will hear the appeal prior to Casey's reporting date.
The appeal is written by Lisabeth Fryer, who argued the motion in court on the 6th. It is very long and has many legal references. There is a great deal of bashing for Judge Stan Strickland. It is a longer version of what I posted about that hearing. In addition, she criticized Judge Perry.
...the trial court engages in three pages of of moralizing about the responsibility of the defense counsel in candor to the tribunal, as if somehow this entire 'mess' was the responsibility of the defense, rather than a vindictive act by a glaringly biased judge... For the record, this was not a case in which the defense was in possession of information that neither the court, nor the State of Florida lacked. Instead, defense counsel only learned of the probation informally, whereas the State of Florida received formal notice of the commencement of probation... Further, the former disqualified judge actually signed the original order which established probation while the Defendant was awaiting trial on a different set of charges. That the court feels it necessary to chastise the defense (and the defense alone -- by name) for not bringing this matter to the court's attention is, at best, misplaced.
Right now, I'm waiting to see if Frank George files a response to this motion, once it is officially filed.
Keep tuned for the latest turn in this twisted case!